Is 5065E a good deal for me?

[Stowed4Sea]

What do you guys think?

I've got two main questions:

1. What do you think about the price, assuming no abnormal oil leaks or other damage? I see the rear tire tread is pretty much gone, how much you estimate is left? Anyone had to replace those tires before and know roughly how much they cost?

2. I grew up on farm and I all know is lots of clutch work. We never had a front loader as it wasn't that type of farm. How is this PRT work for lots of frontloader work? I have 24 acres, almost all wooded that I'm working on clearing a few acres for trails, a few acres of crops and homesite, but as I understand this transmission, as long as you don't have to change the range, if shifting gears it has power shift and if changing direction, you also don't need a clutch? It doesn't seem bad at all and seems just as easy as lawnmower, but admit that's the biggest thing I've ever driven with a hydrostatic transmission. Well, other than a combine, now that I think about it, opening up a field without a hydrostatic drive would not be fun, so maybe I should stick with the smaller 4 series? I don't know, it's hard to know without buying one and seeing if you love or hate it. Do the pedals ever get annoying on a hydrostatic? I know you have cruise control but gearing just seems so much nicer.

EDIT: Forgot to say thanks in advance!

 

[dusty3030]

I don't get your line of questioning with the hydrostatic, the tractor you linked is a gear drive tractor that has a power reverser. So it has a wet clutch and you can change directions with the lever by the steering wheel without using the foot clutch pedal. The clutch is activated hydraulically. The power reverser transmission is a great option for loader work.

The tractor you linked also has industrial tread tires so they are a hard, shallow tread. They don't look all that worn from the pictures.

 

[Stowed4Sea]

I don't get your line of questioning with the hydrostatic, the tractor you linked is a gear drive tractor that has a power reverser. So it has a wet clutch and you can change directions with the lever by the steering wheel without using the foot clutch pedal. The clutch is activated hydraulically. The power reverser transmission is a great option for loader work.

The tractor you linked also has industrial tread tires so they are a hard, shallow tread. They don't look all that worn from the pictures.

Ah, thanks about your thoughts, I noticed they were industrial tires but still looked a bit worn to me, but don't have much experience as to what looks worn there.

Regarding the transmission, since I don't have any experience with loader work, I'm asking if there's much of a difference between this transmission and a hydrostatic one, basically I'm asking for guys that do lots of loader work, is there anyone that enjoys doing it on a 5 series with a power reverser, as opposed to a 4 series with hydrostatic. I don't want to get this tractor and end up hating the transmission after a month. I do have problems with my knees from dislocating it back in high school, but if I'm rarely using the clutch with a PRT, I'm wondering if it's that big of a difference with using a clutch occasionally on the 5 with a power reverser, or using my right foot on pedals all the time with a hydrostatic transmission on a 4 series.

 

[dusty3030]

Personally 6 of one half a dozen of the other.
With the PRT you'd still be using your right foot on the foot throttle, your right hand would be on the loader joystick and your left hand will be steering and flicking the lever. You'd push into a pile, lift your foot up off the throttle and flick the lever to N then to R. Push back down on the throttle to back out.

On the HST you'll need to leave it throttled up to 2,000 rpms or better and you'll be using your right foot to switch from pedal to pedal, right hand on joystick and left hand steering. You'd push into a pile, lift off the F pedal and switch foot to R pedal and back out.

 

[jeff9366]

1) Determine if your proposed tractor is 2-WD or 4-WD.

2-WD tractors are crumby with Loaders.

2) 963 engine hours in seven years = 120 hours per year.
Pretty much indicates owner/operator, non-commercial use, which is good. Larger compact tractor engines like the 5075e regularly go 10,000 engine hours without major attention IF WELL MAINTAINED. All other parts of the tractor will remain pristine proportional to experience level and prudence of the operator.

3) Tire tread looks normal for R4/industrial tires with ~~1,000 engine hours of tractor use. 75% tire life remains.

4) Determine if bucket is attached to the Loader with desirable SSQA mechanism, rather than being fixed. (SSQA = Skid Steer Quick Attach, an industry standard.)

The Deere 5075e is made in India. This is a basic tractor that gets quite favorable reviews within the universe of economy tractors here on T-B-N.
It weighs 5,000 pounds bare tractor. Suitable weight for 20 - 40 acres of ground which will be actually worked by a tractor. Ample for your requirements.

The first implement you will likely want is a Category 2 (size) Box Blade for the Three Point Hitch. (Tractor has a Category 2 Three Point Hitch)
Box Blade will provide counterbalance to the weight of the Loader so you can pick up max bucket loads without the rear wheels lifting off the ground. Box Blade is the go-to implement for moving dirt 5' to 100'. As there is one rear remote pair on the rear of the tractor, buy a Box Blade with hydraulically actuated scarifiers.



MORE: TractorData.com John Deere 5075E tractor information

VIDEOS: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=deere+5075e

Attachments

• 
  DSC00178.jpg

  1.1 MB · Views: 485
• 
  DSC00072.jpg

  5 MB · Views: 498

 

[Stowed4Sea]

Personally 6 of one half a dozen of the other.
With the PRT you'd still be using your right foot on the foot throttle, your right hand would be on the loader joystick and your left hand will be steering and flicking the lever. You'd push into a pile, lift your foot up off the throttle and flick the lever to N then to R. Push back down on the throttle to back out.

On the HST you'll need to leave it throttled up to 2,000 rpms or better and you'll be using your right foot to switch from pedal to pedal, right hand on joystick and left hand steering. You'd push into a pile, lift off the F pedal and switch foot to R pedal and back out.

Thanks for your details, I wasn't aware tractors like that had foot pedals for throttle, but makes sense why when you explain it like that.

1) Determine if your proposed tractor is 2-WD or 4-WD.

2-WD tractors are crumby with Loaders.

2) 963 engine hours in seven years = 120 hours per year.
Pretty much indicates owner/operator, non-commercial use, which is good. Larger compact tractor engines like the 5075e regularly go 10,000 engine hours without major attention IF WELL MAINTAINED. All other parts of the tractor will remain pristine proportional to prudence of the operator.

3) Tire tread looks normal for R4/industrial tires with ~~1,000 engine hours of tractor use.

The Deere 5075e is made in India. This is a basic tractor that gets quite favorable reviews within the universe of economy tractors here on T-B-N.
It weighs 5,000 pounds bare tractor. Suitable weight for 20 - 40 acres of ground which will be actually worked by a tractor. Ample for your requirements.

The first implement you will likely want is a Category 2 (size) Box Blade for the Three Point Hitch. (Tractor has a Category 2 Three Point Hitch)
Box Blade will provide counterbalance to the weight of the Loader so you can pick up loads without the rear wheels lifting off the ground. Box Blade is the go-to implement for moving dirt 5' to 100'. As there is one rear remote pair on the rear of the tractor, buy a Box Blade with hydraulically actuated scarifiers.

MORE: TractorData.com John Deere 5075E tractor information

VIDEOS: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=deere+5075e

Thanks for your input! That's good to know about the 5 series, thanks for that info.

Regarding the box blade, I've never used one before, is it possible to operate in a way where you can use the scarifiers but you don't move dirt/gravel, or if that was my goal should I look more for a land plane. I'm guessing this is where the benefit of having a hydraulic toplink, I'd imagine you could lower the boxblade but lift up the rear a bit with toplink?

 

[jeff9366]

Regarding the box blade, I've never used one before, is it possible to operate in a way where you can use the scarifiers but you don't move dirt/gravel?

Scarifier lengths vary but the basic answer is YES.

VIDEOS: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=TRACTOR+BOX+BLADE+CATEGORY+2

Should I look more for a land plane?

Land Planes are for routine maintenance of established roads, especially gravel roads.

Land Planes are not heavy enough to serve as Loader counterbalance, which is a key function for Box Blades. Loader counterbalance is VERY MUCH a SAFETY ISSUE.

I'm guessing this is where the benefit of having a hydraulic toplink, I'd imagine you could lower the boxblade but lift up the rear a bit with toplink?

You have a single pair of remotes on this tractor. Partially extending the scarifiers makes the Box Blade squat and dig in.

With one additional pair of remotes you can hydraulically adjust the Top Link, which alters the angle-of-attack of Box Blade moldboard/blade, altering the thickness of dirt which is peeled up.

With a second additional pair of remotes you can hydraulically change tilt on the Box Blade which enables Box Blade to produce a shallow trench on one side. Trenching is pretty exotic for a Box Blade.

Multiple remotes are whipped cream. Consider meat and potatoes first, ie: quality Category 2 implements to get you started on your projects.

Attachments

• 
  DSC00017.jpg

  1.1 MB · Views: 164

 

[Stowed4Sea]

Land Planes are not heavy enough to serve as Loader counterbalance, which is a key function for Box Blades. Loader counterbalance is VERY MUCH a SAFETY ISSUE.

I wasn't asking for matter of rear ballast, I was asking about box blade function for my needs vs land plane. JD recommends just 3,000 pounds of weight on the 3 pt hitch as ballast I believe for this tractor, granted that's based on their loader not a Westendorf as that one has, I'd assume it's about the same.

I wasn't aware box blades had that much weight, do they. Or do they make box blades where you can add suitcase weights? I suppose I could weld something together. I was already planning on having to do something else for rear ballast and I don't think using box blade as ballast is really a consideration of mine if it's not a tool that is best for my needs most of the time.

 

[jeff9366]

I was asking about box blade function for my needs vs land plane.

I believe I answered this. Land Planes are primarily maintenance implements. Box Blades are both construction and maintenance implements.

JD recommends just 3,000 pounds of weight on the 3 pt hitch as ballast I believe for this tractor, granted that's based on their loader not a Westendorf as that one has, I'd assume it's about the same.

I do not know what you are seeing but I believe your statement is incorrect.

Counterbalance necessary will be primarily influenced by Loader lift capacity, whether or not rear tires are filled with liquid (800 - 900 pounds) and projection of counterbalance to the rear of the tractor. For these reasons I have never seen a manufacturer publish a factory spec for Loader TPH counterbalance.

JD lists the lift capacity of the TPH at 3,192 pounds. This has very little to do with counterbalance.

Did you view any of the Box Blade videos in Post #7?

I will make a complete guess that Loaders are the #1 accessory added to bare tractors, Box Blades #2.

 

[Stowed4Sea]

I'm not trying to argue, I know you answered that about function of landplane, I was explaining why I cared more about the function of box blade vs land plane.

If I don't need a box blade because I have more use of a land plane, then a key function of a box blade being rear ballast doesn't really matter to me. I'm aware I need rear ballast, a box blade might be a good way to help achieve that, but it also might not be good for me. I was trying to explain I think I should consider their function as a tool first for my needs, not what most people need, and then consider ballast after that, whether it is accomplished via box blade or other rear ballast weights, that's secondary to the tool's primary use.

The source on the other was actually from your youtube suggestion, tractor time with tim video, his review stated requirements for that 520M loader. Granted it's not the same loader, but I'd expect somewhat similar. I've been working on trying to find the specs for that aftermarket loader, but expect I'll have to email them to find out their exact recommendations.