Is sub compact big enough?

[milkman636]

Funny, reading your thread reminds me of my experience with chainsaws. The first one I bought was Stihl 026 with an 18" bar. I wanted something that would be big enough for most chores. Years later I bought a Stihl MS180c with a 14" bar which was much lighter. I found that I use the MS180 for nearly everything and only bring out the heavier one when I am cutting something big. Now considering a DeWalt cordless to take around with me on the tractor for those cases where you just need to hop off and cut one branch off or clear a fallen tree blocking a trail. I can see where that might become the go-to saw for little, quick jobs.

I did the same the same thing with chainsaws too. The 14” EGO battery saw that I picked up on sale last year was a game changer. It just makes sense to me to have more than one size of certain things.

 

[hornett22]

Never used a scut I'd own. Just not impressed. No ground clearance but all seem tippy.

3 point/pto area too cramped and low to the ground.

 

[milkman636]

Never used a scut I'd own. Just not impressed. No ground clearance but all seem tippy.

3 point/pto area too cramped and low to the ground.

The 3 point is cramped and low to the ground. A quick hitch really helps. The counter point would be that sub CUT sized implements are less costly and take up less space in storage. Plus the size is friendly and less intimidating to wives and children just learning to operate.

 

[rScotty]

I did the same the same thing with chainsaws too. The 14” EGO battery saw that I picked up on sale last year was a game changer. It just makes sense to me to have more than one size of certain things.

Uh oh... it wasn't bad enough that we have split 50/50 on small compacts vs sub compacts....but now we have thread drift as well.

Ok then, I have a gasoline chainsaw- most of us do. And I confess to buying an electric chainsaw last year just to see if they were useful.
What sold me on trying it was 3 things. It came with a spare set of lithium batteries, I knew the Makita brand was decent, and I was tired of carrying around all the peripherals that the Stihl requires.

Bottom line: That battery chainsaw has been surprisingly handy. Way more handy than I figured it would be.
Maybe it's time to get another smaller tractor as well.
rScotty

 

[mred2]

I have a LS XR4150 with a lot of attachment. My son has a Mahindra 26 emax. Both are great for what they were designed to do. I pickup logs and move rolls of hay. He can put top soil in the yard without packing it down. He can move between the trees. If he didn't own a smaller tractor, my wife would make me buy one.

 

[hornett22]

The 3 point is cramped and low to the ground. A quick hitch really helps. The counter point would be that sub CUT sized implements are less costly and take up less space in storage. Plus the size is friendly and less intimidating to wives and children just learning to operate.

The price difference from what I've seen is minimal. My time is definitely worth more. If a CUT the size of a L2501, CK2610, or a 1626 are intimidating, y'all probably should have stayed in the city.

 

[California]

... battery chainsaw has been surprisingly handy. Way more handy than I figured it would be.
Maybe it's time to get another smaller tractor as well.
rScotty

Works for me! I added the chainsaw after I had several Ryobi 18 volt shop tools. I discovered it's all I need here for the apple orchard. By the time an old tree keels over, its hollow and the little 10 inch bar is sufficient to buck limbs and cut the hollow trunk into portable sections. Sold the gas chainsaw, no more gas stored here, life is simpler. Likewise I prefer the smaller tractor I described above. Life is good.

 

[PreacherM]

Seems to me many of the replies overlook what OP specifies that he needs. And then recommend an ag-size tractor because that's what fits their own application.

He's mostly replacing a garden tractor that has been sufficient for the 2-3 acres at his home. He needs a loader, and if he no longer had the poor-condition elderly Deere, then the replacement needs to do the '15-20 hours per year' of firewood hauling. (I presume, pulling a small trailer over flat rough ground).

Does he really need 50 hp?

Thanks to all for posting. I'm not trying to buy the biggest tractor I may possibly need. Some of the posts seem to imply that a 50 hp tractor can do everything a SCUT can, but not vice versa. That only tells half the story.

I'm going to keep looking for a good deal on a gc1705/1715 or gc 1723/1726. I'll also be watching for the kioti version as well as a Kioti ck20 or equivalent.

I don't like to make quick decisions and my cash on hand should be much better in a couple months.

 

[PreacherM]

For those who advised keeping the 2010 or wondered about the 3pt hitch: do some research on this site. You'll find that these tractors are pretty much a hopeless case. I'm content to use it for now since it's all I got on hand. Like my brother has said: "the only good thing about a 2010 is that it beats no tractor at all." OH and the power steering also has issues. Locks up at the worst times.

 

[Metalmaster10]

As if there aren't enough of these threads! Sort of an old question I know. I've been eyeing a newer tractor for a long time. Was hoping the market prices would correct themselves, but it don't look like that will happen soon.

I own 18 acres (no hills). 2-3 around the buildings, 10 acres field (rented out), 6 acres woods. I've got access to large tractors if needed for any ag type work. I cut 4-6 cords of firewood every year, but mostly not in my own woods. I've owned a JD 2010 with loader for 2+ years. It's had its typical problems, but I knew that going in. I only put 15-20 hrs on it a year, mostly cutting firewood and doing random loader work. The 3pt hitch is nearly useless so that has kept me from doing any brush cutting, etc.

If money and space were no object I would buy a 40 hp tractor and a SCUT as well. In reality, I've got 4 children to feed and clothe so $ is an issue! I'm mechanically inclined with 2 diesel mechanics in the family so I'm not afraid of used machines.

I really like the Kubota L30 series (31-43 hp) they seem like a good fit and value, but I'm not ready to pay that much just yet. I keep coming back to the SCUT class for 2 reasons: price and "handiness". I have to ask myself, what could a small tractor not do that I really HAVE to do? FEL lift height and capacity are really the biggest disadvantages of the SCUT. But then, it would take a 60+ hp tractor to really lift everything I would like.

A local Massey ferguson dealer has a used GC1705 coming in next week. I told him to call me when it does. With a tractor this size, I would probably use it 60-100 hrs per year. It bugs me that a larger compact tractor would sit in the barn unused much of the year. Purchasing a small tractor would also allow me to sell my Simplicity Sovereign garden tractor. (Have ZTR for lawn). Having 1 machine instead of 2 would be great. The Simplicity is mostly used for snowblowing (2010 is way too clumsy), lawn rolling, pulling sm trailer loads of mulch, and navigating the narrow trails in the woods.

Feel free to comment on any of the above. Several questions in addition:
How much will a GC1705 (or similar) track up a soft lawn or trail?

Will it run a 5ft brush cutter? Dealer says it will. By brush cutter I really just mean tall grass.

Is it dumb to purchase a tractor as a 2-5 year 'trial'?

I will throw a new spin on things.
You already have a larger, heavier utility tractor that doesn't get used much.
You already believe that you will use a sub compact 5 times as much.
My question, given your small area, is a larger tractor SMALL enough to be handy?
I bought my MF1736 utility with only 40 hrs on it because the original owner has a 4 acre plot and said it was too big to be handy for him, so he wanted a sub compact. Yes, the bigger tractors have distinct advantages, but the small ones are often handy in tight spaces that a larger one is not. The SCUT will do nearly everything the larger utility will do, you just need to take smaller bites, so it will take longer on some jobs.

 

[PreacherM]

I will throw a new spin on things.
You already have a larger, heavier utility tractor that doesn't get used much.
You already believe that you will use a sub compact 5 times as much.
My question, given your small area, is a larger tractor SMALL enough to be handy?
I bought my MF1736 utility with only 40 hrs on it because the original owner has a 4 acre plot and said it was too big to be handy for him, so he wanted a sub compact. Yes, the bigger tractors have distinct advantages, but the small ones are often handy in tight spaces that a larger one is not. The SCUT will do nearly everything the larger utility will do, you just need to take smaller bites, so it will take longer on some jobs.

That's pretty much what I've concluded. If bigger tractors were cheaper, it might look different! For myself I think the main advantage of larger would be FEL lift height and capacity.

 

[Fxfymn413]

I don't like to make quick decisions and my cash on hand should be much better in a couple months.

Smart move. I have found that time is my biggest ally when I'm looking for something. It may take a while, but eventually a good deal on what you need will pop up if you are vigilant and keep looking daily.

I use sites like "Search Tempest" to check CL's all around the area and of course word of mouth is always helpful. I have found that a good time to check the local CL is around 8 at night since that is after most folks have posted around dinner time.

 

[jyoutz]

That's pretty much what I've concluded. If bigger tractors were cheaper, it might look different! For myself I think the main advantage of larger would be FEL lift height and capacity.

And clearance underneath. The low stance, small tires, and vulnerable HST fan on the BX makes them a little risky for working in the woods or rough ground. They are best for maintenance chores on lawns or fields with no obstructions.

 

[check]

And clearance underneath. The low stance, small tires, and vulnerable HST fan on the BX makes them a little risky for working in the woods or rough ground. They are best for maintenance chores on lawns or fields with no obstructions.

Don’t agree. My Kubota BX25 is used for all kinds of things, and is very tough. Our rental property is 25 acres, and I have been able to do what I want. Used 2” wheel spacers for stability, and a BroTec steel plate to protect the HST fan. And the 3-Point snowblower is deadly!

The tractor is a 2009, and I see no reason to upgrade, and spend all that extra money.

 

[oosik]

I have 80 acres and a mile long gravel driveway. Bought a brand new Ford 1700 4WD( ~26hp) in 1982 when we moved onto the property. It worked great for the 27 years I owned it. Driveway snow plowing, brush cleanup, moving rocks & logs - etc.

My land is open stands of Ponderosa pine and fields of bunch grass. Access to any part of the property is not a problem.

So.....In 2009 I upgraded to a brand new Kubota M6040. Larger tractor - larger project - more rapid completion of smaller projects - and I could do summer maintenance on my driveway. I found that I needed Cat 2 implements to "penetrate" the driveway surface once it dried out in the summer.

Yes - Cat 2 implements ARE a lot more expensive than Cat 1. But it's silly to own a tractor that can not handle the heavier implements needed to get a job done.

 

[rScotty]

Don’t agree. My Kubota BX25 is used for all kinds of things, and is very tough. Our rental property is 25 acres, and I have been able to do what I want. Used 2” wheel spacers for stability, and a BroTec steel plate to protect the HST fan. And the 3-Point snowblower is deadly!

The tractor is a 2009, and I see no reason to upgrade, and spend all that extra money.

How do you think it would have fared without those key modifications? I wonder how many owners make protective changes to a new tractor.

 

[oosik]

Hey - rScotty - - I made a change to my M6040 in 2009 when it was new. I added expanded metal to the OEM grill guard. BEFORE I added the grapple. Really - not much of a change. But I had read enough posts here on TBN to know that I didn't want to buy new tractor parts. Grills - radiators - batteries.

I knock on wood now. Forty plus years out here on the 80 and no tractor damage from foreign objects. Pretty hard for bunch grass to damage anything. And when I fell my gigantic pines for firewood - tractor was FAR away.

However - it's very obvious why many have made protective changes to their tractors. It can be a jungle out there........

 

[LittleBittyBigJohn]

I have a 1025R and about 11 acres. 3 of that is lawn. It is a handy little dude. It looks to be very similar to the MF that you are looking at. I have the belly mower and it works well as a lawn mower. Better than any box store tractor type mower that I have owned. I prefer my zero turn most of the time but being a diesel the 1025R does better when the grass gets high and on the wide open spaces. It is heavier than a lawn mower, you will leave ruts if the ground is soft, but not terrible ones. On soft ground mine mostly just leaves the imprints of the tire tread and just enough rut that you can feel it. The little loader is awesome, full buckets of SB2 grade7 no problem. I assume the MF would be sized appropriately. I have not been let down on the amount of capacity or power at all. It does great with the 4' box blade.

It has plenty of power for the 4' bush hog in 6' tall Johnson grass and decent in 2' tall fertilized Bermuda. I've got my eye out for a 5' bush hog. I think it would have plenty of power if the grass is not too tall or too thick not sure about weight, but I can stand on the back of the 4' while it is lifted and hop and the front stays on the ground so I'm hoping. That is with the loader on, the 4' is pretty heavy with the loader off. The 4' is so narrow that the stems on stemmy grass get pushed down and out of the cutter by the tires. So it does not leave a good cut on the first go round. It's also terribly slow at only 4' wide I would not want to do a large area. That has been my main complaint about the SCUT. It's also rough riding and feels a little tippy. But it's not terrible in those regards.

Also on the belly mower. If you opt for one you will definitely need to remove it if you are doing anything on non-lawn ground. There is very little ground clearance with it on.

 

[hornett22]

Depends on your property. If it's flat and manicured, probably fine. Mine would eat a SCUT for breakfast. You could probably mow some of my lawn and retrieve my mail. That's about it.

 

[airbiscuit]

I'd go with a compact (and did). A sub compact is basically a lawnmower with attachments. If ground clearance is a concern, I'd check what it is? Good luck

You seem to have your mind made up on a SCUT. I think you will be happy with that. I think you would be even happier with a Small Frame CUT. About the same footprint, but larger wheels, more traction and ground clearance.