Comparison JD 5065E VS JD 5065M...$10,000 QUESTION

[deere5105]

I have been considering upgrading my current tractor. I have read of this similar comparison in a couple of threads. I have read many posts where the "E" series are referred to as entry level or basic machines and the "M" series described as much more tractor. In comparing the 5065E and 5065M with about the same features, I come up with approximately a $10,000 difference. The "M" series is about 1300 lbs heavier, has extendable draft links std., rear work light std. and a 5-cylinder engine vs. the 3-cylinder. For the part time farmer, food plot maintenance, basic property up keep and occasional loader work what is it about the "M" series that is $10,000 better? I grew up on standard gear tractors from the 40's and 70's. The current 5105 with SyncReverser is a huge upgrade from what I was used to. I just can't see the justification behind the "M" series for my uses. Is the performance of the "M" series going to be that much better and more particulary $10,000 better? For reference, I am trying to find something that matches or beats the performance of a Ford 4000 with loaded 16.9-30 rear tires. I gave an offer on a JD 5303 last week, but want to make sure I make the right decision the first time.

 

[ctlguy]

Here are some basic differences

e series, dry cltuch
m series, wet clutch

e series, overseas mfg
m series, usa mfg

e series 3cyl turbo
m series 5cyl turbo

e series, no reverser (2 trans choices)
m series, reverser ( and 4 trans choices)

e sereis, 540 pto only (mech actuated)
m series, 540 2 speed, and 1000 options (eh actuated)

e series, hyd flow @ 1 scv 11.4 gpm
m series, hyd flow @ 1 scv 14.6 gpm

e sereis, three pt mech only top link sensing
m series, three pt, mech or eh, lower link sensing

e series, straddle platform
m series, flat platform

etc, etc.

All of these and more does cost $. The big one for me would be transmission options (as well as a reverser), and the wet clutch. Just no question of clutch durability vs a dry clutch. I don't think there is anything wrong w/ the e series is just another option if you don't need the additional features or comfort level. good luck, I don't think I got any of these specs wrong but am sure someone will point them out if I did..

 

[deere5105]

I believe your specs are correct. It also appears that the wet clutch is only on the PowerReverser and the standard transmission is the SyncReverser. Lift specs seem to be about the same. In my search I seem to have found that there are less maintenance issues with the previous "03" series than the earlier "05" series. Have not heard anything on the "25" series or new "M" series. Have been looking at used tractors too and that puts the same comparison to the "03" series and "25" series. Most of the used 5325's I have looked at have the 9/3 SyncReverser transmission which should bring the dry clutch back in to play. What would be the advantage of the 5cyl engine over the 3cyl? And if it is an advantage to have more cylinders why does the next step up go back to 4cyl engines?

 

[Zebrafive]

I see no advantage to the number of cylinders. Possibly its a balance issue.
It used to be the 3 cylinder tractors had a shorter wheel base than the 4 cylinder tractors, then with the 5 cylinder tractors they now share the same wheel base. One big difference is the 5 cylinders are a dry block and the 4 cylinders are wet sleeved.

I like where they move the fuel tank on the M tractors and that they now paint the axles green, but not enough to buy one over a 25 series or even a 20 series.

Myself, I would want a reverser, and wet clutch, and made in USA.

 

[Bigfoot62]

You didn't say, but are you buying a cab tractor or open station? I think the differences are greater on the cab tractors.

I've been looking for several months, and will probably buy a 5085M in the next few days. I've looked at the "E" series, and I see some things that I don't like. (most of it is mentioned above) Collectively, I put about 400 hours per year on my three tractors. I realize that is not nearly what some do, but it's much more than most people will ever use a tractor. For me, it's worth the extra money to get the comfort and features of the M. My plan is to keep this tractor for a long time. $10,000 spread out over 20 or 30 years is not a lot.
JMHO

 

[RollingsFarms]

all i know about the subject is this. the M series are supposedly heavier then the previous 5025 series. however, i have yet to hear any other benefits the M series have over the 5025 series other then a 16x16 power reverser and 32x32 pr vs a 12x12 and 24x24 in the 5025 series. granted the 24x24 and 32x32 are harder to find it seems, but i would suspect this would benefit for haying or similar applications anyways. I too am considering upgrading to a 5325/5425 or a 5065m. not anytime soon, but in the next few years. reasons are i'd like to have a few more gears, power reverser would be sweet, more weight wouldn't be a bad thing, bigger motor would be greatly appreciated for the pulling applications i do(my 2.9 is a strong motor but i can even make my 56hp tractor bog down at times with my disk), better hydraulics and stronger loader, ergonomics are better. didn't have the money at the time i bought my tractor because i HAD to have a tractor right then and there wasnt time to go shopping around for used, or save up extra $$$ to get a 5025 series.

i asked a salesman why Deere used the 5cyl engine and then jumped to the 4cyl and his response was emmisions. i don't think that was the right answer seeing is how they have the 2.9 pushing 74hp in the E and 03 series. you'd think they could derate the 4.5L 4cyl to cover ALL the M series but they don't. it makes the 5cyl seem like the oddball being used in only two tractors. i personally would prefer to have the 4.5L 4cyl but don't have the need for an 85+hp tractor. nothing wrong with the 5 cyl though that i've heard of.

also keep in mind that the 5025, 5003, 5E and 5M series ALL use the SAME front axle. don't let anyone tell you any different. don't believe me? go look for yourself. 2wd use Cararro and 4wd use DANA and you'll notice the little plate is stamped "made in china". also notice the engine and transmission that's used in the 5003 and 5E series is been around for YEARS. it's been used by alot of Deere's utility lineup. assembled in Mexico i believe but i could be wrong. me wanting to move up to a 5025 or 5m has NOTHING to do with where it's made or isn't made. my only gripe with the 5003 series and 5E series is the paint on the rims is too think for my liking and the 4wd is a PITA to engage sometimes.

honesly if i was going to keep the tractor for years and year, i would go with the 5m series. to me the benefits outweigh the negatives. resale value seems to be alot better on the 5025 and 5m series then the 5003 and 5e series. i see alot of the 5003 series for sale with not alot of hours on them for almost HALF the price they were when new. a 5325 with 1,500 hours was STILL commanding a $25,000 price i saw the other day.

 

[deere5105]

This tractor will be an open station. For the type use I have I am seldom in open fields for very long periods of time. Would be concerned with damaging the cab in the woods. I guess one question with the "M" and 5025 series would be are there more maintenance issues when dealing with more "bells and whistles"? I definitely realize the benefits to the extra weight when pulling ground engaging equipment, but will owning the higher tech unit create more headaches as it starts to age? I am curious of the expected life of a wet clutch versus dry clutch.

 

[Zebrafive]

Deere claims 3 to1, wet clutch vs dry

 

[deere5105]

Came across a 2004 5420 with 430 hrs locally. Has the 9F/3R SyncShuttle transmission. Not seeing many with the wet clutch power reverser available. Loader has been removed on trade in, but mounts left in place. Had a new 553 for $6100 or a recently traded for 521 for $3300. This is the 4 cylinder engine and assembled/made in USA. Don't foresee coming across the wet clutch anytime soon and price seems to be much higher. Price for this unit with the 521 loader is within $1000 of a 5303 I was looking at and this seems to be much more tractor. Going to look at it Saturday.

 

[jenkinsph]

I suspect you are finding more of the 9F/3R trannies units because the owners wanted to upgrade to the PR trannies.

If you are planning on loader work you will be much better served with a Power Reverser tranny.

 

[deere5105]

Will be occasional loader work done, but not extensive. I primarily use the FEL I have now for occasional yard work, but primarily pushing downed limbs and trees out of roads while maintaining roads.

 

[jenkinsph]

You know of course that trying to decide between these two models E or M is similar to decide between a stripped down 6cylinder pickup and a loaded 8cylinder pickup. Your mind and pocket book have to meet somewhere in agreement. This forum is filled with posts where people have bought stripped down tractors new and within a year or so are back on here posting a thread and looking for an upgraded model.

My view is to buy a loaded tractor and keep it for the long haul, so the difference in increased up front cost is minor over the life of the tractor. Everytime I use my tractors in close work I am sure I made the right choice with the ehydro transmission, much better than my older 820 for close in manuevering. I really suggest you give the 4520 or 4720, the 5065E and the 5065M all a good test drive and test the manueverability of all of them to help you make up your mind. I would not approach this with preconceived notions that simple is better and more reliable rather look into all of these with an open mind.

 

[deere5105]

Steve, I think you have given good advice. I have seen this vehicle example on here before when discussing the cab tractors. I primarily work in areas where maneuverability around objects are not critical. I favor the larger Ag machines with their ability to handle heavier implements over the smaller compact machines. For the money, this 5420 seems like a good option. I am planning to look at it Saturday morning. This is a little more than I wanted to spend, but think it would be a good long term investment and resolve some of the issues I have with my current tractor. The only negatives I am hearing on this 5420 is the 9F/3R, no reverser and dry clutch. For the amount and type of use I have, I feel like the dry clutch will last many hours. I have operated a tractor with a reverser a few times and feel like it is something I can live without. Other than these things, are there any other issues I should be concerned with?

 

[RollingsFarms]

Steve, I think you have given good advice. I have seen this vehicle example on here before when discussing the cab tractors. I primarily work in areas where maneuverability around objects are not critical. I favor the larger Ag machines with their ability to handle heavier implements over the smaller compact machines. For the money, this 5420 seems like a good option. I am planning to look at it Saturday morning. This is a little more than I wanted to spend, but think it would be a good long term investment and resolve some of the issues I have with my current tractor. The only negatives I am hearing on this 5420 is the 9F/3R, no reverser and dry clutch. For the amount and type of use I have, I feel like the dry clutch will last many hours. I have operated a tractor with a reverser a few times and feel like it is something I can live without. Other than these things, are there any other issues I should be concerned with?

the 9x3 is going to come with a SyncReverser which is what i currently have. to be honest about the wet vs dry clutch, my previous tractor(as well as my current one) had a dry clutch. i put 1,500 hours on it and it only needed a slight adjustment one time. granted it didn't have a loader on it, it was just used for disking and bush hogging. how high are the hours on this 5420? the reason i ask is because highway departments order tractors about this size for mowing and only get them with the 9x3 transmission, so that might be what this tractor did it's whole life. just a guess though.

 

[deere5105]

Tractor was purchased new by an older gentleman who passed away shortly after purchase. Once his estate was settled another gentleman purchased it and recently traded in on a cab tractor. Have only seen pictures so far, but plan to look at it Saturday.

 

[RollingsFarms]

i think the tractor you're talking about is listen on tractorhouse. i just took a look at one very similar of what you're describing located in MS. seems to be in pretty good shape from the pics. if you're picky about cosmetic things, i noticed the canopy had a good size peice missing, most likely from a limb or something. also it looks like you'll be needing a set of front tires sooner then later. also has a turn down exhaust, not sure if you prefer that or not. seems to be like a good tractor though.

 

[deere5105]

i think the tractor you're talking about is listen on tractorhouse. i just took a look at one very similar of what you're describing located in MS. seems to be in pretty good shape from the pics. if you're picky about cosmetic things, i noticed the canopy had a good size peice missing, most likely from a limb or something. also it looks like you'll be needing a set of front tires sooner then later. also has a turn down exhaust, not sure if you prefer that or not. seems to be like a good tractor though.

This is not the same tractor. I am looking at one with 438 hrs and that one has about 1700 hrs.

 

[deere5105]

I was able to look at the 5420 this weekend. It is a 2004 model with 9F/3R, 4WD, Canopy, brush guard, joystick, extendable draft links and rear work light. Unit has 430 hours. Tractor seemed tight and everything works. Very clean. Much larger than the 5105. I like this tractor. Dealer is taking a 521 FEL in on a trade and offered to include it in the deal since I want a loader. Price out the door including loader $26,200. He also is going to get a 1999 model 5510 in on a trade soon. This unit has the power reverser transmission, but is 5 years older and has 2300 hours. I know the reverser would be more handy, but from pictures I saw the 5510 looked like it had been worked pretty hard. It had a 541 self leveling loader and was $21,000. Strongly leaning toward the 5420. Supposed to get some pictures of the 521 loader early this week since it is not currently on the yard to view. Offered $14,500 in the trade for my 2004 5105 2WD with 512 loader. Any opinions or suggestions?

 

[RollingsFarms]

I was able to look at the 5420 this weekend. It is a 2004 model with 9F/3R, 4WD, Canopy, brush guard, joystick, extendable draft links and rear work light. Unit has 430 hours. Tractor seemed tight and everything works. Very clean. Much larger than the 5105. I like this tractor. Dealer is taking a 521 FEL in on a trade and offered to include it in the deal since I want a loader. Price out the door including loader $26,200. He also is going to get a 1999 model 5510 in on a trade soon. This unit has the power reverser transmission, but is 5 years older and has 2300 hours. I know the reverser would be more handy, but from pictures I saw the 5510 looked like it had been worked pretty hard. It had a 541 self leveling loader and was $21,000. Strongly leaning toward the 5420. Supposed to get some pictures of the 521 loader early this week since it is not currently on the yard to view. Offered $14,500 in the trade for my 2004 5105 2WD with 512 loader. Any opinions or suggestions?

from what you've said, it seems like a fair price. i'm not sure of the hours or condition your 5105 is in, but i think the trade-in price isn't that bad. did you get to drive the 5420? how'd you like the 4cyl compared to the 3cyl in your tractor? i'd love to hear the differences as mine is also the same engine(2.9L 3cyl). to be honest, i would jump on the 5420 over the 5510. reason being the hours difference and the condition of the tractor from what you described. the 5420 seems like it's had a pretty easy life so far and should last you a long time. keep in mind that 5420 can take a 542 loader which you can get in self-leveling or without, and has a good bit more lift capacity then the 521. just something to think about. might also want to think about getting some hooks welded on the bucket incase you ever need to lift anything with a chain, and you might want to get a tooth bar if it doesn't already have one on it. are the tires already loaded on the 5420? if not is he going to throw that into the deal or did you think to ask?

 

[deere5105]

from what you've said, it seems like a fair price. i'm not sure of the hours or condition your 5105 is in, but i think the trade-in price isn't that bad. did you get to drive the 5420? how'd you like the 4cyl compared to the 3cyl in your tractor? i'd love to hear the differences as mine is also the same engine(2.9L 3cyl). to be honest, i would jump on the 5420 over the 5510. reason being the hours difference and the condition of the tractor from what you described. the 5420 seems like it's had a pretty easy life so far and should last you a long time. keep in mind that 5420 can take a 542 loader which you can get in self-leveling or without, and has a good bit more lift capacity then the 521. just something to think about. might also want to think about getting some hooks welded on the bucket incase you ever need to lift anything with a chain, and you might want to get a tooth bar if it doesn't already have one on it. are the tires already loaded on the 5420? if not is he going to throw that into the deal or did you think to ask?

My 5105 is in like new condition. I admittedly wash it regularly and have waxed it a time or two. I have 374 hrs on the 5105 and it has a 512 FEL. I am going to try to keep my bucket in the deal as it is newer, has the hooks already on the bucket and I think the new General Purpose buckets are much stronger than the older Materials Bucket. Hooks have been used enough already that I couldn't make it without them. I realize there are stronger loaders out there. This tractor had the 541 loader on it already, but was kept during a trade. The 521 loader used is half the price of the new 553 loader he quoted. I think the new 563 is atleast a couple thousand more. Just don't think I am working it to the point of justifying the extra expense. Dealer said rear tires are already loaded. I didn't check to make sure, but will next time I see it. I noticed at idle it started off with no change in engine noise. I expect it will have substantially more torque, but probably use more fuel. I hope to hear something on the loader soon so we can move on to complete the deal or cancel if needed. Attached is picture of tractor without loader.