JD4320 vs. Kubota L5240 -- question about lift capacity

[texasjohn]

I have a Grand L 5030 with 853 loader, earlier model of the L5240. Several comments.
Best idea, try it with actual weight you wish to lift. Shape of weight, distance from pins makes difference.
You will absolutely need lots of rear weight, filled tires, etc. talking close to 1000 lbs, to SAFELY move max weight
Hydraulic pressure in my 5030 was under spec from factory, got it raised, made vast difference in lift capacity. Believe it.
Quick attach for bucket makes attachment a non issue.
I lift 2700 lbs to about 1 foot height with bucket detached, load chained to arms, then hydraulic relief valve pops.
Hay bales, large, heavy, tight, are easily lifted to max height, can stack two high...see rear weight comment!!!

 

[jenkinsph]

I think if you are planning to lift 2000 lbs routinely then you need a fel capable of 3000 lbs minimum. What happens if you hit a bump or hole while moving a bale. While I am sure both tractors can lift the bale they sure don't have much reserve capability. Nothing wrong with either brand imo just a size issue. I don't recommend anyone buy a machine when you start out with it maxed to the limits.

 

[BleedGreen]

Measured at 500mm ahead of the pivot: John Deere 400CX lifts 2339# to full height. Kubota LA854 lifts 1878# to full height. Loader cycle times are also quicker on the Deere.

This info is from our Competitive Comparison section of the Sales Manual. When I look on Kubota's Comparison on their website they only list the JD 400X which is a lighter duty loader. They also only list weights at the pivot point - not 500mm ahead which is more likely to be where the average load is.

A few other quick things - JD uses a Direct Injected engine running at 2400 RPM (to figure Engine & PTO Horsepower) whereas Kub uses an Indirect Injected engine running at 2600 RPM. Deere has a 70 amp alternator on both OS and Cab machines, Kub uses a 45a (OS) and 60a (Cab). JD hydraulic implement pump at 12GPM vs Kub at 9.4GPM - total flow JD 17.1GPM, Kub 14.1GPM.

 

[Grandad4]

Steve has it about right here. Many who have this size tractor - doesn't matter which brand - have moved large round bales. I've done it, so have lots of others. So they "can" do it. However the reduced footprint (wheelbase and width) of these tractors and their weight do not make a stable platform for regularly moving such loads across open ground at anything more than a crawl. If you figure to be loading/unloading or transporting the large rounds with any frequency, you'd probably find an ag utility type tractor to be much more productive.

Loader specifications have become a marketing game, just like lawnmower horsepower ratings. However, physics is physics with loaders... if the hydraulic pressures, cylinder sizes and geometries are about the same, the lift capacities between brands will also be comparable. One difference that is never talked about is how much the loader frame and bucket weigh. All else being equal, a lighter FEL assembly will, on paper at least, have more of its lift capacity available for payload, but maybe it's not quite as rugged as a heavier-designed unit whose published specs aren't quite as impressive. In the real world, just as most post-adolescent people don't buy their cars based on their maximum, pedal-to-the-metal speed, there's a lot to be said for finding a tractor that will do 95% of your work while operating at maybe 80% capacity.

So, if you're betting on the couple of hundred pounds difference in one manufacturer's published FEL capacities to make all the difference in getting your work done, maybe looking at larger equipment is really what is called for.

 

[Bigfoot62]

I think if you are planning to lift 2000 lbs routinely then you need a fel capable of 3000 lbs minimum. What happens if you hit a bump or hole while moving a bale. While I am sure both tractors can lift the bale they sure don't have much reserve capability. Nothing wrong with either brand imo just a size issue. I don't recommend anyone buy a machine when you start out with it maxed to the limits.

Steve is correct. While that may not be what you wanted to hear, I believe that either of the tractors that you were asking about would be overloaded. At the very least, they will have to be heavily ballasted on the rear to pick up that kind of weight. They would be maxed out just to lift it, much less handle it safely on a regular basis. However, the JD 5M series will do it, even without ballast. (but my 5M MFWD weighs 8000#)

 

[JoeBuyer]

Have both JD and Kubota and both are great. It could be that your JD dealer is optimistic and your Kubota dealer is conservative in their advice. If you have other dealers around, I would visit them and ask the same questions without mentioning your previous advice. I am not sure you can go wrong with those choices and agree that the JD dealer may just haul a tractor of that size back to the shop and add it to the bill. It's not like a combine or something. By the way, isn't there a larger loader for that Model Kubota to get to apples to apples.

 

[bilrus61]

I have a two year old L5040 with the LA854 loader. Just got off it bushhogging this evening with my JDmx6. I've got 250 hours on the Kubota L5040 and my only complaint is lack of power with the loader. Not much roll back force at all with the bucket. I traded in a Kubota L4200 with Kubota loader and it's loader was noticably stronger than the loader on the L5040 despite the specs. I even had the dealer check the relief PSI on the LA854. I can work around it and get the work I want done but if your wanting a strong loader go green. That said I love my Kubota L5040 and I coudn't ask for a better tractor, just a better loader.

 

[jenkinsph]

I would suggest that the new 5xxxE series with a power reverser tranny might be better suited and in the same price range too.

 

[crazyal]

Measured at 500mm ahead of the pivot: John Deere 400CX lifts 2339# to full height. Kubota LA854 lifts 1878# to full height. Loader cycle times are also quicker on the Deere.

This info is from our Competitive Comparison section of the Sales Manual. When I look on Kubota's Comparison on their website they only list the JD 400X which is a lighter duty loader. They also only list weights at the pivot point - not 500mm ahead which is more likely to be where the average load is.

A few other quick things - JD uses a Direct Injected engine running at 2400 RPM (to figure Engine & PTO Horsepower) whereas Kub uses an Indirect Injected engine running at 2600 RPM. Deere has a 70 amp alternator on both OS and Cab machines, Kub uses a 45a (OS) and 60a (Cab). JD hydraulic implement pump at 12GPM vs Kub at 9.4GPM - total flow JD 17.1GPM, Kub 14.1GPM.

Why does the Deere brochure for the 4000 series tractors list the CX400 loader as lifting 2194 at the pivot?
4000 Tractors Series - Product Catalog

Like I (and others said) before buying either tractor try it out. If it struggles or just feels like you're at the edge of feeling safe (either lifting or balance) then think about moving up a size. A coworker moves round bales with a NH TC33. It's a much smaller tractor and he's able to get by, just barely though. What I find is that my front Ag tires are the weak link. When I get a good size load in the bucket they look overloaded. The industrial tires handle the weight much better but I'm not sure if I would want them if I was working out in the field in Vermont. I would check to see which tractor had larger front tires.

 

[BleedGreen]

Why does the Deere brochure for the 4000 series tractors list the CX400 loader as lifting 2194 at the pivot?
4000 Tractors Series - Product Catalog/QUOTE]

The 400CX is mechanical self leveling and lifts more at 500 mm ahead then it does at the pivot. Non MSL loaders will lift more at the pivot. The correct measurment to use, no matter what brand is ahead of the pivot point, where your load will actually be.