John deere loader specs.

[Dizno]

Gentlemen, I just want to say that specs are important but only a small part of the story. A Deere loader will outlast anything Kubota any day, any month, and over many years. I have seen, heard, and believe.

John

From the JD brochure NEW 5 SERIES UTILITY TRACTORS, page 17;
John Deere Loaders built to fit:

512NSL

lift at max ht 2453 lbs*
breakout force 4775 lbs*
max lift ht 114"
clearance bucket dumped 85"
reach at max ht 26"
digging depth 3"
dump angle 57 degrees
rollback angle 23 degrees

* measured at pivot

 

[jenkinsph]

Gentlemen, I just want to say that specs are important but only a small part of the story. A Deere loader will outlast anything Kubota any day, any month, and over many years. I have seen, heard, and believe.

John

I have all Deere equipment and am well satisfied. But as far as your comments above, PROVE IT. Kubota makes some very good equipment, this kind of BS will make you look silly and should.

 

[Dizno]

Easy now - I was friendly so ...about the following:

-nickel chrome rods in the cylinders
-friction welded heads on the cylinders
-e-coat and powder coat finish
-how about no pressure relief valves on the bucket cylinders
-nodular cast mounting frames instead of weldments for longer life

How about the fact John Deere utility tractors actually have sleeves in the engine. How about the fact Kubota has not submitted their tractors historically for Nebraska testing? Or that on larger tractors John Deere uses a full frame tractor in their 6000 series that lasts much longer in brutal snow removal conditions?

How about the fact John Deere actually makes loaders for their larger tractors whereas Kubota uses Alo which they don't manufacture?

What more proof do you want?

Thanks and please be friendly.

John


QUOTE=Dizno;3558358]Gentlemen, I just want to say that specs are important but only a small part of the story. A Deere loader will outlast anything Kubota any day, any month, and over many years. I have seen, heard, and believe.

John[/QUOTE]

 

[GManBart]

Easy now - I was friendly so ...about the following:

-nickel chrome rods in the cylinders
-friction welded heads on the cylinders
-e-coat and powder coat finish
-how about no pressure relief valves on the bucket cylinders
-nodular cast mounting frames instead of weldments for longer life

How about the fact John Deere utility tractors actually have sleeves in the engine. How about the fact Kubota has not submitted their tractors historically for Nebraska testing? Or that on larger tractors John Deere uses a full frame tractor in their 6000 series that lasts much longer in brutal snow removal conditions?

How about the fact John Deere actually makes loaders for their larger tractors whereas Kubota uses Alo which they don't manufacture?

What more proof do you want?

Thanks and please be friendly.

John

You do realize that there are many loaders out there, without those fancy "improvements" still working after many decades, right?

Also, the thread is three yeas old....they probably got the answer they were looking for.

 

[Dizno]

You do realize that there are many loaders out there, without those fancy "improvements" still working after many decades, right?

Also, the thread is three yeas old....they probably got the answer they were looking for.

John Deere has had some of these features for years. Of course I know there are loaders still working after many decades. My 1967 John Deere 1020 with a factory original 47 loader can still put in a full days work. How old is your tractor? Point is, I might realize this more than most which is why I drive John Deere.

 

[TomSeller]

I have all Deere equipment and am well satisfied. But as far as your comments above, PROVE IT. Kubota makes some very good equipment, this kind of BS will make you look silly and should.

Oh, I think he was just waving the JD flag, nothing that terribly negative was said about any other color. I have Case, Kubota, JD and Massey loaders. All are good. The JD has the best spec except for speed to full height.

 

[GManBart]

John Deere has had some of these features for years. Of course I know there are loaders still working after many decades. My 1967 John Deere 1020 with a factory original 47 loader can still put in a full days work. How old is your tractor? Point is, I might realize this more than most which is why I drive John Deere.

My 8N was built in Oct of 1947 as best I can tell.

You drive old Deere....back when they were new, you would have had more of an argument. Things have changed....a lot (well other than being the most expensive for a set performance level).

Heck, even a cheapo LS X5000 series loader can lift 25% more, to 1.5" higher, than the JD loader mentioned. If they were truly "the best" they wouldn't get crushed in specs like that....they would lift at least as much, or more, AND have all those fancy improvements you mentioned. You're certainly paying enough that expecting the actual performance matching the durability isn't unreasonable.

 

[Dizno]

You judged my earlier post and challenged me to prove it. I gave concrete examples. I don't have any from your position at all - price and specification are different than quality, durability, and a company that stands behind their product. I do not get your point.

Old or new, John Deere has it. An 8N was not as good as a John Deere D then just as a Kubota is not as good as a John Deere today.

Solid, stable, still John Deere. Still building an awesome product.

It has not changed, my friend.

 

[TomSeller]

.
Solid, stable, still John Deere. Still building an awesome product.
.

Good to see a New John Deere fan on TBN. Quality, well supported product, always has been

 

[GManBart]

You judged my earlier post and challenged me to prove it. I gave concrete examples. I don't have any from your position at all - price and specification are different than quality, durability, and a company that stands behind their product. I do not get your point.

Old or new, John Deere has it. An 8N was not as good as a John Deere D then just as a Kubota is not as good as a John Deere today.

Solid, stable, still John Deere. Still building an awesome product.

It has not changed, my friend.

I didn't challenge anything, I just pointed out that the "improvements" you listed weren't necessary for machines to last virtually indefinitely.

I didn't compare my 8N, just answered your question about how old it was.

Yeah, Deere "has it"....a higher price tag, that is.

Hey, if you're happy with inferior performance, at a higher price, for a possible slight increase in longevity, that's wonderful for you.

"Stable"? You mean like forcing small, responsive, local dealerships out of business? That's really, solid, and stable moves that do wonders for the consumer!

"Quality" should include performance, but you're suggesting it's something independent, because it ruins your argument.

If Deere was really offering a "better" product, at their higher price, they would at least roughly match the performance of far less expensive alternatives....but they aren't.