kubota mx 5000

[Blackberry1]

Has anyone out there seen or tested a MX 5000? My local dealer doesn't have one in stock. What was your impression of it's size compared to the L 4610 and the M 5700?
Blackberry1

 

[treeboone]

I have a L4610HST. It shares the same 852 loader with the 5000. It is a slick loader and that is one of the main reasons I bought the 4610. The 5000 appears to be a economy version with a gear transmission. I don't know how they are priced, but it appeared to be a nice tractor as long as you like a gear transmission. Personally, for my purposes, I will never own anything but a Hydro if I can have my druthers.

 

[rbargeron]

Hi Dave - I've been interested in the MX5000 too, more to see where it fits in the range. A dealer in Walpole, NH (Pinnacleview Equip) has a nifty lineup of new machines on their front lawn so I stopped to look them over. They had two MX5000 machines, one with R4's and one with R1's. They are nice rugged-looking tractors - a little more beef than the L4610 but overall very similar size. The chassis looks to be bit heavier than the L4610 but a small notch below the M4900/M5700 - rear axle has steel gear housings (not planetaries). The shifter is a bit unusual, it doesn't come up through the middle of the deck, but instead comes out of the front left corner of the the transmission, so is at the front edge of the deck but is long and takes a couple of bends to get the shift ball over to the middle. May be fine - just looks like an afterthought, compared to other models.

Overall it looks like a fine utility tractor with a minimum of frills. If your use is primarily loader work, you might prefer more hydraulics in the driveline. But if a lot of your hours are going to be spent spraying your orchards, the MX5000 makes sense. Accurate callibration of a sprayer is pretty tricky (maybe impossible) without gear drive. Another aspect in favor of the MX5000 for orchard work is tire size - a bit smaller than the M4900/M5700 - more compact package.

Hope this is useful - take care - Dick Bargeron

 

[JohnMiller3]

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.tractorbynet.com/forumfiles/1-160756-MX5000Specs-145.jpg>Here's a spec sheet and pricing on the MX5000...</A>

I agree with Dick... it's between the L series and M series...

I feel lot's of bang for the buck. What use do you have planned for this?

 

[JohnMiller3]

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.tractorbynet.com/forumfiles/1-160759-MX5000Page3-800.jpg>Another picture of the MX5000...</A>

 

[JohnMiller3]

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.tractorbynet.com/forumfiles/1-160768-KubotaMX5000%40SalemFarm.jpg>Here's a MX5000 with loader, quoted price $22k before any rebates...</A>

 

[Blackberry1]

John,
My primary uses for the tractor would be spraying, bush hog, tilling, and hauling the peach wagon. I'm sure I could find some way to justify a FEL too. I've been hoping that New Holland would come out with their larger Boomer tractor soon so I could compare the Kubota to something else in this size range. I like the trend toward higher horsepower compact tractors because they can meet my higher horsepower needs without having to purchase a specialty orchard tractor. Currently my spraying is handled by my wife's father and his TL100. A smaller tractor by next spring is a necessity so that I can efficienly start a small cane fruit operation to complement the peaches, as they ripen at similar times.

 

[TBone]

David,

There were a couple of threads earlier this year about the MX5000. It is a much closer comparison to the M4900 than the M5700. Below is my post in one of the other threads. You can do a search under MX5000 for the entire thread and the others. TBone

I recently bought a M4900 and when I stopped by my dealer the other day they had received one of the MX5000s. The following are the differences that I know about. There may be others.

1) The M4900 has a 167.6 cubic inch 5 cylinder engine (49.5 ghp - 45 pto hp) vs the MX's 148.5 cubic inch 4 cylinder (50 ghp - 44 pto hp)

2) The M4900 has a full shuttle available (8F/8R) vs the partial shuttle on the MX (8F/4R)

3) The tranny in the M4900 is fully syncronized while the MX is only syncronized in 3rd and 4th gears.

4) The M4900 has approximately 11gpm hydraulic pump capacity vs 9.2 gpm on the MX.

5) The lift capacity (at 24" behind lift point) is 3310 lbs. on the M4900 - The MX is 2315 lbs.

6) 45 amp alternator on the M4900 - 40 amp on the MX

7) 17.2 gallons fuel capacity on the M4900 - 13.2 on the MX.

8) I think 1 remote valve is standard on the M4900 and it is optional on the MX (Not sure about this)

Both have single stage clutches, live-independent pto, wet brakes, catagory I and II 3ph, position and draft control systems available, mechanical differential locks,
hydrostatic power steering, flat operators deck (The M4900 has a rubber mat - big deal), and optional 4WD.

I didn't price the MX5000 because I had already bought the M4900 but I would have looked at both of them had the MX been available. The differences to me would not have been show stoppers had the savings been substantial.

The M4900 has an overall beefier appearance (it weighs about 500 lbs. more) has arm rests on the seat and to me has a little more "comfortable feel". I don't think you would go wrong with either tractor if they meet your needs. I absolutely love mine.

Good Luck!

TBone

 

[JeremyL]

I've not only seen and tested one, I bought one in April and am fully satisfied. It is slightly larger than the tractors that most people here have and tout, but we wanted to be able to do square hay baling in the near future. Right now I'm using it for bush hogging, trail maintainance and pulling things around and it is just great.

Keep in mind that this MX-5000 replaced a 1950 Oliver that, when it would start, was an accident waiting to happen.

 

[Blackberry1]

Jeremy,
I see on your profile that you will be using your tractor on your paw paw orchard. I've been interested in unusual fruit for years. Are they intended for commercial sale. Do they require spraying or can they be grown organic.
Blackberry1