Kubota or mahindra

[K5lwq]

My theory simplifies the decision. Pick the weight and frame size you need then if you will be doing a lot of PTO work get the highest HP in that size. If you are doing a lot of ground engaging work go with middle of the road HP. If it is mostly loader work then lower HP is fine. Not complicated at all.

 

[4570Man]

Not very often?
Oh wow I couldn’t disagree more. PTO HP is one of probably the 3 or 4 most important things dictating my tractor buying choices. It has to be a certain HP to run balers, discbines, rakes, tedders, etc. Note I said 3-4 most important. Of course there’s other considerations.
In fact, my last 2 tractors were PTO dyno tested.

Probably doesn’t matter to you since you’re a contractor and a PTO to you is something you put the plastic cover on and has a little pile of dirt on top of it all year.
Got to remember to see things through other people’s eyes sometimes. Tractors used in agriculture, cutting or rototilling, snowblowing, PTO HP is a huge purchase factor.

You’re comparing a different class machine. As long as they can hook a bushhog up how many non commercial owners care?

 

[4570Man]

"It’s not very often a buyers pto hp needs dictate the tractor buying choice with no consideration for anything else."

That statement is true but in my particular circumstances it was also the case. I personally believe that the PTO hp on most of these compact tractors is too low. That's part of their "bleed your wallet" game to push you up to a much larger tractor then what you want or need and make you spend a lot more money then what you want or should need to spend. This is where you hit the point of frustration and tractor shopping becomes like a complex math problem to solve.

Kubota offers 60 hp in a compact tractor and 40 in a compact under 3000 pounds. How much do you need?

 

[4570Man]

But if I have to add wieght to every tractor to get the best ballast, then kubota is still the underdog and to even attempt to get it close to the other it will cost more in ballast.
Secondly your statement about quality is highly subjective and in question from many like me who have owned many brands including kubota. They are not the first words out of my mouth when referring to quality!

Every tractor needs considerable ballast to fully utilize the loader. If you had a big enough tractor or small enough load you might get by without it but if you intend on using 100 percent of the rated capacity the ballast is mandatory.

 

[Hay Dude]

You’re comparing a different class machine. As long as they can hook a bushhog up how many non commercial owners care?

Seriously? All guys do is discuss every detail of everything on their tractors down to number of zerk fittings or the tilt of their steering wheel.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

My theory simplifies the decision. Pick the weight and frame size you need then if you will be doing a lot of PTO work get the highest HP in that size. If you are doing a lot of ground engaging work go with middle of the road HP. If it is mostly loader work then lower HP is fine. Not complicated at all.

That doesn't always work out as you are theorizing. One of the best examples I can provide of this is a 5 foot flail mower that requires a minimum of 30 PTO hp. Almost all 5 foot wide tractors have a max PTO hp rating of 30 so what tractor would one put that flail mower behind?

 

[K5lwq]

That doesn't always work out as you are theorizing. One of the best examples I can provide of this is a 5 foot flail mower that requires a minimum of 30 PTO hp. Almost all 5 foot wide tractors have a max PTO hp rating of 30 so what tractor would one put that flail mower behind?

Well let's see. I have two tractors that is in that 5 ft range. One is 25HP turned up to about 30HP and the other one is 48HP. The 48HP one swings a 64" ditch bank flail 90% of the time and can mow faster than I want to bounce around. Most manufacturers have several power options in each frame size.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

Well let's see. I have two tractors that is in that 5 ft range. One is 25HP turned up to about 30HP and the other one is 48HP. The 48HP one swings a 64" ditch bank flail 90% of the time and can mow faster than I want to bounce around. Most manufacturers have several power options in each frame size.

What are the chances you would have the unicorn Man those specs on that Branson are perfect. I can't argue with that. But here's the deal breaker, there is only one dealer near me and the guy that owns it is a total *******. There are no words to describe on this forum how bad of a person he is. So it once again is Deere or Kubota for me

 

[DieselBound]

"The added weight does not help you mow better, and uses more fuel." Thanks for pointing that out.

Broad brush...

My B7800 is a really light tractor. I don't like running in 4wd all the time (tears things up). If there's a bit of resistance from the brush hog or the ground is a bit wet the tractor was prone to spin the rear wheels. When I got the rears ballasted that changed this dynamic quite a bit. Hilly terrain might be an area where added weight (to help lower center of gravity) might be beneficial.

But, I agree with the "general" statement of weight, normally, not being of benefit for mowing.

 

[paulfun9]

Every tractor needs considerable ballast to fully utilize the loader. If you had a big enough tractor or small enough load you might get by without it but if you intend on using 100 percent of the rated capacity the ballast is mandatory.

That’s what I am saying.

 

[Hay Dude]

I can tell you with 100% confidence that my 2 Kubotas are not ballasted enough to pick up their rated loader capacity with total safety. I have loaded probably 20,000 round and square bales over the last 10+ years and they are a little tippy at 2/3rd to full height, even with cast rear rims and wheel weights.
If they were heavier framed or ballasted, they would be safer.
They are great tractors, but they are on the lighter side for 130HP

 

[bdhsfz6]

But if I have to add wieght to every tractor to get the best ballast, then kubota is still the underdog and to even attempt to get it close to the other it will cost more in ballast.
Secondly your statement about quality is highly subjective and in question from many like me who have owned many brands including kubota. They are not the first words out of my mouth when referring to quality!

I did not mention any specific manufacturer when I referred to quality. My statement holds true regardless of who makes the tractor.

 

[RichnMo]

Which is exactly why I wouldn't touch a Kubota with a ten foot pole. They are the lowest featured, worst designed tractors on the market. The controls are also terrible. And they're expensive. I guess the orange paint mesmerizes people. You can get a lot more tractor for the money elsewhere.

Well you obviously haven't priced the green. Because the hydraulic's are junk and location of things needed to operate.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

Well you obviously haven't priced the green. Because the hydraulic's are junk and location of things needed to operate.

Please provide some explanation of what you are referring to.

 

[RichnMo]

Please provide some explanation of what you are referring to.

I purchased a new 5310 4wd when I lived in Colo. before moving to MO. With 2 rear remotes, filled rear tires and Fel and multiple implements. Upon delivery I was tickled having made close to a 50k investment to maintain my 40 ac. Within the first month I noticed that if I parked the green machine with the loader up you could hear it creaking as it bled off and dropped down. Then going into winter and living southeast of Denver at 9400ft we encountered some heavy snow fall. The first time I slid off the road into the ditch along the road, using the bucket to normally claw or push yourself out got me nothing! A task I had done multiple times before with my 30 hp Kubota.
Taking the green machine 50 miles back to the dealer I got it from was going to be one of 6 trips to JD to get nothing accomplished. The replaced almost the entire hyd assemblies on the tractor which did zip ! The regional rep said unless I wanted to upgrade into a 6000 series tractor with different spool valves etc that there was nothing they could do and the inferior hydrolics and bleed off was considered normal ! I couldn't believe what I was told and have never owned or will ever again.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

I purchased a new 5310 4wd when I lived in Colo. before moving to MO. With 2 rear remotes, filled rear tires and Fel and multiple implements. Upon delivery I was tickled having made close to a 50k investment to maintain my 40 ac. Within the first month I noticed that if I parked the green machine with the loader up you could hear it creaking as it bled off and dropped down. Then going into winter and living southeast of Denver at 9400ft we encountered some heavy snow fall. The first time I slid off the road into the ditch along the road, using the bucket to normally claw or push yourself out got me nothing! A task I had done multiple times before with my 30 hp Kubota.
Taking the green machine 50 miles back to the dealer I got it from was going to be one of 6 trips to JD to get nothing accomplished. The replaced almost the entire hyd assemblies on the tractor which did zip ! The regional rep said unless I wanted to upgrade into a 6000 series tractor with different spool valves etc that there was nothing they could do and the inferior hydrolics and bleed off was considered normal ! I couldn't believe what I was told and have never owned or will ever again.

Thanks for your reply about this and I am sorry to hear about your experience. When companies like Deere sell a product that is inferior and underperforms, saying the performance is normal is their go to answer to weasel out. This is not the first time I have heard a story like this on TBN and this is why I strongly believe a product needs to be demoed before purchase.

 

[LD1]

I purchased a new 5310 4wd when I lived in Colo. before moving to MO. With 2 rear remotes, filled rear tires and Fel and multiple implements. Upon delivery I was tickled having made close to a 50k investment to maintain my 40 ac. Within the first month I noticed that if I parked the green machine with the loader up you could hear it creaking as it bled off and dropped down. Then going into winter and living southeast of Denver at 9400ft we encountered some heavy snow fall. The first time I slid off the road into the ditch along the road, using the bucket to normally claw or push yourself out got me nothing! A task I had done multiple times before with my 30 hp Kubota.
Taking the green machine 50 miles back to the dealer I got it from was going to be one of 6 trips to JD to get nothing accomplished. The replaced almost the entire hyd assemblies on the tractor which did zip ! The regional rep said unless I wanted to upgrade into a 6000 series tractor with different spool valves etc that there was nothing they could do and the inferior hydrolics and bleed off was considered normal ! I couldn't believe what I was told and have never owned or will ever again.

Everyones opinion on how much bleeding down is acceptable is different.

The ONLY one that matters is what the valve manufacture specifies.

There are NO seals in the spools on a hydraulic valve. IT is just very tight tolerance metal on metal. So they ALL will leak down eventually. But is it a foot a week or a foot a minute?

What a valve manufacture rates it at is gonna be a given amount of fluid (in CC's or ounces) over a given time at a given pressure.
With some math....based on cylinder sizes and oil volume in said cylinder....you can convert that to loader movement in which is deem acceptable over a period of time.

JD service manuals probably have that information spelled out. But if it were mine, I would have specifically asked what is "acceptable". Then actually take a measurement on YOUR machine and see if it is within their allowable spec or not.

You made NO mention at all how fast your loader would "creep" down. Without knowing that its hard for me to form an opinion on your situation

 

[rScotty]

Everyones opinion on how much bleeding down is acceptable is different.

The ONLY one that matters is what the valve manufacture specifies.

There are NO seals in the spools on a hydraulic valve. IT is just very tight tolerance metal on metal. So they ALL will leak down eventually. But is it a foot a week or a foot a minute?

What a valve manufacture rates it at is gonna be a given amount of fluid (in CC's or ounces) over a given time at a given pressure.
With some math....based on cylinder sizes and oil volume in said cylinder....you can convert that to loader movement in which is deem acceptable over a period of time.

JD service manuals probably have that information spelled out. But if it were mine, I would have specifically asked what is "acceptable". Then actually take a measurement on YOUR machine and see if it is within their allowable spec or not.

You made NO mention at all how fast your loader would "creep" down. Without knowing that its hard for me to form an opinion on your situation

Well said. I can't seem to find the leakdown limits for our Kubota right now...but I do remember when I reading them and being surprised at how fast that the leakdown could be and still be acceptable.

Obviously people see this differently, but at our place I would never leave a loader up with motor off or unattended... not without first engaging the built in mechanical stop that all loaders have or should have that prevents the arms from falling down.

 

[Cahaba Valley Farm]

Well said. I can't seem to find the leakdown limits for our Kubota right now...but I do remember when I reading them and being surprised at how fast that the leakdown could be and still be acceptable.

Loader leak-down is a very common problem in this industry and the manufacturers in response to it have lowered their standards instead of choosing to do the right thing. Toyota tried this same tactic 16 years ago when they had a problem with their engines burning oil. They went as far as writing a owners manual that stated it was acceptable for the engine to burn a quart of oil every 600 miles. It wasn't long before a class action lawsuit ensued and Toyota issued a recall. This again is why it is so important that you demo, do your research and talk to current/past owners about the piece of equipment that you are interested in purchasing.

 

[LD1]

Loader leak-down is a very common problem in this industry and the manufacturers in response to it have lowered their standards instead of choosing to do the right thing. Toyota tried this same tactic 16 years ago when they had a problem with their engines burning oil. They went as far as writing a owners manual that stated it was acceptable for the engine to burn a quart of oil every 600 miles. It wasn't long before a class action lawsuit ensued and Toyota issued a recall. This again is why it is so important that you demo, do your research and talk to current/past owners about the piece of equipment that you are interested in purchasing.

I wouldn't really say its very common....and definitely wouldn't say its a "problem"

Sure, if you are mowing with the loader on and trying to keep it say ~1' off the ground...and you find yourself having to raise it back up every few minutes it would be a problem. but shutting the tractor off, and leaving the loader up and walk away from it...and return an hour later and find its dropped 6 or 8 inches is NOT a problem.

I dont think RichnMo ever said what his leak down rate was. Therefore I have no idea and cannot form an opinion whether or not I would consider it acceptable or whether its a gross overreaction by a customer who thinks a loader should stay up indefinitely and never drop even an inch.

But I would certainly think that if his loader were bleeding down several inches per minute that deere would remedy the situation. But again, without knowing I can only assume that it wasnt the case, rather it was a customer parking machine with loader 1' in the air at night and coming out in the morning to find it on the ground and was upset by that