Kubota Tractor Weights

[Buzzard7]

I am a city slicker who just moved to the country and am about to buy my first tractor (ever). I am thinking of buying a Kubota M7040 for my 80 acres (mowing, moving hay, some light clearing and dirt work.) Does this seem like about the right size tractor for me? Also, I have looked at other brands and their salesmen have pointed out that the Kubota tractors are much lighter than their competitors. Is this a big deal?

 

[slowzuki]

Hello, that machine is about the perfect size for what you want to do. The smaller M series are lighter than many of the others but not by that much. The 7040 is really a 62 or so hp tractor not 70 so when you compare it make sure you aren't comparing engine to pto hp.

The weight matters more when you need to haul heavy loads and plow. The rest of the time you haul it around burning fuel. It is certainly heavy enough to do your tasks and more.

 

[radman1]

Depending on the task, weight does matter. Especially important for FEL work and drawbar/3pt tillage work. Are you moving big round bales with loader? If so will the bales be stacked? With larger tractors, it is rare to hear someone say they wish the tractor weighed less. It really depends on your tasks.

 

[slowzuki]

I can move rounds with my L5030HSTC with only loaded tires. The 7040 is longer wider and a fair bit heavier. Shouldn't be a problem.

Depending on the task, weight does matter. Especially important for FEL work and drawbar/3pt tillage work. Are you moving big round bales with loader? If so will the bales be stacked? With larger tractors, it is rare to hear someone say they wish the tractor weighed less. It really depends on your tasks.

 

[Buzzard7]

Depending on the task, weight does matter. Especially important for FEL work and drawbar/3pt tillage work. Are you moving big round bales with loader? If so will the bales be stacked? With larger tractors, it is rare to hear someone say they wish the tractor weighed less. It really depends on your tasks.

I think the bales will weigh between 1200-1500 pounds. I plan to stack them two high.

 

[radman1]

If stacking round bales, definitely load the rear tires. You will be ok if on flat ground. Could even attach rear blade or something else on 3 pt in addition to loaded tires.

 

[texasjohn]

I move and can stack 6 foot round balles with my 5030 HSTC.... but ONLY with loaded tires AND extra weight on the rear. I use a front bale spike and a rear bale fork and can carry 2 bales at once.

I have a number of removable, stackable weights, each about 100 lbs. I find this a perfect solution... add weight to front or rear or rear implement as needed, or leave it off. I have 8 such weights.... makes the difference between being able to do a task safely and with great danger and wheels off the ground.

Net... that tractor will do all you need to do..I have 200 acres and about 50 horse power tractor. Weight balance is critical... regardless of how much your tractor weighs... don't be afraid of that tractor because of weight discussions... just consider removable weights as part of the implements you purchase.

 

[mike69440]

I sometimes think Kubota is trying to build airplanes, not tractors, as they are light for their size.

They are well engineered, but weight is what makes ground engagement work and loader work possible.

I added over 1100 lbs to my L39. Iwould rather it had that weight to start with.

 

[texasjohn]

1100 lbs is about the weight added to my tractor by fluid filling the rear tires.

 

[EastTnFarmboy]

I think loaded tires and a decent 6' or 7' box blade will provide sufficient ballast on that tractor.

 

[slowzuki]

The rears on the 7040 hold more weight than our little L5030's. The 7040 to 9540 are considered great chore tractors for farmers. Gaining in popularity. The old M6800-M9000's are really popular for feeding and haying work on farms too. Not so much for plowing etc.

 

[mopiflyer]

Hi Buzzard,

I was also concerned about the weight, but by getting cast rear wheels and adding beet juice to the tires it weighs just about as much as the old chunk of iron that I traded in...a Minniapolis-Moline M670. The Kubota picks on big bales or a loader fill with gravel with no problem and no ballast box on bale on the back. The New Holland tractor about the same hp, weighed in about the same...

Don in Hoosierland

 

[KeithInSpace]

As with race cars, I'd rather the tractor be underweight, allowing me the flexibility to add weight where I want it. Sometimes you want to run lean so you don't rut everything up...difficult to do when you have to remove the ENGINE to make the tractor lighter.

I've had times when I wanted more weight in the front when doing BH work...just took a scoop of soil into the FEL. I've actually installed the MMM for no reason other than improving the COG. Sure it is a little light for what I call "2% work"...the work you do only 2% of the time. It covers the other 98% perfectly. Could use a CrewCab F550 sometimes, but precious little of the time. Hence my not posting the investment.

Not to downplay the need for a tank sometimes. That's why I own a Corvette and an Expedition. Not much complaining from the Corvette camp about the lack of towing capacity...or from the Expedition camp about not doing 4.1 second 0-60 runs...just understand the intended use and purchase accordingly. Doesn't make Kubota in any way a lesser machine...or the other makes "more" for simply being heavier.