L45TLB Info

[srl28]

Well it is, but HST trans, making it for some very easier to use. Very interested in the machine and will be upgrading from our b7800 to this. Just want some more pictures and all.

 

[bandit67]

That's going to be a nice upgrade.

If I ever "need" to upgrade, I think the L45 would be a great all-around workhorse. Not too big, not too small, and a ton of power. I for one, like the upgrades they've done to create this L45.

It would be my "ideal" machine. I just don't really "need" my "ideal" machine, and probably won't for a while. But it's nice to know if I ever can make a move to my ideal machine, it's there, waiting for me.

 

[Muleskinner]

Here is the Front cover and rear cover for the L45TLB Brochure

Holy crap!!! Look at that. Kubota is going to offer a four in one front bucket option on the L45! Now that will sell like hot cakes!!

 

[_RaT_]

Don't expect just a little bit less from a L45 than a L48, take a look side by side. They are, in my opinion, 2 different class machines. It should be more the size of a L48 and not have smaller tires like the L39.

Yes, lets not confuse the two tractor models. The L45 updates the L39 by adding a cylinder on the engine (don't really consider that an update), HST plus (which may or may not be an upgrade) etc. It is not a L48 and that is for some a very good thing. If the L48 had four ranges and had come out with hydraulic self leveling as an option instead of a standard "convenience" it would indeed be a long lived tractor following the footsteps of the L35. It has been a relatively short lived tractor design. A tractor with some good strengths and some glaring weaknesses. I suppose you might say the same about the L39 or this is just the new tractor marketing mentality. Don't just keep up with the Jones's, surpass them.

 

[Muleskinner]

I'm a bit curious about the L45 as well. Having owned a TL48 in the past I'm am quite aware of its deficiencies, the HST gear ranges being number one on the list and one of the reasons I really liked the L39 with GST. I will be curious to try the HST Plus on the L45. After I sold the TL48 I picked up a L3830 HST. That HST was superb with very nice High, Medium and Low ranges. I'm also with Muleskinner on the L3830 or L39 3 cylinder. It was and is a very smooth and powerful engine, basically a L48 engine with one less cylinder. Since I never got to do any dirt work with the L39, I cannot comment on its abilities, size wise it would have been ideal for my needs. I suppose the good thing is that the L39 leftovers will be around for some time should I get interested in a TLB and the L45 TLB not much of an improvement over the L48's HST. The M59 is more than I need and as has been mentioned, getting into a price range that makes one think twice about going into the next class of tractors, the industrial TLB's. I picked up my TL48 in 2001 for about $29K

I can attest for the L39's dirt capacity. I put over 300 hours on mine grading roads, grading building pads, finish grading for concrete, removing brush, Etc, Etc. The L39 is one heck of a work horse. With the GST trans it has super low end grunt and can flat move out when transporting material with the front bucket. The tractor NEVER let me down and was always an amazement as far as what it could do with only 39HP. The biggest mistake I ever made was the day I sold it!!!

The only short coming it had was when you were up real close to an objet using the front bucket. I had to use the clutch to stop in time on more than one occasion. This is where the HST Plus will shine. But other than that, I would take an L39 with a GST ANYTIME!!

 

[srl28]

Yes, but i think the little bit extra HP and the hydro trans may make it a little more nible and easy to use. Find it a pain to use the GST at times on the l39, rented it a few times, loved the lift height, etc....wish kubota or someone had some more info and especially pictures of the machine. All we have is that 1 brochure pic!!

 

[curtisfarmer]

I have 2 L48s and neither came with hyd. self leveling, but did come with mechanical leveling. Which I disconnected as soon as they where delivered. The older L48s must be what Rat is talking about. Wish the L45 had L48s heavy metal skin. I didn't realize they are adding another piston to the L39 engine. Does anyone else think the L39/45 tires are too small?

 

[_RaT_]

I have 2 L48s and neither came with hyd. self leveling, but did come with mechanical leveling. Which I disconnected as soon as they where delivered. The older L48s must be what Rat is talking about. Wish the L45 had L48s heavy metal skin. I didn't realize they are adding another piston to the L39 engine. Does anyone else think the L39/45 tires are too small?

Its to bad none of the new tractors have the thicker tin of the L48 and L35. I realize its just there for keeping the engine and stuff out of the elements, but one stick gets by the loader bucket and you have a much better chance of surviving the attack with the L48. My L3830 had just such an attack. Suffice it to say, it was caught before it did enough damage to have to get it fixed. The new owner never noticed it.

The original design of the hydraulic self leveler on the L48 was a big mistake. It made it very difficult to get the bucket in the proper position for grading not to mention it had issues with bucket curl.

 

[Muleskinner]

I never use the self leveler anyway. I keep mine turned off on my M7040 and also did so on my old L39. Once you get used to operating a FEL it's too slow for me. I guess if you are loading rolled hay or pallets it would be okay. But for a "stick jockey" loading dirt, rock or sand like me it's a waste of time.

I never found the L39's tires to be too small. They worked just fine for the application. I used mine on hard dirt and desert sand most of the time. I NEVER got stuck or felt like I needed wider or taller tires. (More wieght would have been nice) I always load my rear tires with one gallon of automotive anitfreeze per tire and the rest water. I put 32 oz of slime in each front tire. Keeps the slow leaks down from thorns and such. I run my rear tires at 15 to 20 pounds for traction. Never had a tire slip the bead or roll off at that pressure. I run the fronts about 3/4's of what the factory calls for. Works better in sand and such.

 

[art]

Does anyone else think the L39/45 tires are too small?

Thats an easy question to answer! For some applications they might be, but for the majority of all work I can't see where they need bigger tires. If you look at full sized machines that weigh in at 15,000lbs plus that use the same size rears as the L-48 and M-59 why do they need to be on a 9,000lb machine? Why do they need to be on the 10,000lb machines?

If you were to need floatation great, the bigger tires would probably help. otherwise they are fine. They are not overloaded at all, not even close.