Large JD CUT questions -

[timb]

Dan (and Bob),

Thanks for the info - that's exactly the kind of real-world results I was hoping to hear. Sounds like the R1s are rated very conservatively - which is good. I don't intend to constantly run around maxed out, but one of the things that's pointing me toward the large-framed CUT's vs. the medium-sized crowd is the very big jump in FEL performance. Hate to have that much capacity but have the tires be the weak link.

Bob/Dan/Billy - have you ever used your 46/4700's to run any ag equipment that "technically" is beyond a compact's reach (i.e. a baler)?

Other than playing Paul Bunyan - what's the hardest job you've tackled?

Dan - how do you like the hoe? Really wish I could justify having that - but that's one implement I'll probably skip unless I find a used one at a good price point.

Thanks,
Tim

 

[rancar]

You're welcome Tim!! Best of luck in your shopping for a CUT.

One thing I should add is I decided to purchase the largest 4x10 series (4710) CUT because for a couple thousand dollars more I was indeed getting the bigger FEL and a larger 48HP engine that has the highest torque of any of the 4x10 series tractors. I think if you're unsure of the extent of your anticipated projects and you want the maximum bang for the buck and can afford a couple extra thousand the larger CUT may be the way to go.

<font color=blue>Bob/Dan/Billy - have you ever used your 46/4700's to run any ag equipment that "technically" is beyond a compact's reach (i.e. a baler)?</font color=blue>

No, I haven't. However, I recall other posters here at TBN who have (eg, talk to cowboydoc) and even the small bailers put a strain on the tractor. If you're thinking of running ag attachments, you might want to think of investigating JD's various 5000 series line ag tractors.

<font color=blue>Other than playing Paul Bunyan - what's the hardest job you've tackled?</font color=blue>

...Lifting field stone out of hedgerows that I'm clearing on the property. These stones are quite large and I have to be careful I don't overload the FEL. I can tell though when I'm hitting maximum lift capacity. Being careful in this way, I've had no problems with the 4710 or the 460 FEL.

Hope all this helps...

....Bob

 

[dmccarty]

Tim,

I have only run a MX6, 4n1 460 FEL, box blade and JD 48. No
big equipment over what the tractor can handle. I certainly
feel that I have pushed the FEL and backhoe to its limits. Not
abused the equipment but certainly used the stuff. My use
is size and hydraulically limited not HP bound.

I love the JD48. I use it during the winter and I'm about to
put it back on the tractor when I finish cleanup from the ice
storm. I have dug up hundreds of stumps, quite a few 36+
inch oaks. Its paying for itself. The problem with the 48
and the tractors in general is the old time and money issue.
If I had a bigger backhoe I could do more and faster but it
would cost more money. So I take more time to get the job
done but it gets done. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

I use the 48 mainly for digging up stumps. I have used it to
dig some big post holes for a small fence/gate. It was over
kill and made me use a lot more concrete than I would have
like but it sure beat digging by hand. An auger would have
been more efficient but I don't have the money. I do have
the 48. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif So it dug the hole. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

After our house is built I'm going to build a barn and a garage.
I'll use the backhoe to dig the foundations. I might do it with
the house but would prefer the builder do it so I'll be out of
his way.

The backhoe is lots of money. Its nice to have around but it
has to pay for itself as far as I'm concerned. I spent alot of
time getting the 48 and I'm glad I did but it was a real HARD
decision. It really busted my budget but I could not have done
what I need to get done without it. If you don't have lots
of digging to do I think its hard to justify the price.

I have cleared out two driveways with the backhoe and 1.75
house sites. I still have some work on my house site.
Without the 48 I would have had to pay someone to do the
job or rented equipment. Around here it is VERY hard to get
people to do some jobs which is why I ended up with my
equipment. I got tired of waiting for people to show up....
But the equipment has to pay for itself. I figure my tractor
will be "paid" for this year or next. If I add up the work I
have gotten done and what it would have cost me the tractor
will be paid for. Course I still have the monthly payment but
in the long term its made me money. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Hope this helps,
Dan

 

[cowboydoc]

Timb,
I've pushed my 4600 way beyond anything it was ever meant to do. I've got a backhoe as well and have done some pretty big jobs. I have run a baler, rake, plow, disc, hauled 15-20 tons of hay on a hay trailer regularly, lift 1600 lb. bales on an almost daily basis, etc. This has been one tough little machine. I have over 1500 hours on mine and very little trouble at all.

 

[timb]

Richard,

You've mentioned baling with your 4600 before - and that while it worked it wasn't the best thing to do to the 4600. What kind/model baler are you running?

Of all the things I can think that I might get into - baling's probably the hardest on the tractor. That's why I'm keeping it in the back of my mind as a yardstick.

Honestly I'm not sure if I'll ever get into doing hay on my own, it certainly would not be tremendously cost-(or time) -effective but it's something I'd like to have the option to do as much for self-satisfation as anything. If I do bale, it's not going to be a big area (under 30 acres - probably well under) - and all the old family haying equipment has long since been sold off.

So to justify it - I'll almost certainly have to keep my eyes open and pick up smaller used equipment as it becomes available around here. I would be content with a small-end baler (say a Hesston 530-size or equivalent in a round baler, ditto the small end of square balers). And for square bales I wouldn't have any compelling reason to have to use a kicker and tote a wagon. I can live with making a couple of passes to finish the job.

I know my wife's grandfather did all his own hay work on the place with his Ford NAA - and I'm pretty sure he had a PTO-powered baler, but I don't know exactly what he had. Unfortunately all that stuff is gone although the NAA is still in the family and still purring.

Tim

 

[cowboydoc]

timb,

I've got a JD 328 baler. The only thing I didn't like is that it jerked the tractor around alot. When the plunger would go forward it would jerk the tractor back and forth some. I bale hundreds of acres of hay and so I wouldn't do it all day with this tractor. But if I only had maybe 5 or 10 acres to do I wouldn't hesitate to use the 4600. You can do five acres pretty quick with this baler. I keep the loader on which I would think you would want to do. If my 4020 broke down, my normal baler tractor I wouldn't hesitate to use the 4600. We've used it periodically when we have needed to.

With regards to a round baler I don't think I would ever use one. Even one of the smaller ones. I think those are just too hard on a compact, plus you really have to consider the weight factor there as well. Even with an 800 pound bale you are going to have to be really careful going down hills.

 

[JTD]

Timb, I have a 4700 hydro w/ R-4s and generally like them. Since most of my land is sand, I haven't had many problems with traction. Around the pond and creeks it can become tricky though. I've put 600+ hrs on the unit. I bought it used with 500 hrs; 1100 total now. My post driver is by far the heaviest 3PH attachment and it moves it OK. I've bent two cat 1 pins on it interestingly just from normal use. I've used the loader to pick up and move 16 ft 30 inch pine logs with the forks - just barely. Recently, one of the hydraulic cylinder bucket curl seals failed internally and I'm waiting for the seal kit to fix it today. Spoke with a guy who used to work at the Grovetown, GA assembly plant and he told me that in their testing of the 460 that this occasionally occures under heavy use. My tractor tends to overheat when discing the sand land (6 ft 18 disc) in summer after 2 to 3 hours. I was told that this tends to occur with units with the hydro. Although I can run a square baler, it's going to stress these tractors and I'd be really careful going downhill. It'd be really slow too. Wouldn't try to run a round baler at all. I'm buying a round baler now and will use my neighbor's tractor for a few years.

 

[timb]

I've never run or been all that close to a round baler running - so this may be a really dumb question. While I understand the overall weight of the thing (especially as the bale builds up) - I kind of assumed it was a more "steady" load compared to the plunger impact on a square baler. True/False?

I have to agree any "normal" round baler would be too much of a good thing for the 4600/4700, but the little Hesston 530 I mentioned (think this became the 730 and now the 830) is really small compared to a "normal" round baler. Light it weighs only around 2500 lbs and since it produces relatively small (39" wide bales) - they should top out around 500-600 lbs. (compared to the 4500-5000 lbs or more for a more typically-sized round baler and bale). Hesston only specified 30 pto hp so they seem to be thinking smaller tractor - old or new.

I think Richard's JD 328 runs around 2800-3000 lbs "dry". Price and availability-wise I'd probably end up with a square baler anyway, although it seems like more New Holland around here.

Anyway - it sounds like if I ever do begin to hay myself, the 4600/4700 could at least work for awhile to start. Fortunately (and unusually) for this area of PA - I have relatively flat pastures. Nearly all the slopes are in the woodlots.

Other than John (jtd) what size disc has anyone used?

 

[cowboydoc]

I would say false. It's the pto that you have to worry about and esp. the weight. Now remember when they say 30 hp that's pto hp. I have never run one of those little ones like that so it may work, I'm not sure there.

As far as a disc goes I can pull 12' if I don't drop it all the way into the ground. The 10' it pulls no problem.

 

[timb]

Richard - A 10' disc ought to be plenty for me - but out of curiousity, what's the problem with the 12' disc, traction or hp? What kind of ballast are you running (rear wheel/front weights, filled tires)?

If you were going to the 4710 would you recommend the 13.8-28 or 16.9-24 rears? (Tractor will be used as part-time lawn mower with RFM).