Box Scraper Lots of questions on attachments for 1533 or 1538

[BrokeFarmerJohn]

Just my :2cents:. should be a 7 footer to cover your tracks when angled. :thumbsup: I would get the heavy duty unit that Mahindra has available, even with just snow, you don't want to ride up and over the ice and it is nice to have offset and tilt capabilities.

One last thing, did you look at, even consider the 1526?

Good point on the blade as far as width goes.

I didn't really consider the 1526 because wanted to get one that could easily handle more than what I need as far as brush hogging or whatever else I decide todo later down the road. I actually was leaning towards the 2540 until I saw how much more it would be and how much I didn't need the extra HP from the 1533.

But idk that's why I posted here to get a bit more insite on tractor demands and to justify a bigger tractor lol. It's more of will I need it over the 1533, fears of our growing the tractor.

But the sales guy put it this way, if the HP diff from the 1533 to the 1538 makes that much of a diff than your not buying enough tractor to begin with, he said the 1533 should handle what I want and some, only reason to get even bigger is to run a 7ft mower vs a 6ft ext ext. he didn't think 4hp at the pto would be very noticeable. Enough to justify the extra cost in machine.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

And, Brian, what width blade do you recommend........

As I mentioned in post #6, for the rear blade, a 7 footer and either the Mahindra offset series, or preferable the heavy duty series. You run that 7 footer at a 35* angle and it is only about 66" wide.

One of these days I will get a Land Pride RBT3584 for my Mahindra 3215. Believe it or not, sometimes it would be nicer to use a smaller tractor & blade other than my 7520 with the RBT45108.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Good point on the blade as far as width goes.

I didn't really consider the 1526 because wanted to get one that could easily handle more than what I need as far as brush hogging or whatever else I decide todo later down the road. I actually was leaning towards the 2540 until I saw how much more it would be and how much I didn't need the extra HP from the 1533.

But idk that's why I posted here to get a bit more insite on tractor demands and to justify a bigger tractor lol. It's more of will I need it over the 1533, fears of our growing the tractor.

But the sales guy put it this way, if the HP diff from the 1533 to the 1538 makes that much of a diff than your not buying enough tractor to begin with, he said the 1533 should handle what I want and some, only reason to get even bigger is to run a 7ft mower vs a 6ft ext ext. he didn't think 4hp at the pto would be very noticeable. Enough to justify the extra cost in machine.

Your sales guy doe not understand HP needs-requirements. Yes the 33 will work fine. The 38 may not even operate any larger implements, but it will operate those same implements faster. Has nothing to do with getting a larger tractor.

If you can afford it, always get the maximum HP for the frame size. That way you can get the most out of the weight-frame size that you are getting.

Again, just my :2cents:

 

[BrokeFarmerJohn]

@ Brian that's why I posted here to get a bit more insite of what I will find once I get established with a tractor, to this date the biggest tractor I have operated is a JD 445 lol. I have no experience with working with implements. I have an idea of what I need, an idea of what I will need but I guess I don't like to get caught off guard. A new tractor is a big investment, one I plan to keep for 20 or 30 years as long as I can still find parts. If the tractor I buy is too big for 80% of my projects, I would be ok with that but the 20% it's just the right size for, I will be really glad I bought the bigger tractor. I'm also keeping my costs low or as low as I can hence my name lmao. I really appreciate your input.

But I'm still not fully convinced 3hp will make much of a diff, it's a 12.5% increase on power for a little over a grand, I could use that money on another implement to make the tractor more useful in that way. The tractor and attachments I listed are financed but that's more per month I have to come up with, I could afford the 1538 but would need to see evidence that supports a 3hp increase is more useful than a lower payment or another attachment. I wonder if there is a chart on mowing speed per HP on a 6ft mower, if its say 20 or 30% faster and I had a lot of mowing todo, I could see the attraction of 12.5% more power. I almost think weight would be a better investment, to put more power down.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Here is a chart to figure speed by. TractorData.com - Mowing with tractors

It does not allow for HP, so you need to base that on what size mower you would use and if you would make the jump up to a wider cutter for the 38 or if you would stay the same and just be able to move at a 12% faster rate.

It gives you an idea though. If you are not going to be mowing much, then none of it really matters that much.

All variables that only you can answer.



Don't get me wrong, and as mentioned, only if it is affordable to get the most HP in the frame size. Either will get the job done. There is a reason that typically dealers carry more of the lower HP in the frame size. Because they are more affordable and is what more people purchase.

My local dealer carries way more 1526, 1533 & 2538 machines than any of the others, because those are what sell the most. They have a few bigger HST machines, but they simply do not sell often and I don't think that I have ever even seen a 1538 on his lot.

You mentioned weight to the ground, and you are correct in thinking more power to the ground, but only to an extent. You can get to a point where there is just to much weight to move around adequately. If you are doing a lot of dirt work, weight and HP would be king, but for most mowing and only general road maintenance, then the weight becomes less important. This is why I brought up the 1526 & 1533 comparison on the hill. The 1526 goes right up in high range and the 1533 would not even make it at all in hi range, but had to be dropped down to mid range. there is over a 700lb difference between those 2 machines with the lower HP tractor seeming to have a higher power to weight ratio. I didn't figure it out, just simply from the driving experience on the same exact hill.

Anyway, they all are good machines, if you go with the 33, you can get another implement. If you were to go with the 1526, there is over a $4500 difference and you could get a whole lot of implements with that. :thumbsup:

Just something else to consider, makes no difference to me one way or the other.

 

[BrokeFarmerJohn]

@ Brian

You got me thinking about that and I became curious so I did the math lol. I first calculated what the lbs per HP is than I figured the HP loss at PTO (tractor operating loss) and what percentage that is from the total HP. Turns out it's really closer than I thought, looks like the advantage is with the 1538 HST.

1526 HST is 96lbs per HP
2459lbs @ 25.6hp
18.5hp @ PTO -7.1hp 27.73%

1533 HST is 91.7lbs per HP
3164lbs @ 34.5hp
24.7 @ PTO -9.6hp 28.41%


1538 HST is 82lbs per HP
3175lbs @ 38.7hp
27.7hp @ PTO -11hp 28.42%