M-Series Snag!!!

[Glowplug]

Anybody who has read my two recent threads Loader Arms Too Big and M8540 Loader Decision knows that I have been getting very close to getting a Kubota M8540. Well, yesterday I put in an application for financing. Kubota approved me but with one stipulation. I had to pay an unbelievable amount as a downpayment. So now I had to rethink my whole situation. Either wait on my tractor purchase, take out a loan from my dealer for the additional money down, or get a smaller tractor. Now truthfully, the M8540 is too big a tractor for my property. If there is such a thing. My wife wanted me to REALLY downsize. When I first started looking at tractors I wanted a standard shift transmission. So I quickly decided I wanted an M-series. I quickly went from the M5040 to the M6040 to the M7040. I stayed with the M7040 for a great deal of time. But the past few months I had decided I wanted the M8540 with a Quicke Q35 loader. So after this turn-of-events I went to my dealer today and spent about 2 1/2 hours there. At this point I have decided to get the M7040 with a Kubota LA1153 loader. I checked on the financing and approval was no problem. Turns out that Kubota's problem was that I was financing a 3rd party loader (Quicke) as well as a Rhino mower. By changing to a Kubota loader there was not a problem. I could actually probably even get the M8540 with the Kubota LA1353 loader with no problem. But I actually feel better by going with the M7040.

The M7040 is truly probably a more practical size tractor for my needs. I definately want a hydraulic shuttle though and my dealer has none. So he's been on the phone much of the afternoon trying to locate one.

It looks like I'll get a M7040 with hydraulic shuttle, 4WD, ROPS w/ canopy, rear and canopy work lights, 2 rear remote valves, and LA1153 loader with hydraulic self-levelling valve and 3rd function valve with a 72" bucket and pallet forks.

I actually feel better with the M7040 over the M8540. I think it will be more practical. The Cat I/II 3ph on the M7040 will allow for a wider range and less expensive implements than the obligatory Cat II hitch on the M8540. The only things I believe I would miss from the M8540 would be the F12/R12 transmission and the hydraulic brakes. The larger displacement, turbocharger, greater hp and torque, greater lifting capacity for both the 3ph and loader, and greater pump capacity would all be nice but probably not noticed for my uses. Also by getting the Kubota loader instead of Quicke loader I would have a universal skid-steer type interface as opposed to a "euro" style interface. I could then have the ability to use the numerous available attachments with universal skid-steer type interface.

I actually feel better and I am somewhat relieved. I am still somewhat concerned with the F8/R8 transmission though.

I'll tell you what. Buying a tractor is a thousand times more time-consuming and nerve-wracking than buying a car. But in my opinion it's a thousand times more important to make the right decision. If a car gets me from point A to point B without a major problem that's all I care about. But a tractor. . .that's a lifestyle!!!

Anyway, I just wanted to post all this for everyone's information and enjoyment. I guess I don't truly have a question but any comments or words of advice would be appreciated.

 

[Doc_Bob]

I actually feel better with the M7040 over the M8540. I think it will be more practical. The Cat I/II 3ph on the M7040 will allow for a wider range and less expensive implements than the obligatory Cat II hitch on the M8540. .

My New Holland TN70A allows CatI/II implements. I have learned that it is not wise or possible to use all CAT I implements on my TN70A.
Bob

 

[Doc_Bob]

It looks like I'll get a M7040 with hydraulic shuttle, 4WD, ROPS w/ canopy, rear and canopy work lights, 2 rear remote valves, and LA1153 loader with hydraulic self-levelling valve and 3rd function valve with a 72" bucket and pallet forks.

How much money did you save?
Bob

 

[Glowplug]

How much money did you save?
Bob

Over 6 grand!! That's more than I thought I would. I was under the impression the M8540 was only about $2,500 more than the M7040 according to my calculations. That's one reason I didn't mind stepping up to the 8540, mainly for the loader and 12-speed transmission. But with that price difference I don't think they're worth it.

 

[Bob_Young]

Chuck,
For your lot size, buying an M-series really seems to be jumping into the deep end of the pool....especially for a first time tractor owner. If you absolutely KNEW you needed that big a tractor or if you just had the cash lying around, it'd be different. But, with what appears to be minimal tractoring experience, it's impossible to know. Also, obtaining money for this buy appears to be an issue.

What you may be overlooking is that, on small properties, the small tractors are, in many cases, far more useful and enjoyable to operate than the big beasts. They can get into much smaller areas, can turn around much easier, can easily operate much closer to obstacles, and don't weigh so much that you have to constantly think about damaging the ground you travel over. Spending half a day seesawing back and forth to get into, turn around and leave a tight area will quickly cool one's 'big tractor' enthusiasm. Don't forget, with a bucket sticking out the front and a implement hanging off the back, even an L-series approaches the length of a full-sized pickup truck.

For 16 acres, I would be looking at the low end of the L-series (L3400, L3430) or even a B3030. Since you might have heavy work lined up, maybe you should aim a bit higher. An L4330 or an L5030 could be worth considering. Both are available in either GST (Gear) or HST and there are currently sales incentives in place to move them. Another choice might be an L4400 for plenty of power in a light package with gears and a trim price tag. If you have to sell down the road (maybe you needed bigger or smaller), any of these will be much easier to move than an M8540.

See how the smaller machine works out for you, then you will KNOW what you need without breaking the bank or giving the wife a reason to say, "Told you so.". Don't forget, big tractors need big strong implements that also cost big bucks and need big space to turn around.

I'd say, listen to your wife. She seems to have a good grasp of the issues at hand. It'll make things easier for both of you down the road.

Not trying to offend or be condescending here, Chuck. We all had to start out somewhere. Some of us grew up with tractors, others grew up with different advantages. Would hate to see you spend big $ on an M8540 and get discouraged by it when the same $ would've bought two of something that would've made you very happy.
FWIW
Bob

 

[IslandTractor]

I have to agree with Bob, an even smaller tractor would be more efficient for your size lot (even if you doubled it). However, I don't have any trouble understanding how you came to escalate up to the big M's. Tractors, like boats, are addicting, especially in the catalog/internet shopping phase of the purchase decision. Bigger is almost always more attractive on paper. However, it is good to catch yourself and rethink the whole deal before you purchase. I don't doubt you'd be happy with the M7040 but I still think you'd be just as ecstatic to have a beautiful Lxx40 series in your driveway with perhaps a couple of extra implements rather than extra horsepower. That said, I understand the emotional pull for "bigger, better". I'm grateful I've caught myself before buying a 46 foot trawler I didn't need or a 44 ft sloop that was just perfect when what I really was trying to do was find a boat I could sail around by myself. (Finally settled on a 24ft sailboat ). I think you would be every bit as happy sitting on an L as an M and I just cannot imagine that one of those L's could not manage every single task you have in mind. Good luck.

PS. Think of all the brownie points you would earn by announcing to your wife that you had considered her opinion and decided to downsize. That simple speech could keep you on her good list for a long long time.

 

[Glowplug]

You guys are absolutely trying to kill me!!!!!!!!
About a year ago when I first started looking at tractors seriously I checked out and researched the L-series. My dealer said he really didn't carry many of those but would be happy to help me out. Most of the buyers of tractors up around that dealer are farmers with significant Ag applications in mind.
I appreciate your advice but don't confuse me even more!
Besides, I'm trying to purchase the land beside of mine, 12 acres, for a total of 28 acres. It will require A LOT of work to get it in shape. I'd like to clear it, and eventually do some hay round bailing on it.

See ya!

 

[AndyMA]

I have 2 machines I use mostly. A Ford 2120 43hp and a New Holland TN75D 75hp Cat I/II. I routinely work on less than an acre at a time with the TN with no problem. In my opinion it's not the size of the lot that matters much, it's what you are doing. Round bale haying takes a good size tractor.

Andy

 

[john_bud]

You guys are absolutely trying to kill me!!!!!!!!
About a year ago when I first started looking at tractors seriously I checked out and researched the L-series. My dealer said he really didn't carry many of those but would be happy to help me out. Most of the buyers of tractors up around that dealer are farmers with significant Ag applications in mind.
I appreciate your advice but don't confuse me even more!
Besides, I'm trying to purchase the land beside of mine, 12 acres, for a total of 28 acres. It will require A LOT of work to get it in shape. I'd like to clear it, and eventually do some hay round bailing on it.

See ya!

Ok, You do have a smaller sized lot (even with the extra 12 acres). Clearing the land will require some power and a piece of equipment. But are you talking about grubbing out 36" oak stumps across all the acres? Then either of your choices are too small. Or are you talking about running a rough cut mower and planting seed? Then they are too big. Since we don't know what your land looks like (at least I don't), nor your goals including the amount of time you want to spend --we can't get real close to good advice. Only guesses and speculation. While fun for us, it's probably frustrating for you. Can you post some pictures of your land? Maybe even a sat photo link?

I am assuming that you have had machines in the L4330 range and the M range delivered to your property so you could test them out against your needs? Many dealers do that if you haven't.

Have you priced out the 3pt attachments? An 8' heavy duty rough cut mower with 4"-5" cutting capacity will run you in the 6+ grand range. If you need it you need it, but it's quite expensive if you don't NEED it. Cat II implements are much more $$$ than cat I. They are also larger.

Just for calibration, I have 15 acres I live on and an L3410 HST is a nice size. The L43 on up to L50 would also be fine. Much larger and for my land, it doesn't provide return on investment.

jb

 

[Dargo]

Besides, I'm trying to purchase the land beside of mine, 12 acres, for a total of 28 acres. It will require A LOT of work to get it in shape. I'd like to clear it, and eventually do some hay round bailing on it.

See ya!

Ah ha! I figured you likely had plans to add to your acreage. Actually, other than weight, you won't feel that an M series tractor is just too big once you get used to it. I say that about the weight because weight is the only issue with my larger tractor around my house. Like right now when the lawn is pretty soft, there is just no way I'm able to use a 12,000 pound tractor without making a huge mess. My rears are loaded on that tractor, and I'm about to unload them I think. That would put me closer to 10k with the FEL and mower. Even on my other property when doing heavy work, I'm not really sure that a couple thousand pounds is really making that big of a difference or not. I was more thinking of stability on some pretty steep hills, but I don't know.

Anyway, if you look through all the threads here I'd bet that the ratio of people going to larger tractors vs. the people going to smaller tractors is relatively significant. As a matter of fact, I can't recall off hand any thread on here where someone has gone down in tractor size. I'm sure there are some, but not too many. Also, it could get somewhat expensive to move up in tractor size about a dozen times or so if you keep missing by going too small. Besides, if you buy an M series tractor, you'll have more interest in purchasing the additional land, right?