Mahindra 4035 and 5035 rpms and . . .

[Fig Tree]

Mahindra has always prided itself on Hp at lower rpm, because of lower fuel consumption and less wear and tear on the engines. These two models, and others, rev at high rpm than their previous formats and higher than that of competitor brands. I'm concerned that this will diminish the longevity of the engines. I am interested in opinions about this. Also, is the Mahindra manufactured engine inferior to the Mitsubishi?

 

[sd455dan]

I know many higher revving engines seem to last just as well- but I do have a gripe with these newer smaller engines being produced with the same power ratings but no graph or average torque and HP being provided these days...

Like you I like my diesels to have low rpm power to- both of the ones I own have a torque peak of 1400 and max rpm of 2000 both have about 90% of total torque available @1000rpm
I think that it is less expensive to build a smaller engine and then set the max rpm around 3000- and using an engine with 1/3 less cubic inch displacement, rate the (peak horsepower) the same as the engine that only revs to 2000. This may also have something to do with the ease of meeting emissions.

Which engine will pull a plow better or push a lot of snow while plowing and can do so- without running at near max rpm to do the work ?
the larger lower revving engine

which one has more total torque?-
the larger lower revving one... a good example of an older low revving engine that was high torque would be any Johnny popper although some would say TO rpm limited- but they could pull and do it very efficiently, day after day after day.

Each their own- but given a choice for a diesel tractor engine-
give me more cubes and a lower max rpm.
Now if we were talking street bikes or boats, give me a very wide RPM range and lots of peak power

One other thing - look at some tractors and the difference in the engines Hp rating- and its pto HP rating...
a larger (cubic inch engine- with a lower peak rpm) will generally have with the pto rating- being closer to the engines HP rating ... my :2cents: and JMO your mileage may vary

 

[JerryK]

First off, without raising your hackles much... that's a pretty bold statement to be posting as your first post. My 5035 makes it's rated horsepower at 2400 RPMs. My old 1981 JD 2240 makes hers at 2100 RPMS. Most of the change is industry wide, due to emmisions standards. And your statement about other brands really out of the ball park... If you check into it, the new tractors idle faster than the old ones, too. Again, emission related. Sorry...

 

[Fig Tree]

My hackles aren't raised at all. I asked a question as a new member to the forum and as a tractor newbie. My question was based on research-derived facts to which Dan added an informed and thoughtful discussion (the torque/types of uses issue)- with which I agree. Lower revs and greater displacement is better in work trucks, so it seems obvious to expect it to be so in tractors. I agree also with your comments, except that I did not imply that Mahindra was out of the ballpark. Compared with earlier formats, Mahindra vs Mahindra, the RPMs are higher and are now slightly higher than many peers. You can look it up,I did- for purposes of learning, not debating or provoking. My purpose is the same in posting my question. My current tractor is a 1953 model that I received along with the purchase of my new property. I love it, but it has no front loader and is 2WD. I am new to tractors and my question was my first post on any forum. That is a complement to you, Dan and the other members as I have learned a lot from following various threads. Thank you for responding.

 

[Fig Tree]

I appreciate your response on which I commented in a reply to Larry K. It seems that the basic concepts re displacement, torque, and rpm are as constant as Newtonian physics when it comes to down-to-earth mechanics. Thanks:thumbsup:

 

[buickanddeere]

Mahindra has always prided itself on Hp at lower rpm, because of lower fuel consumption and less wear and tear on the engines. These two models, and others, rev at high rpm than their previous formats and higher than that of competitor brands. I'm concerned that this will diminish the longevity of the engines. I am interested in opinions about this. Also, is the Mahindra manufactured engine inferior to the Mitsubishi?

How did you get a Mahindra 4035 wound up to 5035rpms ?

 

[Fig Tree]

??? Hmmm? Those are model #s. I didn't cite the actual RPMs.

 

[sd455dan]

which brings up a question with the Mahindra 5035s rpm rating .
Jerry K listed 2400 RPM- so are there different rpm ratings for different years of the 5035??
because tractor data lists rated rpm as 2800 ?? Or is this just a case of rated HP @ 2400 RPM and a redline of 2800 RPM ??

I do like how heavy and well built the Mahindra line of tractors are... if buying new they would be right up there with some of the other (best values) per $$ spent...

 

[MtnViewRanch]

The Mahindra website lists the 5035 as having 49.5hp @ 2800RPM and 540 PTO RPM @ 2404.

Hope that this clears something up.

 

[buickanddeere]

Just trying to be funny