MX5 vs LX5 ???

[RollTideRam]

I probably can't afford either one, but I have a question. Why does the mx5 require more pto hp than the lx5? I think it was 22 and 18hp. My 2520 has 20.5 pto hp. Also when looking for attatchments for the 2520, deere does not list a rotary cutter at all. JC

 

[ddivinia]

The MX-5 is much heavier. The extra weight has got to be the issue.

I am sure JD has a rotary cutter for yoru 2520.

D.

 

[BloomingtonMike]

I am contemplating a MX6 for my 3320 but Deere says min 30 PTO HP and the 3320 is 25hp. MX5 is what JD says I should use. Local Dealer has a MX6 cheap though.

 

[jeepinator]

Using my MX5 as a reference, I'd not recommend an MX6.
My MX5 is a tank and it puts a lot of mass way, way back there. You would likely be fine with the 3PH lift capacity, and even the PTO power, but the counterweight you would need would be substantial. On bumpy ground at any speed even my MX5 sets up some entertaining bronco action. I could see an MX6 being a handful, but workable with a load of gravel in the bucket and a few beers

 

[jeepinator]

I'd sure think an LX4 would be fine on a 2520?
I checked and indeed no JD documentation I could find indicates compatibility with any LX or MX.

 

[browns40]

Tough one...

How much clearance does the 2520 have? My impression was that this series was intended to offer all the extras you can get on a tractor, while still keeping finish mowing/maneuverability/light weight the primary focus of the machine, you know? Not quite enough PTO for a big tiller, winch or shredder... not quite enough loader to load truck over 8 feet sides... but more than enough for a homeowner with relatively finished property to take care of most any maintenance and improvements that came along.

I mean no offense for sure, just figure based on the close pricing to the 3120 & 3203 that the intended niche was meant to be a bit different than the larger framed/weighted machines.

The MX5 weighs 728 #'s, which IF I recall is 35-40% of the total weight of the 2520 (???)... also that weight center of gravity is about 4 feet back from your 3pt hitch.

Improperly ballasted that thing would be wagging your tractor all over the place... even if you had proper front ballast, your tractor would be using a lot of power just to move, and have so much weight on the structure of the tractor. I think it would be too much stress on the tractor... too tough to use, let alone use it effectively.

MX5 also recommends a minimum of 25 PTO hp... the 3320 HST is just at the lower limit, but turns it fine.

Mike, regarding the MX6, I guess it depends on your intentions... In the field, I wish I'd opted for the MX6 for efficiency & that extra 10-15% blade tip speed... in the woods, realistically, the MX5 is plenty of shredder for my tractor... more maneuverable (like the 3x20 vs. 4x20), still able to take a full bite of alders, makes a path the same size at the footprint of the machine... but can't bite off so much that the loadmatch can't compensate for the material... gets close, but works through it.

That said, how good a deal is your MX6? Cheaper than the MX5?

Back on point, the LX5 is quite a bit lighter cutter, but is not much more of a cutter than the off brands are... very thin steel.

Just reread your post--I'm a horses *****... the LX gearbox carries less than half the rating of the MX5, blades are smaller & thinner, don't even know if they have a stump jumper (???). You need more to turn the MX because there's a lot more steel to move via PTO (and tractor).

 

[unreconstructed]

I have an MX6 for my 5203. It is, of course, no problem for the 5203. But I can definitely tell its "back there". Don't have a 2520, but can't visualize the MX6 on that light of a tractor.

 

[jeffinsgf]

Hmmm. I think there's an oversight on the JD web site. No rotary cutters are indicated for the 2520, but the LX-4 is indicated for the 2210, 2305, and 2320.

That is all I would put on a 2520. JD makes those recomendations for a reason.

 

[rockyridgefarm]

MX6 owner here. I use one on a 4310. It isn't perfect. But not nearly as bad as "needing a load of gravel and several beers" to use... My only real requirements are that I must have the loader in place and on really bumpy ground I may have to slow down a bit when transporting.

I actually would not rule out the MX5. The LX is just too lightly made for anything too rough for a finish mower. The skirt thinness is my bigget concern. Swing a little too wide and clip a post, or snag a rock and it may be all over.

My dealer talked me into trying the MX before going to an LX; maybe you could do the same. At least be able to mount one and travel your property without actully cutting.

Better gearbox, reasonable skirt thickness, heavier frame, double deck, higher tip speed, thicker blades, real stumpjumper, Made in America, MX vs. flimsy LX. I guess there is a lot to consider...

 

[Houndsman]

JD does recommend the LX4 and LX5 for the 2520. JD does not recommend the LX 6 for a 2520. Owners manuals for the LX4/5 also confirm this.
In the 3X20 series, JD does not start recommending the MX series until the 3320. This leaves the 3120 out. Our 3120 owners may have a different perspective. Per JD literature, the 990 is rated for LX4/5/6 and MX5.
v/r mark

 

[rockyridgefarm]

Yeah, I am well aware the MX isn't recommended. But I thought I would share the perspective that it can work as log as the operator is aware of the limitations.

Same for the LX. The user has to realize its limitations. No whacking posts. No rocks. No hidden old cars.

Within 15 minutes of getting our MX my wife hit a hidden pice of oilfield pipe. The MX cut off a 3" length of pipe (that stuff has 3/8" wall thickness). Didn't even mark the MX. Made an aweful racket.

No way we could use an LX. YMMV!

 

[dbdartman]

don't even know if they... (LX) ...have a stump jumper (???).

Yes, they do, at least my LX5 does.

 

[timb]

My decision on LX vs MX was made five minutes after I discovered the two parked side by each on the dealer's lot. No comparison. The LX was probably all I needed, but I figured I couldn't hurt the MX.

At the time I bought, seemed to me that the MX was priced competitively with other good brand models of similar build/features but the LX was not nearly as cost effective for it's class.

 

[rockyridgefarm]

the LX has an oval stumpjumper, which will usually work.

As Tim points out, add the chains and slipclutch to most brands and the Deere units are pretty competitive.

BTW i am pretty down on the LX. There are many folks who own them and are quite pleased, and are able to take care of it. That is great. Now if I owned one I am afraid it would not be pretty.

 

[jeepinator]

I think I would have bought the LX if I had a nice flat pasture/meadow. But I still have 3+ acres of previously forested Pacific NW jungle to tame. And the stumps were never removed...
I ran a jagged log end right through the tranny on my ATV last spring when trying to explore it. Heavy duty. I may even put the MX to the test.

When it was time for the decision last December on LX vs MX, I kept thinking how rough I am on stuff. When it's finally time to get something done, being careful escapes me pretty completely. I am not sure what other CUT's have been through, but to me, I have not been kind to my tractor and attachments.
Yet everything seems to be holding up pretty darn good! So either I am paranoid, or this stuff is built maniac proof.

 

[rmonio]

Then I must qualify as a maniac - and hence my reason for having an MX6. As Mike says, the MX's heavy duty construction is a real plus when cutting everything from grass to pipes. The other day it was a rock that I tore into that had managed to escape my careful pre-work when cutting. The MX6 literally cut it in half, put a small dent in the deck (easily corrected) and made a racket that only a caged rhinoceros could top. After looking at the rock, noticing the the blades were hardly even touched, and realizing that it could have been ALOT worse on the deck and blades... well, let's just say that I'm glad I bought the MX and not an LX as I would have had one messed up mower after all that.

Mike's right - if you can make it work then the MX is he only way to go. It was the reason I bought my i-Match, it does wiggle my 4600 when I'm working with it as the weight/size is significant (the MX6), but I wouldn't trade it for anything else out there today.

Good luck!

-Bob

 

[dieselmotorhead]

Another 4600 with MX6, it is Heavy and the 4600 is a large frame CUT. so if it is a smaller machine than mine( 4600 loaded tires, 220# of wheel weight FEL with heavy JD 4in 1 bucket ) Think more about an MX5.

 

[Ronster]

I'm also looking for a rotary cutter for my 2520. I'd like a 60" but most manufacturers recommend more PTO hp my 2520 provides. Befco makes one that weighs about 510lbs, the lightest I've seen so far. Has anyone put a 60" cutter on their 2520? BTW, I'm using a Woods RM660 72" finish mower on the 2520, that seems to work ok.