Mx5100HST OR DK50HST OR 5035 MAHINDRA?
- Thread starter Byrd57
- Start date
- Views: 10939
-
- Tags
- kubota mx5100
TSO
Elite Member
FYI, the Mahindra 5035 also has 42.5 pto HP.
What do you plan on using anyhow that will require the extra 5 PTO HP ? I ask because my buddies L3540 has about 10 less PTO HP than my LS (28hp vs 38hp) but we pretty much use the same implements anyhow and his handles them just fine. Most PTO implements are 6 ft or less, 38.5 HP will handle them just as well as 42.5 will. My buddy pulls his 84" finish mower with his and handles it nicely.
I'm not challenging your choice, I don't think you can go wrong with any of those 3 tractors... I'm just thinking that basing your decision off +/- 5 PTO HP might not be the best factor, unless you truly need that additional 5 PTO HP to run something larger.
TomSeller
Super Member
I exhaust my PTO power way more often than I lose traction and you just can't add HP like you can with ballast to get more weight. You can always add weight on your 3 pt if you need it but you are stuck with the HP you get the day you buy it. Unless you are into risky engine mods.
TSO
Elite Member
Really? Doing what, and with what tractor, implement, implement size & tractor HP? I have never once run out of PTO power... sheared plenty of shear pins, broke a PTO shaft... nearly buried an auger with my previous CK20 because I shot the auger down too fast but almost didn't have the 3pt lift strength to get it back up.
If you're running out of PTO power that often, I would surmise that you're either over-sizing your implements, or you haven't learned how to handle them properly.
TSO
Elite Member
It's not aggressive Tom... I'm asking because I'd like to know how you manage to max out your pto more than you lose traction. Please explain.
Sysop
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2013
- Messages
- 3,301
- Location
- Fairmont, WV
- Tractor
- Mahindra 4035HST purchased 2013 - Husqvarna TS348-D purchased 2019 - Craftsman 42" HST purchased 2003
I saw a picture of Tom's once, he lives on some fairly flat ground. Traction likely isn't much concern for him.
That being said, any machine can bog the PTO going through tall wet grasses too fast, but that's not so much a lack of power as it is the physics of being able to exhaust X amount of grass-weight with the given surface area of blades measuring Y at a rate slower than Z speed is taking in new grass to cut. Blades with more surface area or more blades is more rotating mass and should require more PTO power to spin, but blades with more surface area or more blades would move more grass out of the deck faster and therefore create less PTO-bog in the same situations at the same speeds. But this is still a physics issue able to be overcome by slowing down or adding more blade surface area. Adding power in such a situation just creates additional wear on components or requires larger components better suited for X, Y, and Z.
I agree it is difficult to need more PTO without needing more tractor overall... Many implements I've checked into that had "horsepower requirements" were mainly to ensure you have heavy enough tractor to handle the implement.
For the same or similar money I can see wanting the extra 5 PTO horsepower when all else is equal, but if it meant paying much extra or going with something else of lesser spec, I could live with 5 less. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them.
That being said, any machine can bog the PTO going through tall wet grasses too fast, but that's not so much a lack of power as it is the physics of being able to exhaust X amount of grass-weight with the given surface area of blades measuring Y at a rate slower than Z speed is taking in new grass to cut. Blades with more surface area or more blades is more rotating mass and should require more PTO power to spin, but blades with more surface area or more blades would move more grass out of the deck faster and therefore create less PTO-bog in the same situations at the same speeds. But this is still a physics issue able to be overcome by slowing down or adding more blade surface area. Adding power in such a situation just creates additional wear on components or requires larger components better suited for X, Y, and Z.
I agree it is difficult to need more PTO without needing more tractor overall... Many implements I've checked into that had "horsepower requirements" were mainly to ensure you have heavy enough tractor to handle the implement.
For the same or similar money I can see wanting the extra 5 PTO horsepower when all else is equal, but if it meant paying much extra or going with something else of lesser spec, I could live with 5 less. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them.
GManBart
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,976
- Location
- Detroit, Michigan
- Tractor
- Massey Ferguson 241, Kubota SVL90-2
Tell me about it...I'm looking at a 7' brush cutter, 7' scrape blade, and 7' rake to replace my 6-footers. The brush cutter would be a convenience, but the other two I'm just not happy with the smaller size, especially if you angle them.
TSO
Elite Member
agreed...
Gman... check this out. It's the same blade I just picked up (can't believe there's 2 around here, I have half a mind to pick it up as a reserve!!! ). Blade works awesome. 8ft Heavy Duty 3pt Blade
