OP
yellowsocks93
Veteran Member
I have no info on the new loaders. We have not yet got any in on brochures in our brochure rack. I don't know if we have info for the salesmen yet!
New 400X loaders
- Thread starter yellowsocks93
- Start date
- Views: 2309
Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
<font color="red"> The New Holland won't hold a candle in the wind now to the new Deere loader! </font>
<font color="black"> Just because JD now has a curved arm loader does not mean it is a better (or worse) loader. It just means they put curved arms on the loader.
Now take a seriously objective look at the loaders. The NH loaders, with the bucket down, have the arms so steeply raked down that the vast majority of the bucket is visible to the operator. The arms fall steeply toward the ground behind the bucket and are well below the line of the hood.
Take a look at the JD loader and the curved arms seem to almost follow the hood curve, with the bucket hidden behind the curved arms. The arms are ever so slightly curved, and are actually above the line of the hood instead of well below the line of the hood as on the NH design.
So the visibility advantage goes to the LA loaders from NH. As for capacities, etc, I can honestly say I don't have a clue. The NH loaders are available on their Boomer class machines which start at 18 hp and go up to something around 50hp. I might be wrong, but the JD loaders are designed for the middle & larger end of that scale so it would only be logical to assume when the specs are published the capacity portion of the debate will be settled. But that then beckons a question. What is more important (and I suspect the answer will vary from user to user) to see the object you pick up? or to have the capacity to lift up more of it? </font>
What is the better design? I favor the NH design. What is the better loader? I suppose that depends on the question I pose in the previous paragraph.
In the picture, draw a line from the top of the bucket to the place where you think your head will be. I suspect that for most of us under 6'5" tall, the loader arms will still be blocking the view of the bucket.
<font color="black"> Just because JD now has a curved arm loader does not mean it is a better (or worse) loader. It just means they put curved arms on the loader.
Now take a seriously objective look at the loaders. The NH loaders, with the bucket down, have the arms so steeply raked down that the vast majority of the bucket is visible to the operator. The arms fall steeply toward the ground behind the bucket and are well below the line of the hood.
Take a look at the JD loader and the curved arms seem to almost follow the hood curve, with the bucket hidden behind the curved arms. The arms are ever so slightly curved, and are actually above the line of the hood instead of well below the line of the hood as on the NH design.
So the visibility advantage goes to the LA loaders from NH. As for capacities, etc, I can honestly say I don't have a clue. The NH loaders are available on their Boomer class machines which start at 18 hp and go up to something around 50hp. I might be wrong, but the JD loaders are designed for the middle & larger end of that scale so it would only be logical to assume when the specs are published the capacity portion of the debate will be settled. But that then beckons a question. What is more important (and I suspect the answer will vary from user to user) to see the object you pick up? or to have the capacity to lift up more of it? </font>
What is the better design? I favor the NH design. What is the better loader? I suppose that depends on the question I pose in the previous paragraph.
In the picture, draw a line from the top of the bucket to the place where you think your head will be. I suspect that for most of us under 6'5" tall, the loader arms will still be blocking the view of the bucket.
Attachments
OP
yellowsocks93
Veteran Member
I only said that statement since we are in the JD forum. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif I would hope JD blows away the competition as the more we sell the more I have to do at work!
Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I only said that statement since we are in the JD forum. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif I would hope JD blows away the competition as the more we sell the more I have to do at work! )</font>
<font color="black"> Silly me, I try to be objective in all the forums. </font>
<font color="black"> Silly me, I try to be objective in all the forums. </font>
timb
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2002
- Messages
- 1,058
- Location
- Southwest PA
- Tractor
- Deere 4710/reverser, JD 318 (still needs TLC), JD LT160
Alex - I have a hunch in the long run the only meaningful difference between the 460 and 400X loaders will be the look and possibly easier to reach grease zerks on the 400X.
The basic specs have already been published here and there appears to be no meaningful difference in reach, lift height, or lift capacity. If I recall the 400X has the edge in almost all spec areas - but it's by just fractions of an inch, or a percent or two of weight. On paper anyway nothing you'd likely notice in use.
I agree with Bob that there does not appear to be any significant advantages to the curved arm loader in visibility (I'd same the same for the 'curved' hood.) Connect the dots between your eye height and the ground - I would be very surprised if there is an improvment (but most likely no disadvantage either).
Until someone parks a 4710/460 next to a 4x20/400X and climbs around on both it will be guesswork.
The basic specs have already been published here and there appears to be no meaningful difference in reach, lift height, or lift capacity. If I recall the 400X has the edge in almost all spec areas - but it's by just fractions of an inch, or a percent or two of weight. On paper anyway nothing you'd likely notice in use.
I agree with Bob that there does not appear to be any significant advantages to the curved arm loader in visibility (I'd same the same for the 'curved' hood.) Connect the dots between your eye height and the ground - I would be very surprised if there is an improvment (but most likely no disadvantage either).
Until someone parks a 4710/460 next to a 4x20/400X and climbs around on both it will be guesswork.
Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
If you really look at those new loader arms, the lower portion of the arms actually appear to be straight, but the steel tapers and gets narrower, it really doesn't seem to curve at all. The upper portion of the arm has a very minor curve.
I wonder if it really is just cosmetic? It might provide a bit more visibility than the old style, but it is certainly not a revolutionary design advance.
I wonder if it really is just cosmetic? It might provide a bit more visibility than the old style, but it is certainly not a revolutionary design advance.
tica
New member
I saw the loader up close on a pallet in Paris, Tx. I commented to the salesman that it didn't look all that different and he pointed out that it was made of cast steel which made it much heavier. Would that not make it stronger, also?
JayC
Veteran Member
The local dealer has a 4610 and 4710 with the 400X loaders. They don't look to bad. /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
I don't know about stronger structurally - but I guess the hydraulics aren't that much improved. My dealer said the marginal gain in lift capacity was outweighed by the increased weight of the arms/bucket... little or no net gain... but it sure looks purty. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
