New Holland Decision

[machmeter62]

My current machine is Ford 1520, predecessor to the NH TC series. Its been a great machine to me, but at 23hp I always wished it was larger. So I started looking and figured if I'm gonna move up, might as well take a big step, so I looked at the TN60A/70A series by NH. I've got some acreage I hunt in the Catskills, and want to use the new machine to plant food plots, ditch for drainage, bush hog, cut trails, snow plow, move timber for firewood, etc. Maybe even cut a hay field or two (about 15 acres). Mostly general utility work. Of course I would get it with a loader to start off. I considered Deere, but their financing now can't match NH. I also like the EH shuttle shift since loader work will likely be done more than anything else. So my first question is whether this machine is to big for my needs? I took a spin around the lot on both the TN60 and the new 2420, and man the TN made the other feel like a toy. The 2420 seemed more nimble and much quiter, but I liked the feel of power on the TN, and the fact it runs at a lower RPM than the 2420. I could probably get by with the 2420, or a smaller one in the TC series, but figure, for a few thousand more it appears like a better deal, and much more tractor. I'm getting a quote to include a loader, 6' HD bucket, with the standard single rear remote. Not sure why I would need another remote with what I'm doing, but appreciate any input on this. Its a big decision, so I want to be sure its the right one. Thanks in advance for any comments.

Unless you absolutely have no future use for the Ford 1520, I would keep it and just add another tractor. I even have the older vintage Ford 1500 that is still in our family of tractors. It is very useful with a 60" box blade and a 5' Howard J tiller for our large garden. I would have regreted selling or trading it. It is still in "mint condition" condition after 26 years of ownership; and would probably retain most of it's original value with it's 4x4 and 12 FWD/4 REV trans.?

 

[drivadesl]

I agree with Riddler that the size of my loader, its capacity and lift capability is a limitation, I guess comes with this size tractor. The tasks I've listed could be done to a certain extent with a lesser tractor than the TN, but then there's the speed factor, which comes with greater capacity.

Spoke to my dealer today, and he is quoting the Woods LU-132 loader. He says this is $1500 less than the NH loader. Both have the quick attach and can take the same HD bucket and pallet forks I want. Looking at the photos, the NH loader looks much beefier, and spec wise, may have an advantage with a 46D rollback angle vs. 35D with the woods. Digging depth is NH 8", Woods at 5". Overall it looks like the NH has some advantage over the Woods, but is it worth $1500?? Can anyone comment on a Woods loader, or Woods products in general?

Oh, and Happy Thanksgiving to all!!

 

[Z-Michigan]

Woods products in general are excellent. However, I consider the FEL to be an integrated part of the tractor, and major makers like NH will engineer the FEL to fit the tractor precisely. Aftermarket stuff is, IMHO, "will fit" rather than perfect. I would be inclined to get the NH FEL.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

I agree with Riddler that the size of my loader, its capacity and lift capability is a limitation, I guess comes with this size tractor. The tasks I've listed could be done to a certain extent with a lesser tractor than the TN, but then there's the speed factor, which comes with greater capacity.

Spoke to my dealer today, and he is quoting the Woods LU-132 loader. He says this is $1500 less than the NH loader. Both have the quick attach and can take the same HD bucket and pallet forks I want. Looking at the photos, the NH loader looks much beefier, and spec wise, may have an advantage with a 46D rollback angle vs. 35D with the woods. Digging depth is NH 8", Woods at 5". Overall it looks like the NH has some advantage over the Woods, but is it worth $1500?? Can anyone comment on a Woods loader, or Woods products in general?

Oh, and Happy Thanksgiving to all!!

With the NH loader specking out better, it would be a no brainer for me to get the NH loader. You can never have enough lift capacity and to save $1500, well that $$$$ is well spent to get better specs and the loader that is made for that tractor.

Just my opinion

 

[Doc_Bob]

My current machine is Ford 1520, predecessor to the NH TC series. Its been a great machine to me, but at 23hp I always wished it was larger. So I started looking and figured if I'm gonna move up, might as well take a big step, so I looked at the TN60A/70A series by NH.

I have a 2003 TN70A with FEL and 3 rear remotes. EHSS too. I do little work with pallets, so I do not need HST. I use a 3 bottom plow, tiller, bush hog, preseeder, blade, and PTO snow blower (2 stage, double augur). Love the machine, no regrets.

I always want more power, but that is my problem!
Bob

 

[Westendorf-RR]

Spoke to my dealer today, and he is quoting the Woods LU-132 loader. He says this is $1500 less than the NH loader. Both have the quick attach and can take the same HD bucket and pallet forks I want. Looking at the photos, the NH loader looks much beefier, and spec wise, may have an advantage with a 46D rollback angle vs. 35D with the woods. Digging depth is NH 8", Woods at 5". Overall it looks like the NH has some advantage over the Woods, but is it worth $1500?? Can anyone comment on a Woods loader, or Woods products in general?

I can but I'll restrain myself. The overall trend is to assume that you want the cheapest and are shopping for best price. It is tempting ($1500 less), however, when everything is said and done and the loader is installed on your tractor, don't you want a loader that will REALLY WORK for what you need it to? I recommend looking for the best long term value and consider all the features, functions and versatility.

 

[shaley]

If you are comparing the Woods LU132 to the NH 810TL NSL I'd say the Woods has some key feature advantages.
Woods Max Lift 132" NH 122" Key when loading dump trucks or putting hay in the loft.
Woods Breakout Force at pins = 5000Lb NH = 4200LB This does not tell all but is a good comparison number. The Woods gets the advantage from the curved loader arms.
Lift at front of bucket or pallet forks
Woods Lift capacity @ 32" from pin 2400LB NH = 2400LB
The 5" vs 8" digging depth is a non issue. Loader buckets don't dig they peel. A 2" bite is all you would want to peel at one time or the bucket will fill up too fast. Not sure that machine has the weight to peel more that 4" at a time anyway as peeling tends to break traction on the front tires anyway.

 

[drivadesl]

Yes the comparison is as Shaley stated, and on paper each seems to have some advantage. I like the curved geometry of the Woods, which appears to offer better visibility. I went to the dealer yesterday, but he was closed, so I wandered the lot. He had a Woods LU-132, and it looked pretty solid, but unfortunately didn't have a NH loader which to compare. I'm on the fence on this one, as I need to get the price quote down a bit, and the Woods offers a good savings, albeit a possible compromise. The $1500 would go towards a bush hog, which I will be looking for in the spring. These are the decisions you have to make...amongst others.....I'll be speaking to the dealer early this week to get some tighter numbers. Thanks guys.

 

[Westendorf-RR]

If you are comparing the Woods LU132 to the NH 810TL NSL I'd say the Woods has some key feature advantages.
Woods Max Lift 132" NH 122" Key when loading dump trucks or putting hay in the loft.
Woods Breakout Force at pins = 5000Lb NH = 4200LB This does not tell all but is a good comparison number. The Woods gets the advantage from the curved loader arms.
Lift at front of bucket or pallet forks
Woods Lift capacity @ 32" from pin 2400LB NH = 2400LB
The 5" vs 8" digging depth is a non issue. Loader buckets don't dig they peel. A 2" bite is all you would want to peel at one time or the bucket will fill up too fast. Not sure that machine has the weight to peel more that 4" at a time anyway as peeling tends to break traction on the front tires anyway.

I agree with you on the digging depth and would also put the breakout in the same category. HOWEVER, the specs don't really match what you are saying.

The first thing I noticed when I looked up the loaders was the psi the loaders were tested at. The Woods Break out vs. HN Breakout is within a couple hundred pounds if you consider different psi's and when you factor in that the NH loader sits closer to the front tires, the Breakouts are very close.
See comparison chart below - it makes big difference.

We can't caution customers enough. Don't rely too heavily on the "specs". If you do, make sure you are comparing apples to apples. The numbers can be skewed so easily as there are so many variables that come into play. Each company tries to make their numbers look better than the next guy's and in the end, it is the customer that suffers. Look at lift capacity at full height and you'll get a good sampling of the power of the loader. The reach at ground level will give you a good idea of how well the loader will fit your tractor (how far out front it will sit) so you can avoid that "pucker" factor everyone has been talking about.

Here are some things in addition to specs you may not have considered when you are looking at a new or used loader.
1) How does the loader mount and dismount? Everyone says it's easy, but download an operators manual and you'll get the real answer.
2) What kind of quick-attach system is it? How many time will you have to get off the tractor to change the attachment, will you need tools?
3) What kind of Hydraulic System does it have and fitting types? Grade of PSI hosing, etc?
4) Can you keep your fenders?
5) Will it work with 30" rows?
6) Will it work with a belly mower?
7) Are there custom options? Can you upgrade bucket cylinders so you can get better breakout for the frequent dirt work you plan to do?
8) Is it available with an optional self-leveling package?
9) What kind of buckets can I get on the loader? Heavy Duty Bucket with 4" Square tubing as top rail, chain hooks standard, and no-rib interior for quick clean out?
10) Will I be able to keep my loader on my next tractor?
11) Can I use my loader on both my tractors?
12) What is the resale value?
13) Will I be able to get parts for the loader 10 or 15 years down the road?


JUST FYI -
Also ran across this SAFETY ADVISORY online for you LU132 users when I was looking up the specs on the loader.
Woods Equipment Company

 

[drivadesl]

Well I completed my decision. Firstly I went with the Woods LU-132 loader. It was close between it and the NH each had there positives. Of course the Woods being $1400 less was probably the deal meaker for that unit, plus the greater reach, and the quick attach system. The cost savings I used to help upgrade the tractor from the TN-60A to the TN-70A. I'm gloating to myself here, cause something about that extra HP (70 vs 57) and torque,(213 ft-lbs vs 159) along with the turbo puts it up big notch in usable power. I wouldn't say it was a "must have" but I feel alot better about the purchase cause I'd have been kicking myself later if I felt underpowered. Added to the options is MFWD. Given the hilly terrain and type of work planned I think this is a necessity. Also transmission wise went to the 16 X 16 hydraulic shuttle shift. Never had one, but it looks like a good fit for the for the loader work, and ground work I'll be doing. I added the underhood exhaust, an extra rear remote (just in case), block heater, R-4 tires, and pallet forks. On the last item I chose 42" length, which will fit a standard pallet. Not sure if I should upgrade to the 48" since I won't be taking delivery till Feb, so if anyone cares to comment. These would be for moving stumps, big logs, tree planting, etc. Maybe the 6" less length would make overall better manueverability in the woods I don't know. Anyway, now I've got to sit tight and wait for delvery. Thanks for your input in helping me decide on this.