Newbie

[RanchMan]

<font color="blue">The 4500 4wd is a little underpowered in my opinon for teh weight. </font>

Your statement about the 4500 being "underpowered for the weight" is something I'll have to disagree with.

Weight is a GOOD thing when it comes to tractors. Everybody wants more weight on their tractor, not less. People load tires, add aftermarket weights, or even make their own (see another thread here on TBN). All that HP does you no good if your spinning your wheels, and if you are "light," that's exactly what will happen. Weight makes your translation of HP into work much more efficient because it increases traction/reduces slippage. Never ever heard a tractor owner complain his tractor was too heavy and he was therefore getting too much traction. I'm sure there is someone out there like this, but they must have some other considerations in mind (e.g. "ruts", etc.)

Am I saying the 5500 is overpowered? Certainly not. HP is good thing too - just like weight. For pulling a given implement, a 5500's engine will be less "loaded" than a lower HP engine. But this is not because of the 5500's weight (and similar traction as a 4500 - i.e. similar contact pads on the wheels) - it is because the 5500's engine is designed to produce more HP, hence it would be operating at a lower percentage of it's total potential HP.

Weight has nothing to do with the ability of the engine to move the tractor, (all tractors are "overpowered" in this respect considering their gearing) but it has everything to do with traction. When it comes down to it, weight is a lot like 4wd. Both help get more HP to the ground so you can work and don't just "spin out." Weight? Give it to me, I’ll take it!

 

[ebeacham]

I have to agree with Ranchman, I have about 950 lbs extra in the tires add that to the FEL and my tractor must be getting close to 6000 lbs. Every bit of weight extra helps.

 

[coronelli]

Your right in that respect, I definately wasn't being clear. The ezxtra power helps with lots of things though for the modest extra cost.

 

[honeyb]

OK guys thanks for all the input here.

I went to my Mahindra dealer and test drove a 4500 4wd and
a 5500 2wd tractor. Well to me the 5500 drives much better
and is smoother. I liked the shuttle shift on the 4500 4wd.

The dealer told me that the 4500 4wd is being re-done by
Mahindra. He said that they had encountered some problems
with it and were going to work the bugs out. He said the 4500
4wd was the only model that was affected. So he was kind of
leery to sell me one. He said the 5500 2wd would work for me
for what I needed to do.

I was wondering about the 4500 being under powered, as I
used to have a full size 4wd truck that had a V6 in it and it
just did not have enough HP even though it was a 4wd. So
now I will only have a 4wd truck with a V8. I was just wonder-
ing if the might be the case with the 4500.

I also went and test drove a Kubota MX5000 and a Farmtrac
60. Both of these tractors drove ery well, I would have to say
that the Kubota felt better, but it is a significantly lighter
tractor. These two dealers also reccommended a 2wd tractor
for what I told them I was going to use it for.

So as for now I am leaning towards the 5500 2wd. I just can't
justify spending the extra money for 4wd. Plus if I were to get
a 4wd I could not get any implements at all because my
budget would be shot. So whats the reason for getting a 4wd
tractor if you have not got any implements to work with.

 

[DiskDoctr]

Honeyb,

Another consideration between 4wd vs 2wd...

Tight turns in 4wd are more difficult. About 80% of minimum turning radius is fine, after that it struggles some (just like your 4wd pickup in 4wd on pavement).

Of course, most 4wd models can switch to 2wd, but it doesn't work the other way /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

As for budgets, sometimes shopping payments helps. A few $k seems like a lot, but when there are things like Mahindra's 3yr 0% interest, the monthly cost isn't that different. But a tractor without implements is very limited, so budgets do count...

I'm not sure what Kubota is offering for financing (?)

If you're like me, I wanted to pay outright, but took the 1.5%, got more implements, put the money away for it and will add to it to make up the difference before the end of the 36 months, and it didn't cost much in interest /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

But, as always, it is easy to spend someone else's money /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

As for me, 4wd allows me to have R4 tires (about halfway between Ag tires that tear up lawns and Turf tires that spin and have almost no traction). This makes a nice "good traction" and "easy on lawn" dual purpose tractor.

Just remember, you're going to have this for a long time (most for 10-20 yrs), so get what is right for you and take all our opinions as just that- opinions. Get the one that best meets your needs and is truly within your budget.

Hopefully these opinions were helpful to you.

Oh- welcome aboard!

-JC

PS- I was not aware of a problem with the 4500 4wd- does anyone have more details on this??

 

[RanchMan]

<font color="blue">The dealer told me that the 4500 4wd is being re-done by Mahindra. He said that they had encountered some problems with it and were going to work the bugs out. He said the 4500 4wd was the only model that was affected. So he was kind of leery to sell me one. He said the 5500 2wd would work for me for what I needed to do.</font>

Hmmmm. Could be, but I'd sure check in to it further with other dealers. Don't just take 1 salesman's "word" on something like this. I'd be VERY curious to see what the profit margin was on a 2wd 5500 compared to a 4wd 4500..... Perhaps there's another motivation in play.

<font color="blue">I was wondering about the 4500 being under powered, as I used to have a full size 4wd truck that had a V6 in it and it just did not have enough HP even though it was a 4wd. </font>

You're comparing apples to oranges here - tractors and trucks are nothing alike - it's all in the gearing and use. You need to remember that tractors aren't designed to go 80mph down the highway the majority of the time and "off road" a minority of the time. Most small tractors max out at 15-20mph and that's in their absolute highest gear. When it comes down to doing work, you would NEVER use those upper gears. The weight thing has been discussed as to why it is (a)good, and (b)not going to result in an "underpowered" tractor. The benefits of extra horsepower have also been discussed.

<font color="blue">These two dealers also reccommended a 2wd tractor for what I told them I was going to use it for. </font>

Owners of 4wd tractors (and even a 2wd tractor owner) have stated why they like 4wd. You remain "unconvinced" as to its value in your circumstance. That's OK, just remember that (a) these statements are coming from people who actually use their equipment, and; (b) they aren't trying to make money off of you by selling you a product. A someone told me once, "Always consider your source."

<font color="blue">Plus if I were to get a 4wd I could not get any implements at all because my budget would be shot. So whats the reason for getting a 4wd tractor if you have not got any implements to work with. </font>

A 2wd tractor with implements beats a 4wd with none. I'll agree with that. You gotta pull something to do any work, so if it came down to it and you had no more money you could spend, a 2wd 5500 with implements would be better than simply using a 4wd 4500 as a big ATV on your property.

 

[jwcinpk]

You'll regret not getting the 4wd regardless of size. I for one will never have another 2wd tractor.

 

[DiskDoctr]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I was wondering about the 4500 being under powered, as I used to have a full size 4wd truck that had a V6 in it and it just did not have enough HP even though it was a 4wd.
You're comparing apples to oranges here - tractors and trucks are nothing alike )</font>

Ranchman,

I see his point, as I often see it the same way. If a certain size "vehicle" (car, truck, tractor, etc) offers a larger engine, it usually is a result of customers wanting more oomph and the mfg believes the design will handle it.

Usually there is a reason customers ask for more. Either it feels a little sluggish (bad), or its potential uses exceed the original design (good). In either case, I usually opt for the larger engine.

Like I did in my '04 Toyota 4Runner. a V8 vs the V6 is a huge difference. It easily tows my trailer at 7k gross with tractor loaded (and other stuff). The 5 speed auto also helps on the highway, too. I think this is the comparison he was trying to make. I don't think he intended to compare tractors to trucks, nor am I. But I get the point.

Does this make more sense now, or did I just confuse the issue?

-JC

 

[RanchMan]

I completely agree as to why more hp is put in to specific cars/trucks. But I took his post very differently than you did. My interpretation was that he was basically saying that for a big (heavy) truck, more power = better, and the 4500 could be under-powered because of it's ‘size’ (i.e. weight)

Is this how he meant it? Maybe, maybe not - he's the only one that can tell us for sure, but it sure sounded to me like there was a direct comparison between the trucks and tractors - especially since the terms "under-powered" and "size" came in to play and he talked about only buying v8 powered trucks now because of his experience with v6 powered trucks.

Again, my point was that just because both machines (trucks & tractors) have horsepower ratings doesn't make them comparable items - e.g. it's an erroneous comparison because of all the major differences in designed usage.

 

[DiskDoctr]

Ranchman,

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Is this how he meant it? Maybe, maybe not )</font>

Maybe you're right and I misunderstood /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

I've been known to be confused before /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

-JC

 

[honeyb]

RM and DD,

What I meant was by the comparison was the truck that I had would not go good in the mud and also when out on the highway pulling a heavily load trailer it just did not have enough HP to do the job. Now the truck that I have now is the same model and style but has a V8 instead and has made all the difference in the world.

Now I have a friend who has a Toyota 4wd with a V6 that could out do my old truck (full size 4wd with V6), but he cannot out do the one I have now.

I have not had much experience with the 4wd tractors so I may not have made a fair comparison. I just assummed they were close to the same. I would the smaller tractors do a good job at what they do and I probable would buy a 4wd if I was going to buy one of the small compact tractors. But I am looking at buying the larger tractor with more HP and I just cannot afford the 4wd option and stay within my budget.

Believe me if I had the money I would buy a 4wd drive tractor in a heartbeat. I just would rather have the larger size tractor. I have also got to have the implements as I have only got a tiller.

 

[RanchMan]

If I had my choice, I would choose a higher HP tractor over a lower HP one if everything else were equal. Unfortunately, that's not really the case when comparing the 2wd 4500 and the 2wd 5500. While weight is similar, gearing, brakes, etc. aren't.

The 2wd 4500 will not be "underpowered" due to weight, but yes, the engine will work harder pulling the same size implement as a 2wd 5500 if an equivalent gear ratio can be found across the two tractors (accounting for differences in tire size). This is due to the resistance to being pulled a particular implement generates and not the weight of the tractor. In other words, if you have two identical tractors (same weight, transmission, tires, etc.) but different engines in each, and if they are pulling identical implements (say a harrow), the one with the lesser HP will work "harder" than the one with more, BUT, chances are BOTH will loose traction and be unable to pull long before they "run out" of available HP. Let’s look at an extreme and highly simplified example.

Tractor A & B are identical, just like I mentioned above, except for engine HP. Let’s say "A" has 40hp and "B" has 30hp. Now, let’s say it takes 15hp transmitted to the ground to pull a given implement. Now, let’s say that based on a given day’s field conditions, with the tires you are using, etc. both tractors (because they are identical) are capable of putting 30hp to the ground. In this scenario, "A" uses 37.5% (15/40) of its hp to pull the implement while "B" uses 50% (15/30). Tractor "B’s" engine works harder, but still pulls the implement.

Now, let’s take a magic wand and waive it around and make each tractor weigh much less than they originally did. Now, because each tractor weighs less, even with the same field conditions as above, each tractor can only transfer a maximum of 10hp to the ground to pull an implement. Both tractors try, but both tractors fail to pull the implement regardless of horsepower because they both are so light they can’t transfer the engine hp to the ground in the form of work. The result is that both tractors sit there and spin their wheels getting nowhere fast. Weight was needed and desired. More HP is good, but if it can’t be transmitted to the ground, it does nothing for you.

So yes, all else being equal, yes, more HP is a "good" thing, but it is just part of the equation. Weight is a positive variable in the same equation, not a negative one as has been suggested. You don't want more HP because your tractor weighs more, you want more HP to work the engine less while pulling a given size implement.

 

[honeyb]

RM, so if I understand you right the 4500 4wd should not run out of HP for what I would need it for. It would just run out of traction. So the 5500 would run out of traction before the 4500 would because it weighs less.

So my dad's Ford 3600 won't pull his 20X20 disc because he runs out of traction instead of HP is this correct. Let me ask you this the dealer said one of his customers had a Kubota 4wd tractor that would not pull a 20X20 disc. So the guy came in and traded for a 2wd Mahindra and it would pull it and not spin. I assume this is because of the weight diffrence as the Kubota was out 1500 pounds lighter.

There is still this thing called my budget I have to worry about. I guess I will just have to win the lottery and then I will be able to afford the 4wd. Does anyone on here the winning numbers for next weeks lottery, LOL.

RM, I noticed you have a 4110 why didn't you get a 4500 4wd as it weighs 1800 lbs more and has higher lifting capicity. Plus it has 1 more HP. They about the same in price too. ut I guess you have your reasons.

To keep within my budget and get some implements I can only afford about $13000 for the tractor, give or take a couple of hundred (not thousands). So to get a 4wd with the most hp for $13000 it seems I would need to look at the 3510. But it just looks way to small. I would definitly choose the 5500 over the 3510 for my situation.

 

[Charlie_in_TX]

I replied to your other thread but maybe I should have done it here.

For your requirements, 10acre hog'n, 1acre plowing + some foodplots you could do all that with a 25hp Ford 8N. The 4500/5500 will do it better and faster with more expencive implements. For what you are talking about I would really consider a 3510gear.

With most tractors and ground contacting impements you run out of traction long before you run out of power. For mowing, you will run out of power long before you run out of traction. Having said that, a 3510 should handle a 6ft hog and a 2 bottom plow well.

 

[RanchMan]

<font color="blue">the 4500 4wd should not run out of HP for what I would need it for. </font>

Correct - if you're pulling "reasonable" size implements in conducive conditions. More HP is desirable due to running the engine with less stress (lower % of total available HP) but no, you shouldn't "run out" of HP pulling things like a 6' disc based on what you've stated in this thread. I pull a 6.5 disc with my 4110. 4wd is required to effectively pull it based on my soil conditions, the tractor being "light", and the speed I like to go, but otherwise it works just fine.

<font color="blue">It would just run out of traction. So the 5500 would run out of traction before the 4500 would because it weighs less. </font>

All else being equal, yes. The variables in play are the contact patch of the tires and weight distribution of the tractors. I assume the 5500 tires are bigger, and more contact patch will generally increase your coefficient of friction which improves your traction. (friction is good when talking about tire/ground contact). But weight distribution is also important. If most of the weight is centered over your front tires, your rear tires will have a lower coefficient of friction, hence lower traction. (Think of a 2wd truck driving on ice vs. a car - chances are the car can out accelerate the truck due to having more weight over the rear axle.) If the 2wd 4500 has most of its weight centered over the front axle and with smaller tires, it could loose traction before the 5500 - but the opposite is also true - if the 5500 has little weight over the rear axle then it is possible it could loose traction before the 4500. The only "real" way to determine which would loose traction first is to have a "tractor pull." /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

<font color="blue">So my dad's Ford 3600 won't pull his 20X20 disc because he runs out of traction instead of HP is this correct. </font>

If the wheels are spinning but he's going nowhere, then yes, it's a traction issue. If the wheels aren't spinning and he's going nowhere (i.e. engine dies after releasing the clutch) then it's a HP issue. Again, the greater the % of the total available hp from the engine you use, the harder it is on the engine. Hence why more HP is "better" - all else being equal.

<font color="blue">RM, I noticed you have a 4110 why didn't you get a 4500 ...... I guess you have your reasons. </font>

Yes, I did have my reasons. There was the Daedong engine (same as the Kioti), Korean mfg. vs. Indian mfg., etc., but the main reason at the time is that even though Mahindra claims to have introduced their 4500 in 2001, even in early 2002 I had yet to see a 4500 4wd. You can't buy what you can't find.

<font color="blue">I would definitly choose the 5500 over the 3510 for my situation. </font>

I would too.

 

[DiskDoctr]

Honeyb,

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( There is still this thing called my budget I have to worry about. I guess I will just have to win the lottery and then I will be able to afford the 4wd. Does anyone on here the winning numbers for next weeks lottery, LOL. )</font>

I don't have next week's lottery numbers, but I could hook you up with last week's winning numbers /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif That's about as good as finding out that the "perfect" tractor is out of your budget range, eh /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Seriously, though, there is a lot of good info posted above. You've probably digested it and even become a smarter, more educated consumer because of it. That's the most important part.

When you get to your dealer and make your decision, you will undoubtedly be armed with lots of info. In the end, do what you feel comfortable about and that is within your budget.

Oh, and HAVE FUN! Shopping for a new tractor should be fun, right? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

-JC