NX4510 and NX5010 pricing and review

[TSO]

I've taken the liberty to put in some paragraphs in your reply. I hope the changes don't distort anything you said.

You mention a 37hp and a 66hp tractor but you don't state specifically whether they are on the same frame size (I doubt it). There is no question that a larger frame higher horsepower tractor will do more work than a smaller frame lower horsepower tractor. Nobody here is disputing that. However, the issue being debated is the relative advantages of more or less horsepower with the same size frame, identical loader, tractor weight almost identical, and identical hydraulics. As best I can tell the only difference other than horsepower is tire size.

The engines for the NX4510 and 6010 are based on the identical 3 cylinder block and are both naturally aspirated according to Kioti's website. Of course Kioti has never been able to get their website accurate and today both the 45hp and 60hp variants are listed as having the identical 1.8 liter displacement. I rather doubt that is accurate. The other guys here claim to know a lot more about those engines so maybe they can fill us in. I've looked on Kioti's website for the specific fuel consumption graphs for the NX engine series. Nothing to be found and they have even removed the charts they used to have posted for the DK line engines. The general principles are the same with diesels however so a chart demonstrating specific fuel consumption for a Yanmar marine engine is informative. I've posted the jpg below. It basically shows that diesel engines use MORE fuel per kilowatt of power produced when run at LOWER rpm. Running an engine designed to put out 60 hp at 1500rpm to produce the same power as a 45hp engine running at 2000rpm will show that the 60hp engine uses more fuel to produce the same power.

I'm all for efficiency but I don't know of examples of higher horsepower diesels that are equally efficient at the same output. Bigger pistons, bigger bore, more friction surface has to waste fuel when not running at optimal engine speed for efficiency. More important, if diesel engines have their most efficient output close to PTO RPM, then a more powerful engine doing the same work as a smaller engine is going to be operating in a suboptimal RPM range for efficiency. I'm not an engineer but that just stands to reason. Also, while some folks here claim that you would expend the same amount of fuel running a mower with either a high or lower hp engine, it seems impossible to do that unless you run the more powerful engine at a lower RPM. You cannot do that when mowing and expect the same cut. Mowers are engineered to give their best cut at PTO speed. That means if the lower HP engine will be running at PTO speed for a given HP while the higher HP engine running the same mower will be running at significantly lower RPM. Of course the higher horsepower tractor should simply be running a larger mower but that has consequences too. The difference between a 6ft medium duty bush hog and an 8ft medium duty bush hog is a couple of grand last I checked. Pretty much the same story with other implements too. Bigger implements might be desirable but there are good reasons why the vast majority of TBN tractor owners tend to top out at about 6ft implements. If you really think eight foot implements make sense then 60hp might make sense. It would be inefficient however to run six foot implements with a bigger engine than necessary.

With regard to rototilling or discing, horsepower certainly can make a difference in the size implement you can use. For rototilling, 40hp seems fine to run a six foot tiller in my experience. I rototill in low range can can break new sod, wet or dry without even running at full PTO speed. I'm sure a seven or eight foot tiller would require more horsepower. It will also cost almost double what a six foot tiller costs. If you are a commercial farmer that cost may well make total sense. Most folks on TBN are not using their tractors for commercial purposes full time so that calculus is tougher to justify especially for an implement that gets used once or twice a year as with a rototiller.

Mowing seems the area where more HP might well be justified so long as the appropriate size mower is used. As a 40hp does fine running a six foot bush hog, I'd imagine similar efficiency would dictate an eight foot bush hog for a 60hp tractor. Pretty steep price jump from 6ft rotary to 8ft rotary of similar duty rating. Again, for commercial use it might be easy to justify but most TBNers buying Kioti DK or NX size machines are not commercial operators.

I've never run a 3PT stump grinder. I note however that a hydraulic $38,000 Vermeer stump grinder uses a 34hp diesel engine. . A 24" wheel 3pt stump grinder model uses max of 35hp and cuts 10" below grade. A pro 34" model cuts 12" below grade and runs on 35-100hp....why stop at 60hp???

Your comments on pushing trees over and use of the loader are just wrong IMO. The NX tractors are all the same weight and have the same loader. You bent (!!!) an FEL arm on your tractor which shows that even a 37hp tractor can produce damaging amounts of force when used inappropriately on a tractor FEL. Tractor FELs are designed and manufactured to lift not push. We all push with them but clearly there is a reason bulldozers have short fat FEL arms rather than long skinny ones like on a tractor. Having more HP available to push might well allow more force to be exerted against a tree but it is a dangerous thing to do. I've pushed over many trees with my 40hp DKse, not sure I'd want to put even more force on the identical loader (different number same loader ) with an NX.

My bottom line: if you really need 60hp for something other than a larger mower, get a bigger frame tractor. Putting 60hp into the NX frame is akin to putting 500hp into a F150. Very limited returns. Get a F250 instead.

Yes, and no. There are other factors than size. Trans options also factor in. But you're right that it depends on the user and tasks.

For me, aside from my own use, which is managing only 15 acres and a very small "farm" (small livestock and just a couple acres of cash crops)... I work my tractor commercially. I truly need more HP, but I also need to be as small as possible, for access limitations, transport, and ground impact.

I have an 8ft belt driven dual blade b'hog. When I did a couple big jobs last year, I'm sure glad I had the extra width! That one doesn't really bog down the tractor because the belts will slip as the blades encounter something too thick, but if I tightened the belts, then the tractor HP would definitely come into play.

Regarding a stump grinder, a Vermeer commercial grinder engine really only has to worry about the hydraulic pump. It's not powering a tractor. And the hydraulic output is likely much higher than a CUT. So, you really can't compare that. I don't know how much more PTO HP would completely "future proof" my 3pt grinder, but I do know that 36.5 works well on soft wood, and relatively seasoned hard wood, but isn't enough for newer hard stumps, especially large ones.

When grading, I like to grade in medium range. The speed of medium leaves a nicer finish than going in low range, and obviously make much quicker work of it. Sometimes I could use more HP. But again, I don't know how much.

That's what has stopped me from selling my 1648... I just don't know how much HP would be enough.

Again, I'm sure that for some people, they have more HP than necessary... But I'm also sure that the vast majority of tractor owners who regret their purchase, regret not having more power, or more size. I know for me, the size is perfect, and I love the loader strength... I just need more HP.

I wonder if I could drop in about 75 HP ?!?!

 

[MinnesotaEric]

My bottom line: if you really need 60hp for something other than a larger mower, get a bigger frame tractor. Putting 60hp into the NX frame is akin to putting 500hp into a F150. Very limited returns. Get a F250 instead.

Unless you want an eHST, then you're limited to the largest CUTs. Or larger Utility tractors are too large to navigate in your working environment, then you're looking at the highest hp CUTs.

Different people have different views, expectations, time frames, and price points.

 

[IslandTractor]

People automatically assume higher horsepower engines burn more fuel at all times, but that isn't always true. In many cases the higher horsepower engine burns more fuel at all times because it has a larger displacement, so pumping losses are higher and larger components have more friction, parasitic losses, etc. In this case, the Kioti NX engines are all the same size....same pumping efficiency, same friction, etc. The higher horsepower models are tuned differently (injectors and turbo settings), but that isn't going to make a big difference in fuel efficiency to put out X amount of horsepower. If you put all four engines on a test stand, and set them for something like 35hp at the PTO, they're going to be using about the same amount of fuel. In practice, the larger horsepower models will use a touch more fuel because they will be making more power at PTO speed than the lower horsepower models....but it's not going to be a huge difference.

As noted in my recent post, this is wrong. A 60hp engine will use more fuel than a 45hp engine to produce any amount of power below 45hp. Engines are most efficient close to their max RPM which for practical purposes is PTO speed RPM. Here is the specific fuel consumption graph for a similar size Yanmar again below. Look at the left upper chart area which shows fuel consumption per unit of power by RPM. Note higher specific fuel consumption at lower RPMs. It isn't a minor difference. Looks to me like at 2/3rd power (compare to about 40hp with a 60hp engine) the fuel efficiency is 1/3rd worse per unit of power produced at non PTO RPM than at PTO speed (The Yanmar "PTO" speed is about 3400). These graphs come from a slightly larger Yanmar but the principle is the same. Diesels are most efficient at about PTO speed and operating them slower consumes more fuel per unit of power. A 45hp engine putting out 40hp will therefore consume less fuel than a 60hp engine producing the same 40hp. Daedong has these types of graphs too but they no longer post them on their website.

If you need 50-60hp most of the time then surely that is the size engine you should get. However if you think spending extra up front for the "insurance" of having extra power on a few occasions down the road, recognize that you not only pay more up front but you pay more at the fuel pump every day too.

 

[kapper]

I've taken the liberty to put in some paragraphs in your reply. I hope the changes don't distort anything you said.


My bottom line: if you really need 60hp for something other than a larger mower, get a bigger frame tractor. Putting 60hp into the NX frame is akin to putting 500hp into a F150. Very limited returns. Get a F250 instead.

Thanks for some very good points and observations. This has prompted me to bring up some good counter points that I believe people following this will find beneficial.

First, as for my two comparisons; The 66 hp John Deere is a CUT. Yes, it is on a slightly larger frame than the 37 hp, but not by much. They had the 3000 series and the 4000 series, much like the Kioti. So the 66 hp is the largest HP CUT in the 4000 line, which is basically the same size as the NX series.

As far as bending the loader frame, that was operator error. Rookie mistake, and yet another one of life's valuable learning moments. I was trying to pull a very large oak log because due to the tightness of the woods I could not 'pull' it from the rear of the tractor, so I tried to 'pull' it from the loader bucket and twist it around a tree. This is a no-no, i.e. any twisting motion does not bode well for a loader! But in using the 66 hp I find all of those tasks simply much easier.

You mention tilling with the 40 hp and a 6 foot tiller. This is a great observation. I did not articulate this clear enough in my first examples so I can expand on it now. I also use a 6 foot tiller with the 66 hp, and will also use the Kioti 6 foot tiller. However, I often Till in Mid range. When I till up ground I let the machine and the earth dictate my speed. In other words, I set the cruise to the maximum speed in order to get the soil preparation to my desired liking. So this brings in a new element into our discussion, that element is our TIME. If TIME is never an issue than perhaps using the smallest hp available is no big deal. But for the sake of our discussion I"m sure there are many people with busy jobs, kids, schooling, farms or business' to run etc. So, lets try to put a viable comparison of hp into TIME....

Lets say you are tilling with a 6' tiller on a 40 hp unit that allows you to cruise at 1.4 mph, and I am tilling with the same 6' tiller, but the 60 hp allows my to cruise at say 2.9 mph, then we are both accomplishing the same level of soil preparation. This same principle could be extrapolated for loader work and mowing or other pto operations. So, if a 60 hp vs a 45 hp allows you to save TIME..... then it might be an important factor for folks to consider. If you till a garden once a year, then you will never need more than the 40. If you are tilling multiple food plots, or anything more than a 1/4 acre, than the Time, or efficiency of your tractor (i.e. hp) might make a difference to you. So if we both till the same size area in a given day, but the 60 hp allows me to do it in an hour less time then the result is either A) I am back at the house having a cold one, or B) I am now working on the next project, while the smaller hp unit would still be working on the tilling project. Granted you could argue that the difference might only be .2 mph, or .4 mph or whatever.... But having used BOTH a 37 hp with a 6' tiller, AND a 66 hp with a 6' tiller I can say with certainty that the added hp allows me to do the same jobs, only faster.... . And being that I usually have tractor projects often stacked up like cord wood, this does matter to me.

All of the examples I mentioned were based on real situations. I did not have the luxury of people making these types of in depth comparisons, so I learned the hard way . If I could sum up the hp point I am trying to make it would be this;

You don't learn that you could have used more horsepower until it is too late. So, unless you are test driving a tractor doing real world jobs, or unless you are borrowing a neighbors to see these things first hand, you won't realize the possible things that you could encounter until you actually encounter them, and of course by then it is too late. I am simply trying to help folks who are making the hp comparisons by providing REAL examples of where and when the added hp has truly been beneficial to me. Thanks!

 

[IslandTractor]

With regard to tilling, I thought it was supposed to be done at low speed so the tines have a chance to break up the soil more effectively. I've not tried tilling in mid range with my DK40se.

 

[kapper]

With regard to tilling, I thought it was supposed to be done at low speed so the tines have a chance to break up the soil more effectively. I've not tried tilling in mid range with my DK40se.

There are a lot of variables at play when it comes to tilling. If you are breaking new sod, then yes, slower is better and you will likely have to till it two or possibly three times depending on how fine you want it. However, if you are tilling ground that has been prepped (roundup sprayed and everything is dead and thin), or ground that you had tilled last fall, then it can be accomplished at a faster speed than other tilling. For me, I plant food plots in the spring, and then again in the fall so the 'secondary' tilling tends to go much faster than breaking up new ground.

 

[kapper]

With regard to tilling, I thought it was supposed to be done at low speed so the tines have a chance to break up the soil more effectively. I've not tried tilling in mid range with my DK40se.

The other issue for me to till in Mid range is all of the starting/stopping and turning. I may till at the same mph in Mid range that you might in Low range, but I find that staying in Mid ranges allows me to do all the turning around, etc faster than in low range.

 

[IslandTractor]

Unless you want an eHST, then you're limited to the largest CUTs. Or larger Utility tractors are too large to navigate in your working environment, then you're looking at the highest hp CUTs.

Different people have different views, expectations, time frames, and price points.

I agree that there are specific needs that can be best met with something like a NX6010 (or a 500hp King Ranch!). My main point is that for the vast majority of tractor users in non commercial settings, the base NX4510 will do just about everything that they need and about everything the NX6010 can do without bigger implements. Because of the upfront costs and higher operation costs, potential buyers should think very hard before paying a significant premium to upgrade to 55 or 60hp. I don't think you will find many (?if any) DK40se owners who felt they should have paid extra for more hp or who did in fact trade up to a DK45 or 50. Kioti played exactly the same game with the DK lineup. People often trade up tractors but most of the time it is to a larger frame size and it is everything (weight, loader, 3PT etc) that comes with an upgrade in FRAME size that makes the most difference.

 

[94BULLITT]

I agree with Island I don't see much need for a 60hp CUT. In some cases a 60hp utility tractor is less.

 

[TSO]

...I don't see much need for a 60hp CUT...

For YOUR uses, you mean... ?