The Objective Superiority of JD in 32-46 HP

[Bird]

Richard, I guess things must be different in your part of the country. Around here the only John Deere dealers I've visited were real proud of that green paint. And of the three I visited, all three acted as if they'd be doing me a big favor to even let me have one at any cost.

Bird

 

[glennmac]

I have spent a lot of time researching the info posted here and am spending a lot of time on this thread. While I occasionally may jest and prod and debate, I have stated here only things I believe to be factual and correct. The serious goal is to sort out real objective differences.

I compare the 4690 backhoe because that is the only Kubota hoe available on the 3010 and the 3410. The comparable JD machines, the 4300 and 4400, can take the 48 backhoe. Therefore, the comparison seems the fair and proper one.

The JD hoes are made by ARPS, like the Bush Hog and Great Bend hoes, but the JD rock shaft attachment scheme is patented and proprietary.

If a Bradco hoe can indeed install in 5 minutes and is available across the Kubota line, then that would be indeed be way to match the Deere hoe attachment speed. But I bet the Bradco would interfere with a midmount mower.

Radman, do you have your Bradco installed on your 3710? If so, which Bradco model? I do have some time on my hands and I was driving the L's again today. I sure liked the 3710's 4 cylinder engine a lot more than the 3010's 3 cylinder.

 

[Alan L.]

I thought you just got the 2910 after getting the BX first. Are you now fixing to change tractors again? I've thought of it myself but I'm not sure how much bigger a tractor than my 2710 I can easily trailer and take 6 miles to my Mother's land and 30 miles to the dealer.

Alan L., TX

 

[glennmac]

Well, I am thinking about going bigger, but it is probably just fantasy since the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of War (who are the same person) will veto any more tractor goodies.

It started with my dissatisfaction with my backhoe options for the 2910. When I saw the Deere hoe, I was very impressed. When I started learning more about the Deere 4000 series I began getting even more impressed at how they have architected their designs.

This thread is partly to inform the Orange and Blue world, which predominate on this board, of the favorable attributes I have found out about Deere. It is also partly in hope that they can argue me out of upgrading to a Deere by pointing out things I have missed or gotten wrong.

Like many here, what I dont know about tractors is a lot more than I do.

 

[cowboydoc]

Bird,
I'm sure around here it has something to do with the fact that there is a John Deere dealer on every corner and the plant is only 20 miles away. Around here it is the Kubota guys that think they have aristorcratic tractor.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Well, Glennmac, You sure stirred up the pot on this subject. I know that I am generally just a lurker, but thought that I would throw in my $.02 anyway. Your groundrule #4 said no arguments about feelings of comfort but then you mention #10 about JD having the "springiest, most comfortable seat"....I couldn't find that in the JD literature. I feel that the seat on my K is soft and comfortable.
There was, somewhere in this thread, a negative comment about Kubota having a clutch. It could be considered a safety item, for when the pedal is depressed all forward, or reverse, motion of the tractor becomes un-powered (it could continue on because of inertia). On some of the Kubota models, depressing the clutch will also disconnect the PTO. Seems that it could be considered a safety item. Also doesn't the JD need a clutch for the collar-shift transmissions? Likewise on the NH?

Considering that last year a member of this forum was hospitalized with heat-stroke perhaps the cab on the upper end models of the Kubota would have prevented such a thing. It (the cab) has windows that open, filtered ventilation, AC, heat, tinted glass, dual work lights, both fore and aft, widshield wipers (with washers) ,rear view mirrors and a weather-band radio. Although this could be thought of as a comfort item (like your #10) it certainly could be a health and safety item. Those working long days in high heat and/or humidity would certainly appreciate it. I could find nothing in the JD literature about a cab. The only thing in the NH lit was a photo of what seemed to be a canvas cab designed for protection from the snow.
Some "facts" seem to be without merit..being able to do something 3 seconds faster (as an off-the wall example) would have to be done one hundred times a day to add five minutes to the work day.
My apologies if I repeated something that has already been posted, it is entirely possible that I have missed some of the posts.
Tom

 

[glennmac]

I hereby remove all comments about the seat from the list of objective factors. I guess what I was originally trying to report is that the JD seat seemed to have the greatest vertical "travel". However, I did not measure the travel on the seats, so let us agree that seats are too subjective to be on the list.

I also agree that small speed differences in something you do infrequenty (such as removing a FEL or backhoe) can be, as an objective matter, outweighed by small differences in something that you do frequently (such as pressing on a hydro pedal).

Which brings me to a key area I think has been insufficiently discussed: Who has the better hydro?

Let me start by arguing against Deere on this point. Compared to Kubota (I am insufficiently experienced on NH):

1. The Deere hydro pedals are very hard to press and are fatiquing to keep pressed, particularly the reverse pedal. And this is after they instituted a pedal pressure "fix" last year after massive complaints about pedal resistance. I say that pedal resistance is objectively greater and fatiguing on Deere.

2. The Deere hydro is objectively less smooth than Kubota. By that I mean it is herky-jerky. When you start, it clunks forward instead of a smooth acceleration. Stopping is worse. All hydros slow quickly, but when you take your foot off the Deere hydro, it stops NOW. I say the Kubota hydro has objectively smoother and more featherable acceleration and deceleration. The lack of smoothness and non-featherability of the Deere hydro is exacerbated by the difficult pedal pressure requirement.

3. The side-by-side arrangement the forward and reverse pedals on the Deere is objectively different from the front-and-back arrangement on K and NH. While much of this issue may be subjective preference, I find that the Deere arrangement, in connection with the pedal pressures required, is more fatiguing. Also, I believe that the side by side arrangement would increase the statistical possibility of pushing the wrong pedal. This is important to me because I back my brush cutter over creek banks (ie, small cliffs) and pushing the wrong pedal would be disastrous.

Therefore, I amend my intial list of arguments to say that Deere is objectively worse in hydro performance and pedal pressure/arrangement. And using your pedals and hydro is something you do, objectively, all the time every time you are on the tractor.

The JD owners are of course in a far better postition to comment on this issue than me.

 

[RobS]

The HST performance is an interesting aspect that was covered in the JD video. I didn't pay much attention as I am a GST guy, but Deere spent several minutes on tape demonstrating the "power" of their hydro versus K and NH. The test was a front blade pushing through a pile of gravel. They ran the test a couple of times (different ranges?) and the JD pushed all the way through both times while the K and NH tractors stalled partway through. Again, I didn't pay that much attention but there's bound to be some objective data in there somewhere. Then again, it's a single manufacturers point of view /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

 

[Knight9]

Just my $0.02 worth....but in my "subjective opinion" /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif...I would not consider the JD Video to be a valid source of any objective information. It is a sales video for goodness sake!!! Just as I wouldn't "believe" one from Kubota either. The only tests that really are valid are ones performed by independent bodies (ie Nebraska test etc).

Ever heard commercials for pickups on TV?? According to those commercials all the brands have "the most pulling power in its class". Kind of hard to believe that can be true!! /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Kevin

 

[RobS]

I agree that a sales tool should be taken with a grain of salt. With "truth in advertising" laws etc., the claims made are likely true but it's what's not said that we need to be leary of. I don't doubt any of the claims John Deere makes in the video but I do believe, like Glennmac there are strengths in the Kubota and New Holland tractors that should be "objectively" identified. It's also up to us consumers to determine if the objective data provided by the manufacturers is truly comparable (apples to apples tests etc.). Too bad Nebraska doesn't test compacts /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif