Tractor Confusion

[Farmwithjunk]

That's because they agressively market -everything-. Imagine just about any object.. Ok.. you can probably get that product with a JD logo on it.

I wish some of the other tractor mfg's would market as much.. I'm a ford guy.. and NH only seels a few trinkets... hats and jackets.. etc..

Massey.. They have been a majot player just as long as everybody else.. in various forms. Massey harris, and then massey ferguson.. etc.

Soundguy

Right there is why John Deere has such a strong "market share". MARKETING.

They offer some very modern, very user friendly products. Some of their equipment sells big, but isn't "the best". Take for instance, their combines. Side by side, in the field against Case/IH "Axial Flow" or Agco/Gleaner or Massey Ferguson combines, they fall a little short in many areas. Yet, Deere continues to build and sell thousands every year. It's that "NAME".

Deere never did build a good disc, in comparison to IH, or several "short-liners". They sold many.

Great marketing stratagy, a big boost from their "John Deere Credit" services, early success at "going global", and a mixture of brilliant and lucky managment desicions over the years, and you have "THE JOHN DEERE". And success breeds FURTHER success.

Get a few Hollywood celebs in John Deere shirts and hats, next thing you know, all the mallrats have to have Pink Deere shirts, hats, ect.

They build a good product. They'd have you believe they build the ONLY product.

Deere sells so many toys/clothes/plates and dishes/clocks/ect, not only to owners of their tractors, but to people who will never sit on a tractor. MF, NH. Kubota, and all the rest won't ever see that success targeting just their loyal buyers.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Right, which is why I couldn't imagine anyone interested in buying a tractor never hearing of Massey-Ferguson (formerly Harris). There are tons of them in this area and several people have really nice antique M-H tractors that have been in their family since they were new and they now show. We also have a lot of nice old Allis-Chalmers, and I admit I wouldn't mind owning one just for fun.

As for JD, yes you can even buy children's furniture with their logo. And because everyone has heard of them they assume they make the best tractors. Not that they don't have great tractors but so do a lot of other manufacturers. Given the number of old Ford 8Ns, 9Ns etc around here still working, I would have to say Ford/NH must make a quality product as well. Surely if I were in the market for a new tractor I'd have to go look at them. But I would probably look at everything in my area including Case/IH, Kubota, Mahindra and M-F. And base my decision on the tractor I liked best regardless of brand.

Massey Ferguson has a strong history. Not just from the Canadian giant Massey Harris. "FERGUSON" is one of the most famous names in the industry. Harry Ferguson gets most of his recognition for inventing "The Ferguson System" (3-point hitch w/draft control) But his contribution to the world started long before that. John Deere bought "Waterloo Boy Engine Company" just as WW I started. That was their leap into the world of tractors. (and where the Green and Yellow came from) The first Deere's didn't even say "Deere" on them. Harry Ferguson started importing Waterloo Boy tractors in England during WW I. They were re-badged as "OverTime" tractors. That's where Ferguson got HIS ball rolling. It also gave Deere a big boost in their efforts to chase down the GIANT International Harvester. At that stage, Deere wasn't even in the top 10 of tractor manufacturers.

Go overseas and the name Massey Ferguson takes on a life of its own. At one point, in the 1960 and 70's, 1 out of ever 4 tractors sold in the British Isles was a Massey Ferguson 135.

 

[PineRidge]

I'm not going to tell you what color you should consider and I don't think history should have a lot to do with your decision.

Just make sure that the rig that you intend to buy is capable of performing all the tasks that you will ask of it. And make sure that you are comfortable on the operators platform because you will be spending lots of hours there.

Good luck in your decision.....

 

[Farmwithjunk]

I'm not going to tell you what color you should consider and I don't think history should have a lot to do with your decision.

Just make sure that the rig that you intend to buy is capable of performing all the tasks that you will ask of it. And make sure that you are comfortable on the operators platform because you will be spending lots of hours there.

Good luck in your decision.....

That's it! All the "statistics" in the universe make not the first scrap of difference. It's all about will it do the job? Am I happy with the deal I got? Am I comfortable using my tractor?

Specs, statistics, and sales numbers are for filling bandwidth on websites.

 

[MikePA]

That's it! All the "statistics" in the universe make not the first scrap of difference. It's all about will it do the job? Am I happy with the deal I got? Am I comfortable using my tractor?

Specs, statistics, and sales numbers are for filling bandwidth on websites.

Specs and statistics do matter. Part of figuring out if a particular tractor 'will do the job(s)' are the specs and statistics since certain jobs require minimum hp, weight, etc.

Many, perhaps all, manufacturers have several classes of tractors, e.g., sub-compact, compact, utility, etc. Knowing which class tractor someone needs involves both a list of tasks to be accomplished as well as the minimum tractor specifications that will accomplish those tasks.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Specs and statistics do matter. Part of figuring out if a particular tractor 'will do the job(s)' are the specs and statistics since certain jobs require minimum hp, weight, etc.

Many, perhaps all, manufacturers have several classes of tractors, e.g., sub-compact, compact, utility, etc. Knowing which class tractor someone needs involves both a list of tasks to be accomplished as well as the minimum tractor specifications that will accomplish those tasks.

I'm only considering the fact that most published specs are manipulated for the sole benifit of he who issued them. Every manufacturer has their own "standards" their own agenda, and their own "propaganda dept" these days. Even if they are reasonably accurate, statistics are meaningless if the tractor won't do what you interpret the stats to mean.

Specs aren't totally useless, just decieving to most. confusing to about all, and not worth a hill of beans if the tractor isn't to ones liking.

 

[MikePA]

Specs aren't totally useless, just decieving to most. confusing to about all, and not worth a hill of beans if the tractor isn't to ones liking.

A tractor you like that wont do the job is also useless.

Once the tasks to be done are defined, stats should be used to determine what class tractor is required. Once the class has been defined, stats can be used to further refine which model is best, within a given manufacturer. Comparing stats across manufacturers is frustrating, if not impossible, and less important than picking the right dealer.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

A tractor you like that wont do the job is also useless.

Once the tasks to be done are defined, stats should be used to determine what class tractor is required. Once the class has been defined, stats can be used to further refine which model is best, within a given manufacturer. Comparing stats across manufacturers is frustrating, if not impossible, and less important than picking the right dealer.

My "example" is a Deere compact belonging to a neighbor. He bought a tractor/loader to use primarily as a forklift, but also to do some mowing. Deere specs on the loader would indicate that it SHOULD lift the pallets of marble countertops he loads and unloads at his shop. (by a sizable margin)

Push come to shove? IT WON'T. Specs were "smoke and mirrors". AND dealer used those specs to convince him it WOULD do the job.Reality is the specs were useless, misleading, confusing, and plain ol' WRONG.

They're something to debate. They're good for basic comparison. But in the end, if they only serve as a marketing tool, what good are they to the final BUYER?

 

[MikePA]

They're good for basic comparison. But in the end, if they only serve as a marketing tool, what good are they to the final BUYER?

As you wrote, "They're good for basic comparison.". Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Just another thought. I'd prefer a standardized testing, simular to "Nebraska Test" (for Ag tractors) to compare ALL tractors and associated equipment. Apples to apples "hands on" testing would eliminate 99% of the deceptive manipulation of specs.