Tractor Sizing TRACTOR WEIGHT as a SINGLE CRITERION IN TRACTOR SELECTION

[Dranrab]

Post #110: The most efficient way to shop for tractors is to first identify potential tractor applications, then, through consulataton, establish bare tractor weight necessary to safely accomplish your applications. Tractor dealers, experienced tractor owners and TractorByNet.com are sources for recommendations.



Your question is answered in Post #103.

Thank you for your time, but that didn't appear to directly answer any of the questions I asked. I'll allow that I may be having a particularly dense moment, something I am all too capable of doing, so if you are willing can you quote my question then extract the part of post 103 and 110 that you think answers that specific question.

 

[Egon]

Heavier tractors are constructed on larger frames and longer wheelbases making them heavier, which helps maintain heavier tractors upright when applying loads, especially FEL loads.
Heavier tractors have wider wheel stance, increasing stability.

Heavier tractors have FEL lift and Three Point Hitch lift in proportion to weight. Greater FEL lift is the #1 reason compact tractor owners trade up to heavier models.

Heavier tractors are built with thicker steel and thicker axles to withstand greater stress. As a newbie operator you are more likely to bend a light tractor than a heavy tractor.

Heavier tractors have larger diameter wheels/tires, increasing ground clearance. Larger rear wheels are an additional form of gearing. Therefore, heavier tractors with large diameter wheels/tires have more tractive power pulling ground contact implements, pushing a loader bucket into dirt and pushing snow. Larger wheels and tires and a longer wheelbase permit heavier tractors to bridge holes, ruts and tree debris with less operator perturbation.

Tractor weight provides most tractor "grunt" defining tractor capability. Horsepower is needed too but horsepower is less important. Tractor horsepower moves up in priority when considering power for PTO-powered implements like Bush Hogs, but remains secondary to sufficient tractor weight.

When considering a tractor purchase, bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second and (narrowly) rear wheel ballast third.

Horsepower is what the wheels also see. Big wheels and no horsepower don't pull much.

Would the tractor designers consider footprint and ground compaction in the design for horsepower or pulling ability?

Tractors are usually designed to handle attachments. You can bend big heavy ones too.

If one needs more attachment capability you pick the tractor that is suitable.

Tractor stability is based on center of gravity, not weight.

 

[cathy liebchen]

"How much bare tractor weight do I need to pull 4-5 [sic- foot] implements?" Depends on the implements. 2,000 pound tractor? That is tiny. Stick to 4 foot implements. Bush hog? Your 2,000 pound tractor can pull a 5 footer around, but needs more than the probably 18 hp PTO that a 24 hp tractor will produce to run it effectively.You need 3,500 pounds of tractor weight to effectively use a 5 foot ground engaging implements like a box blade (think L series with loaded tires and an FEL).

Our L3901 is great at what it does, but to really move stuff the MX5800 at almost twice the weight and horsepower is a beast

 

[Dranrab]

When you fill a 5ft box blade on a 24-26hp tractor you will find out in a hurry if you're tractor has enough tractor weight to pull it, weight = traction when pulling ground engaging implements..

That touches on my question. Weight=traction. I get that. How do I know how much weight it takes to draw a box blade with ripping tines through soft soil with some roots in it? The dealers in my area have been selling 5' blades with my desired weight tractor, so that leads me to believe that the tractors are heavy enough for those blades.

 

[atsah]

that leads me to believe that the tractors are heavy enough for those blades.

Maybe... Depends how many and what size roots.. For the most part the small tractors will pull a 5ft box blade with soft material but IMO, you can get more done with a 4ft on a SCUT with less rippers requiring less weight and less traction..

 

[k0ua]

Maybe... Depends how many and what size roots.. For the most part the small tractors will pull a 5ft box blade with soft material but IMO, you can get more done with a 4ft on a SCUT with less rippers requiring less weight and less traction..

Many other factors at work here too. What tires are you getting? Are you going to "load" them or put on rear wheel weights? What is the soil like there? ALL of these things can mean a lot as to how well your implement/tractor combo will work for this application. You already mentioned not much hills, and this is a good thing in your favor for many reasons besides traction. Safety being the largest.

 

[atsah]

Many other factors at work here too. What tires are you getting? Are you going to "load" them or put on rear wheel weights? What is the soil like there? ALL of these things can mean a lot as to how well your implement/tractor combo will work for this application. You already mentioned not much hills, and this is a good thing in your favor for many reasons besides traction. Safety being the largest.

Agreed..

 

[chim]

I understand and even identify with some of what Jeff is saying. While smaller tractors have done everything that needed to be done here, the largest one does everything better and it the most fun to operate.

If cost wouldn't be an issue, I'd have a Valtra Unlimited just to play with:

[218] New Valtra Unlimited | Valtra Unlimited Edition | TractorLab - YouTube

 

[MossRoad]

Yikes! That would be fun. :laughing:

 

[Atchuuu]

Dranrab,

I won't speak for Jeff or any of the others who posted. You have already received excellent advice. Since I was in your position not too long ago I would like to add that now that I am actually using a tractor frequently all of the advice I received makes more sense.

Let me give you an example; I went with a L4330 HST with Cab. I nearly purchased a Mahindra or a Kubota L2501 as I didn't have any real reference for what I needed. Both of the ones I started looking at would have been inadequate for my needs. I just didn't know that at the time.

I found some dealers to be excellent and others to be vague or outright misleading. If I asked could the L2501 pull X attachment the answer was sure, you could do that. Which may technically be correct but not practically. If I asked "could I pull x attachment with the L2501 QUICKLY" the answer was usually no. You have to know what you want to do, what you can afford and what you have to compromise on to fit your budget/space/trailer,etc.

As Cathy stated she can get the job done with her L3901 but to "Really move stuff the MX5800 at almost twice the weight and horsepower is a beast". Some things that I would like to do could benefit from a larger tractor then what I purchased. Such as bush hogging. I would love to pull a larger mower but the cost of the extra horsepower and larger bush hog made it unfeasible for me. Plus I didn't really need that much weight and also don't need anything larger that makes getting in to the shed or around trees more difficult so I compromised on speed in favor of cost, space and weight.

The speed at which I am able to get work done was very high on my priority list. Had I gone with the 2501 I could likely still get the work done but not in a reasonable amount of time. By now I would have sold or traded it in and gone through the expense of purchasing again.

In short (too late for that I know), if all you need to do is pull a box blade then find out what size you need to pull, how long it will take with that size and if that is your only criteria find a tractor that will pull it well. Just don't get too focused on one task. I never thought of using pallet forks on my tractor but now it is one of the most used items.

Good luck. Let us know what you decide.

 

[jeff9366]

Tractor weight provides most tractor "grunt" defining tractor capability in pulling applications.
Heavier tractors are built with thicker steel and thicker axles to withstand the stress of heavier loads.

Heavier tractors have larger diameter wheels/tires. Larger rear tires have a larger tire "patch" in contact with the soil, improving traction. Larger wheels and tires and a longer wheelbase permit heavier tractors to bridge holes, ruts and tree debris, increasing traction and reducing operator perturbation. Therefore, heavier tractors with large diameter wheels/tires have more tractive power pulling ground contact implements, pushing a loader bucket into dirt and pushing snow. Larger wheels and tires increase ground clearance, increasing the height at which crops may be cultivated.

Heavier tractors have FEL lift and Three Point Hitch lift in proportion to weight.

When considering a tractor purchase, bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second and (narrowly) rear wheel ballast third. Tractor horsepower moves up in priority when considering power for PTO-powered implements such as Bush Hogs and snow blowers, but remains secondary to sufficient tractor weight.

 

[aczlan]

As someone who is looking for a loader tractor right now, bare tractor weight is unimportant to me.
I want something that has a diesel engine and at least 40HP at the PTO.
Anything that meets those two criteria will have (or can be ballasted to have) plenty of weight to do what I need to do (move round bales and run a round baler).

Aaron Z

 

[MossRoad]

I disagree with the OP. Weight and HP are equally important and very intertwined. There have been several threads on TBN over the years where people bought tractors that didn't have enough HP to get them up a hill.

 

[BAP]

Tractor weight provides most tractor "grunt" defining tractor capability. Horsepower is needed too but horsepower is less important. Tractor horsepower moves up in priority when considering power for PTO-powered implements like Bush Hogs, but remains secondary to sufficient tractor weight.

Heavier tractors have FEL lift and Three Point Hitch lift in proportion to weight.

Heavier tractors are built with thicker steel and thicker axles to withstand greater stress. As a newbie operator you are more likely to bend a light tractor than a heavy tractor.

Heavier tractors have larger diameter wheels/tires. Larger rear tires have a larger tire "patch" in contact with the soil, improving traction. Larger wheels and tires and a longer wheelbase permit heavier tractors to bridge holes, ruts and tree debris, aiding traction and with less operator perturbation. Therefore, heavier tractors with large diameter wheels/tires have more tractive power pulling ground contact implements, pushing a loader bucket into dirt and pushing snow. Larger wheels and tires increase ground clearance.

When considering a tractor purchase, bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second and (narrowly) rear wheel ballast third.

Obviously, you have never operated a “Gutless Wonder”. A Gutless Wonder is a tractor too heavy for it’s power and can hardly get out of it’s own way, let alone, operate equipment with any speed. Sure, it is well planted to the ground, but the only way you can get anything done is to be shifted down into a low gear. Too much weight can be just as bad as too little. Maybe in a flat state like Florida that works fine, but in any areas with hills it plain stinks.

 

[airbiscuit]

So, if we put weight vs. horsepower to the test, it would be interesting to do a battle of the Kubotas:

BX2680 24.8hp 26x12x12 R4 Rear Tires Weight 1521 lbs
L2501 24.8hp 15x19.5 R4 Rear Tires Weight 2623 lbs

So, if we hooked a chain between them and said GO, which would have better tractive power? Having grown up on a farm with small hp John Deere B's—´ with their heavy cast iron wheels and large diameter tires, my money would be on the L2501 with its larger tires and extra weight.

I'm not saying horsepower doesn't matter. It is a significant consideration for PTO intensive operations. But if your tractor is too light, or your tires are too small, you're just spinning your wheels.

 

[4570Man]

At a 1100 pound advantage or over 50 percent heavier the L2501 would be the clear winner.

 

[4570Man]

Obviously, you have never operated a “Gutless Wonder”. A Gutless Wonder is a tractor too heavy for it’s power and can hardly get out of it’s own way, let alone, operate equipment with any speed. Sure, it is well planted to the ground, but the only way you can get anything done is to be shifted down into a low gear. Too much weight can be just as bad as too little. Maybe in a flat state like Florida that works fine, but in any areas with hills it plain stinks.

Gutless wonder tractors still beats a tractor too light for the job. My L3240 pulled a box blade or plow slow. The L3800 is a lot higher power to weight ratio but when the going gets tough it sits there spinning its wheels. The l3240 was the smallest engine of that frame and more power would have definitely been better but a smaller tractor with equal power is worse.

 

[3Ts]

As someone who is looking for a loader tractor right now, bare tractor weight is unimportant to me.
I want something that has a diesel engine and at least 40HP at the PTO.
Anything that meets those two criteria will have (or can be ballasted to have) plenty of weight to do what I need to do (move round bales and run a round baler).

Aaron Z

Are you sure 40 hp can run a round baler? I'm assuming you mean full size 5x5 bales. When I looked into running one with my 5055E (50 hp) it didn't look like I had enough hp. - Note: I do not have a round baler, nor have I run one.

 

[chim]

Obviously, you have never operated a 敵utless Wonder? A Gutless Wonder is a tractor too heavy for it痴 power and can hardly get out of it痴 own way, let alone, operate equipment with any speed. Sure, it is well planted to the ground, but the only way you can get anything done is to be shifted down into a low gear. Too much weight can be just as bad as too little. Maybe in a flat state like Florida that works fine, but in any areas with hills it plain stinks.

Consideration of comfort, tasks and HP led me to what may well be my last tractor purchase. Top chore is mowing. The max RFM width for my property is around 7-1/2' because it isn't flat everywhere. Previous 32HP tractor with a 6' RFM sometimes slowed when mowing a couple hills when approached straight on in high range. For comfort, A/C was desired. Throwing 5HP at the A/C and another 5HP at the wider deck put the L4240 in the range of choices. It worked out very well. The tractor will mow anywhere in any direction in 3rd range low, which is plenty fast.

Snow removal is the fun thing when the grass doesn't need mowed. With loaded and grooved R4's and a custom mounted 8' Fisher plow, it/s been quite enjoyable.

The tractor is heavy enough for anything I need to do and doesn't mark the lawn.

 

[aczlan]

Are you sure 40 hp can run a round baler? I'm assuming you mean full size 5x5 bales. When I looked into running one with my 5055E (50 hp) it didn't look like I had enough hp. - Note: I do not have a round baler, nor have I run one.

I currently make and move round bales with a Kubota L3830 now (running a Ford 552 5x5 round baler, making most bales about 4' in diameter), but it doesn't have a loader and for the price of a loader ($3000-5000), I can pickup a older used 2wd tractor.

Aaron Z