Tractor Sizing TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION

/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #41  
OP is asking about sub $20K machines. You're pushing one closer to $40K. Are you offering to pay the difference?

You seem to do this a lot. It's like you don't even read the threads before you advertise for orange.

the thread was about whether the OP would buy enough tractor, getting a huge one is an easy solution to that. If they are budget constrained, just buy the heaviest you can afford with a good dealer nearby. The cost is just a sunk cost, you get that back on any resale. And Kubota is an easy recommendation since no one ever says they regret choosing that brand, you sure hear that about the others
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #42  
the thread was about whether the OP would buy enough tractor, getting a huge one is an easy solution to that. If they are budget constrained, just buy the heaviest you can afford with a good dealer nearby. The cost is just a sunk cost, you get that back on any resale. And Kubota is an easy recommendation since no one ever says they regret choosing that brand, you sure hear that about the others

Not bad points at all.

Buying a more expensive machine that says Kubota only means you have more tied up in it while you have it. If you sell it in the future, you'll likely get a great percentage back. You can't assume that with all brands.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION
  • Thread Starter
#43  
Bare tractors are designed with a standard weight distribution of 40% front, 60% rear.

Add a Front End Loader and the weight distribution becomes 50% front, 50% rear. (+/-)

Fill the bucket and the weight moves forward, leveraged by low-forward position of a laden bucket.
Could be 60% front, 40% rear. (Tractor wheelbase affects weight distribution.)

Traction is reduced because weight has transferred away from the driving, heavy tread rear wheels.
(Hence the need for liquid rear tire ballast or iron wheel weights.)


Rear wheels may or may not lift from the ground at this moment, but they will certainly be "light" if bucket payload is wet.

Green tree trunk sections and laden pallets on pallet forks are often heavier than wet bucket loads. Laden pallets protrude forward. Weight distribution could be 70% front, 30% rear. Rear wheels will lift.

Suffecient Three Point Hitch counterbalance restores weight distribution to 40% front, 60% rear. (+/-)

Too much rear weight and the tractor front will lift when you move up a slope with the bucket empty.
 
Last edited:
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION
  • Thread Starter
#44  
The LS dealer, Hobby Tractor, is 242 mile north of where I will be in Utah.

If something goes wrong, and many, many neophyte tractor operators prang their tractors in the first year, delivering the tractor for dealer service will require a 484 mile round trip and a second 484 mile round trip to retrieve tractor after service, 968 total miles. If you trailer the tractor your cost has to be at least $1.00 per mile plus hotels plus food. If the dealer trailers the tractor your transportation cost will be $2.00 per mile.

A quality dealer, reasonably close, available for coaching, is important for tractor neophytes. Most new tractors are delivered with a glitch or two requiring correction, often safety/cutout switches which require adjustment to operator weight. My kubota dealer is six miles away. I feel my local dealer continues to add value to my equipment after seven years. Dealer proximity is less important for those experienced with tractors and qualified to perform their own maintenance.

If something goes wrong, and many, many neophyte tractor operators prang their tractors in the first year, those that have Kubota's KTAC insurance are grateful. My Kubota is six years old and has 1,700 engine hours. I maintain KTAC insurance. Except for fueling and greasing my dealer does service. This is my third tractor, second new Kubota. I am age 72.

I have shopped LS at the SE Ag Expo and consider LS a good competitor to Kubota but dealer quality and dealer proximity are especially important to tractor neophytes.
 
Last edited:
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #45  
Correct info, buy enough tractor, do not fall into the ‘don’t buy too much tractor’ trap set by tractor salesman which equals them making 2 or more sales.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #46  
Correct info, buy enough tractor, do not fall into the ‘don’t buy too much tractor’ trap set by tractor salesman which equals them making 2 or more sales.

That is true for me. Because most of my work is in and among trees I had to be careful to choose a tractor that couldn't maneuver among trees or might get stuck because of weight. Looking back I think I could have gone with a MX5200 instead of the L3301. Anything heavier and bigger might be problematic. I did get a 10,000 lb skid steer stuck up to the top of the treads on my property before I bought my tractor.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #47  
For those who work in wood lots or restricted spaces, why not consider orchard or vineyard tractors, same hp as the bigger brethren, but much lower in profile and more maneuverable.
Are salespeople not offering this type of tractor?
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION
  • Thread Starter
#48  
My career was spent in the wine industry.

At my last winery we had four Deere O&V tractors and two standard Deere tractors with Loaders, one with a Backhoe, on our three largest vineyards.

O & V tractors have high volume hydraulic pumps, often ten to twenty times the pumping power of a standard tractor of same weight, to power powerful spray rigs. Grapes are sprayed two to four rows at a time. Engines had 100+ horsepower.

Vineyard and orchard tractors are a low volume category high in price considering weight/$$ or HP/$$.

Twenty years ago no Deere O&V tractor could be ordered with an FEL.
 
Last edited:
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION
  • Thread Starter
#49  
WORKING DRAFT (7.47)​

The fundamental importance of TRACTOR WEIGHT eludes many tractor shoppers. Tractor capability is more closely correlated to tractor weight than any other specification.

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 weight recommendations.

Bare tractor weight is a fundamental tractor specification easily found in sales brochures and web sites, readily comparable across tractor brands and tractor models, new and used. Shop your weight range within tractor brands. Budget will eliminate some choices. Collect a dealer brochure for each tractor model in your weight range.

I spreadsheet tractor and implement specs, often a revealing exercise which cuts through specification clutter. I have a column for cost per pound.

Selling a used tractor is easy. Selling multiple light implements in order to buy heavier, wider implements for a new, heavier tractor requires a lot of time. Depreciation on implements is worse than depreciation on a tractor.

A quality dealer, reasonably close, available for coaching, is important for tractor neophytes. Most new tractors are delivered with a glitch or two requiring correction. My kubota dealer is six miles away. I feel my local dealer continues to add value to my equipment after eight years. Dealer proximity is less important for those experienced with tractors and qualified to perform their own maintenance.

BUY ENOUGH TRACTOR.


Neophyte tractor operators are often intimidated by instability of tractors with small front wheels and large rear wheels, therefore frequently purchase tractors too light, too small for long term satisfaction. ((Tractors seem to shrink after about twenty hours of operating experience.)) Within subcompact and compact tractor categories, a significant tractor capability increase requires a bare tractor weight increase of 50%. It takes a 100% increase in bare tractor weight to elicit MY-OH-MY!

Subcompact and compact tractors under 3,000 pounds bare weight operate in landscape, kitchen/commercial garden or hobby farm applications on one to ten flat acres.

Tractors are inherently unstable operating on sloped ground. Tractor rear wheel/tire spread, sometimes adjustable, is a critical factor increasing compact tractor stability working sloped or uneven ground. A 6" to 10" wider rear axle substantially decreases tractor rollover potential.

When considering a tractor purchase, bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second, rear axle width third, rear wheel/tire ballast fourth.
 
Last edited:
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #50  
After 2-1/2 months? Really?
 

Attachments

  • 648CE97D-4554-459E-A984-BDB26BBF673E.jpeg
    648CE97D-4554-459E-A984-BDB26BBF673E.jpeg
    406.4 KB · Views: 215
Last edited:
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #51  
I have hundreds of acres yet I get plenty done with my L2500 series Kubota Tractor. I never see myself getting a bigger tractor.

Bigger is not always better.

1. My Grandfather had a Ford 900, so the implements that we have, are sized for that. While I have the land base to justify a bigger tractor, it would cost me so much money to replace all the different implements that I have, that a bigger tractor would be cost-prohibitive. The tractor is only part of the equation, the implements it pushes or tows is what really makes the tractor versatile. A smaller tractor with more implements is much more productive then a bigger tractor with less implements.


2. The heavier a tractor is, the bigger it has to be or it will break. Our Ford 900 was a heavy tractor, and constantly broke. My Kubota on the other hand, if I hook onto something it cannot handle, it just breaks traction and spins with no damage done. At that point it is just prudent to stop, and figure a different way to make something work.

3. I look at a tractor as being a Leatherman. It is my swiss army knife of my farm, where I can do 90% of my work, but it does not do it all. When I need to clear land, or dig endlessly in my gravel pit...I just RENT specific equipment that can do the job better. The cost of renting, to do specific tasks, is very cost effective over maintaining and owning bigger equipment that seldom gets used.

4. Brains win over brawn every time. I had a guy with a 60 hp Kubota ask me how I ever could log with my 2500 series Kubota tractor since it was so small. Well logging is about traction, not size, and my winch (which he did not have) has 100% traction all the time, my tires...any tires...do not. Again, this goes back to having the right implements on the tractor, to do the most with the tractor at hand. In short, in logging, a winch is half the tractor. I can winch around rocks, stumps, up hillsides, etc. I can put 150 feet of 3/8 cable anywhere...my tractor I cannot.

5. Slow and steady wins the race! We got a $9000 grant to build a heavy haul road across our farm. That required 350 cubic yards of gravel to surface the road, yet a contractor quoted me a bill of $7000 to haul in gravel from my pit a quarter mile away. As I told the wife, we have the gravel, we just have to move it, but I only have a 1 cubic yard dump trailer. That would be 350 trips, way too much....or is it? The truth was, if we hauled 10 loads per day, in 35 days we would have hauled 350 cubic yards, and that is just what we did. Last year I moved 700 cubic yards over the course of the summer. A person can do a lot with small equipment as long as they are consistent.

6. Sizing up a tractor is not some profound equation. The USDA says to be efficient, a person has to double in horsepower. It does not make sense for me to do so, but if I was, I know it only makes sense for me to go from 27 hp to a 60 hp tractor. It would NOT make sense for me to jump up to a 40 hp tractor; the capacity is just not there. A skilled tractor operator with a small tractor can work circles around an unskilled tractor operator who has a bigger one. A person can never use their check book to pay their way out of operating skill.

Conclusion: I think people buy too big of a tractor most of the time. We call them "Kubota Farmers" because they buy 60 HP tractors and have only 5 acres of land. I think it is better to have a properly sized tractor for 90% of the work needing to be done, and rent for the 10% that cannot not, then to have too big of a tractor 90% of the time.

I know a guy that was going to buy a great big tractor so that when his wood pellets came, he could unload 1 ton pallets. That is stupid. That only happens 1 day out of the year, why buy a great big tractor for 1 day, when the tractor would be too big for 364 other days? Just split the load in half, and then unload the pellets, and save yourself a lot of money.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #53  
I'm not happy with the 2nd sentence in the first paragraph, let alone that part.

It is all nonsense. Buy the power you need and the best tire style to fit the soil/surface conditions then add enough weight to make it work.
6 pages of blather summarized in one sentence.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #54  
After putting 70 hrs on my L3301 while operating in 40 acres of heavy pine and clearing a 3/4 mile walking trail, I wish the salesman would have stressed ground clearance with the tractor purchase. I really needed an MX tractor for extra ground clearance and protection of fluid filters. I ruined two hydraulic filters because running over obstacles I couldn't see.

Other than that I'm happy with the work my L3301 and implements.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #55  
A little disappointed you write throughout your reply about size/dimensions rather than tractor weight. Not quite sure you really get weight yet. Especially the importance of weight as the key specification for new tractor researchers.

I write about size and dimension because it is the variable that does not change. Weight is another matter entirely. It would be foolish to buy a tractor based upon weight because it can and should be changed depending upon the work at hand.

A tractor owner can buy wheel weights, have fluid filled tires, add weight to the front, or add counterweight. I do not like fluid-filled tires, but if I am loading gravel in my gravel pit, I might throw on my snowblower since it adds a ton of rear weight, and really allows me to dig gravel out well. Or I might scoop up a bucket of earth, that way when I am plowing with my tractor, I get a little better weight transfer so I get better drawbar pull.

And that is my point, weight changes and transfers all the time in operation. Like with my skidder. When I am pulling wood out with my winch, when the wood is well back, all my skidder does is spin its tires, but at a point, the load comes in, the weight gets transferred to my tires, and I stop spinning my tires, and I start moving out of the woods. That is because weight transfer took place: the ideal ratio being 60% on the back axle, and 40% on the front. Now if I pull more wood than what the skidder is designed for, it is counter productive because the weight transfer ends up being 80% on the back, and 20% of the front. In other words my front tires are hardly touching the ground, and not getting traction. That does me no good trying to move wood.

The same weight transfer takes place with anything four wheel drive. A tractor pulling a plow, a truck pulling a sled in truck pulling, or a bucket loader moving gravel. With front loader work, you want 60% on the front, and 40% on the back, opposite than with a skidder because the work being performed is swapped.

R.G. LeTourneau proved half a century ago that weight does not matter when he designed his Haul Pak trucks. By having the proper weight transfer, his trucks could haul more load then what the truck actually weighed itself.

I do this same thing when moving big round bales with my little Kubota. Note the plural word "bales." It is easier for me to put one on the back, and another on the front, because the load is balanced and I can move faster and easier than with one on the front that makes my rear end light. The thing is, a bigger tractor cannot move (4) bales, so my little tractor is just as capable since both sized tractors are moving the same amount of hay, so no bigger tractor needed. An engineer would say, "You need a bigger tractor", but a farmer says, "No, I just need an extra hay bale to act as a counterweight."
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #56  
This thread is like an outtake from Groundhog Day.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #57  
Adding weight is easy.

Adding horsepower, hydraulic/lift capacity...not so much.
 
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION
  • Thread Starter
#59  
It's Mother's Day, for crying out loud.

I thank you, MOSS, for your continuing attention through numerous iterations of this thread. HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY!
 
Last edited:
/ TRACTOR WEIGHT as ONE (1) CRITERION in TRACTOR SELECTION #60  

Subcompact and compact tractors under 3,000 pounds bare weight operate in landscape, kitchen/commercial garden or hobby farm applications on one to ten flat acres.


Ten acres?? Of course you are not considering the numerous twenty five or so HP and under three thousand pound tractors that were used to farm 1/4 or 1/2 sections of land are you?
 

Marketplace Items

2006 iDrive TDS-2010H ProJack M2 Electric Trailer Dolly (A59228)
2006 iDrive...
2016 FORD TRANSIT 350 CARGO VAN (A59905)
2016 FORD TRANSIT...
Lone Star dump trailer (A55973)
Lone Star dump...
2023 Chevrolet Tahoe SUV (A59231)
2023 Chevrolet...
HAMM H11 PADFOOT ROLLER (A58214)
HAMM H11 PADFOOT...
PALLET OF BLACK FENDER FLARES (A60432)
PALLET OF BLACK...
 
Top