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

[IndyJay]

Never heard of the "Eagle" hitch nor the "AC "Snap" coupler. If the "biggy" is so great, can I order it on any of the top 12 tractor brands sold today? I knew about three point hitches when I was a kid, long before I even ever sat on a tractor. So I'm still waiting for some examples of tractors I can go out and buy right now that have one of these "superior" hitch systems.

 

[LouNY]

Well then I guess you don't know anything about many of the better products that used to be common and have fallen out of production in this modern age. So you just go on with the 3 point that many people have to have a quick hitch to use and still have issues.

 

[K5lwq]

The IH fast hitch was a very nice system. Here you go.

 

[IndyJay]

"Since 1955"...

Super C was a row crop tractor, not a traditional compact tractor. Traditional compact tractors had 3 pt hitch.

 

[IndyJay]

Well then I guess you don't know anything about many of the better products that used to be common and have fallen out of production in this modern age. So you just go on with the 3 point that many people have to have a quick hitch to use and still have issues.

If they were so much better then why have they fallen out of production?

 

[K5lwq]

Here is the fast hitch used through 1971.

TractorData.com Farmall 856 tractor information

www.tractordata.com

 

[IndyJay]

Here is the fast hitch used through 1971.

TractorData.com Farmall 856 tractor information

www.tractordata.com

I was mistaken, they are still found on modern day tractors.

 

[Egon]

Why not just use rear wheel weights? Takes up less space, has similar down force on the rear tires, and doesn't tend to lighten the front end.

Not near as much down force unless the weights are ridiculously heavy.

 

[jeff9366]

Also added mass lets you maintain momentum easier while pushing or pulling. Adding small amounts of energy to maintain motion, after the static friction has been broken, mass helps conserve the motion.

---- 0 ----​

When it comes to work and pushing a blade or dragging an implement weight is your friend. Even my dozer with steel tracks will spin out before it loses power when trying to push too hard. My first dozer weighed 20,000 lb and it was about useless for pushing brush. Trees no bigger around than my leg it would struggle with. I would have to dig around them. My new dozer weighs 40,000 lbs and takes these trees out no problem. Yes it has more HP but being able to get that HP to the ground due to weight is the big difference.

 

[jeff9366]

The fundamental importance of TRACTOR WEIGHT eludes many tractor shoppers. Tractor capability is more closely correlated to tractor weight than any other single (1) specification.

The compact tractor era functionally began when Henry Ford licensed Harry Ferguson's tractor and Three Point Hitch design in 1939. The tractor industry uniformly adopted the Three Point Hitch after 1955, when Ferguson's patents began to expire and his tractor and Three Point Hitch design were available to industry participants besides Ford open source.

Ford's first Ferguson TPH tractor:

Ford 9N​

1939 - 1942

N Series

Utility tractor

Ford 9N Power
Drawbar (claimed):	12.68 hp 9.5 kW
Belt (claimed):	20.29 hp 15.1 kW
Plows:	2 (14-inch)
Drawbar (tested):	16.31 hp 12.2 kW
Engine (net):	23.56 hp 17.6 kW

Ford 9N Weight
Shipping:	2140 lbs 970 kg
Operating:	2900 lbs 1315 kg
Ballasted:	3375 lbs 1530 kg

Mechanical
Chassis:	2WD
Steering:	manual
Cab:	Open operator station
Transmission:	3-speed

Lots of grain threshers, well pumps and (laundry) washing machines were run off the Ford 9N PTOs. Ford tractors often preceded grid electrical power on the farm by years.

Horses and mules continued to be used regularly on USA farms right through the 1950s.

 

[Yander]

When I was shopping for my tractor, weight was probably #2 in the considerations. I didn't want a tractor over #2,500 or 3,000 pounds. For my purposes I want a lighter tractor because of my long term plans for it.

Not everyone wants, needs or seeks a heavy tractor. I wanted the maximum lift capacity in the lightest tractor I could find and in a Japanese tractor. Those were my criteria for the most part.

If you are using your tractor as a primary mower, you do not want extra weight or if you are using it to travel across people's yards in metro or suburban areas who are very picky about their yards, you don't want a heavy tractor. The later is the reason for my not wanting extra weight. Also, if you are planning to trailer your rig for an hour one way with older equipment (Truck/Trailer), you don't want a 5,000lb tractor, at least I don't. With that heavy a tractor now you need a tandem axle trailer, which I have, but is something for folks to consider who may not have.

It is good for folks to be aware that weight is a big factor in a tractor, but more weight doesn't always mean more capable. More capable by definition means being able to do the things you wish to do with it. THAT is the rub, what do you plan to do with it?

In rainy seasons, I can get on my yard a day sooner with my #1,700lb Case (w/loader) than I can my #3,000lb Yanmar (w/Loader & tires loaded) and probably two days sooner than I can with my #5,000 MF 1750M (w/loader and cab). I have spots in my yard I wouldn't even think of taking the MF a couple days after rains or I would rut the tar out of it. My FIL had a #10,000 lb tractor that I eventually told him nicely to keep it out of my yard, PLEASE. Every time he came over I had ruts.

I know your not saying that a heavier tractor is more capable in every scenario and I get the point of your thread and your crusade to inform. People do get HP hungry and forget all of the other things that factor in, weight just being one of them.

 

[jeff9366]

8/22/2022​

I am looking for a low tech tractor. Something with as little electronics, plastic and gadgets as possible. I guess I could buy vintage, but in the 35 HP (+/-) range, what are the cast iron tractor brands and models to look at?

I dont farm cash crops and I dont expect to ride it for hours. I will pull it our when I need muscle. I could probably buy a compact, but likely there will be occasions when I wish I had more....

Tractor capability is more closely correlated to tractor weight than any other single (1) specification.

Sufficient tractor weight is more important for most tractor applications than increased tractor horsepower. Bare tractor weight is a tractor specification easily found in sales brochures and web sites, readily comparable across tractor brands and tractor models, new and used.


Look at Branson/Korean in compact tractors.
Branson is big in Texas and California, reasonably popular along the Gulf coast. Not many Branson dealers away from the coasts.

Look at Mahindra and John Deere in heavier models.

In Mahindra, not the compact tractors, which are made for Mahindra by LS of Korea, but the heavier models, made-by-Mahindra-in-India models.

John Deere also has a couple made-in-India economy 'E' models which are heavy and basic.
LINK: TractorData.com John Deere 5075E tractor information


Not for me, likely good for you.

CREDIT: Patches​

I would look at Kioti LK3054xs or the updated LK30. The 3054xs is a simple, mechanically injected, mechanical shut down, no fuel solenoid 3 cylinder engine with advertised 30.5 hp, 4 wheel drive with an eight speed gear .transmission [4high-4 low two speed reverse] drop dead simple tractor. The xs version was first produced in 2004. The LK30 is the same mechanically but with an updated 3 cylinder engine [not sure about the solenoid shut down feature on this model]

Kioti LK30​

Kioti LK30 Power
Engine (gross):	30 hp 22.4 kW
PTO (claimed):	23 hp 17.2 kW

Dimensions
Wheelbase:	64.6 inches 164 cm
Length:	111.4 inches 282 cm
Width:	51.4 inches 130 cm
Height (ROPS):	88.6 inches 225 cm
Weight:	2,897 lbs 1314 kg
Ground clearance:	10.8 inches 27 cm
Front tread:	43.5 inches 110 cm
Rear tread:	40.2 to 49.9 inches 102 to 126 cm

Transmission
Type:	synchronized shuttle
Gears:	8 forward and reverse

 

[jeff9366]

My property is three (3) acres.

In addition, I have approximately 1,200 ft of County unmaintained Road which will require regular box blade work, including a lot of roots. Plus I want to increase road width so two vehicles can squeeze by. There are a lot of trees 4 in or less in diameter I will need to remove.

I'm seriously considering Branson. I've got two dealerships with in 20 miles of me. Would a 2000 lbs bare weight Branson 2610H be heavy enough for box blade work? I have thought about increasing the weight of the potential tractor to 3000 pound bare weight Branson 2515R.

BRANSON 2610H​

DIMENSIONS

Wheelbase​	65.7 in (1670)
Overall Length (W/ 3PT)​	122.9 in (3,122 mm)
Min.Overall Width​	53.8 in (1,369 mm)
Overall Height (W/ ROPS)​	91.5 in (2,328 mm)
Ground Clearance (4WD)​	15.1 in (382 mm)
Min.Turning Radius (W/ Brake)​	9.61 ft (2.93 m)
Weight​	2106 lbs (956 kg)

ENGINE

Engine Model​	A1100N2 IDI NA
Aspiration​	Natural
Emissions Standards​	Tier 4
Engine Gross Power​	24 hp (17.9 kW)
PTO Power​	18 hp (13.5 kW)
No. of Cylinders​	3
Displacement​	71.7 cu.in (1,175 cc)
Rated Revolution​	2800 RPM

I consider a 2,106 pound bare weight tractor ample for three acres of property maintenance. However, your county owned 1,200' road changes the calculation. You will have to be willing to spend many hours maintaining your 1,200' root laced road with a box blade pulled by a 2,106 pound tractor Unless your soil is soft, you will only be able to move dirt when the soil is moist.

Consider that engine displacement is only 71.7 cubic inches. Generating this power requires engine revs of 2,800 rpm, so the engine will likely be fairly loud and the HST may whine. The 24-horsepower gross is at sea level. If you are above 3,500' or so in altitude, power generated will be less.
Also, this model has 15.1" of ground clearance, so it is going to feel fairly tippy, even with essential liquid rear tire ballast, to a novice operator working a rutted/uneven road.

BRANSON 2515R​

DIMENSIONS

Wheelbase​	65.7 in (1,670 mm)
Overall Length (W/ 3PT)​	120.9 in (3,071 mm)
Min.Overall Width​	56.3 in (1,430 mm)
Overall Height (W/ ROPS)​	97.3 in (2,471 mm)
Ground Clearance (4WD)​	14.4 in (366 mm)
Min.Turning Radius (W/ Brake)​	7.51 in (2.29 mm)
Weight​	2,989 lbs (1,356 kg)

ENGINE

Engine Model​	Branson A1700N6 IDI
Aspiration​	Natural
Emissions Standards​	Tier 4
Engine Gross Power​	24 hp (18 kW)
PTO Power​	21 hp (15.7 kW)
No. of Cylinders​	3
Displacement​	104.5 cu.in (1,714 cc)
Rated Revolution​	2100 RPM

Not difficult to discern the advantage of the 2515R for road maintenance. The Synchoshuttle transmission will transfer motive power to the wheels about 10% more efficiently than the HST transmission. The additional 883 pounds and 2" of width will keep this tractor significantly more solidly planted on the ground.

With a bare weight of 2,989 pounds, motivated by 24-horsepower, I would NOT order liquid rear tire ballast. Put the rear weight into the Box Blade. There is only so much work 24-horsepower can do.

When considering a tractor purchase bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second, rear axle width third, rear wheel/tire ballast fourth.

 

[tradosaurus]

didn't you just sell your tractor?

 

[workinonit]

I never consider tractor weight when I buy a tractor. What I have found is that if I get the HP, footprint and comfort level that I want the weight is a byproduct and totally sufficient. I don't think I have ever done anything with my tractor and said, "Dang, I wish this tratcor weighed 1000 more pounds". I've definately said I wish it had 4wd or AC.

 

[MossRoad]

I never consider tractor weight when I buy a tractor. What I have found is that if I get the HP, footprint and comfort level that I want the weight is a byproduct and totally sufficient. I don't think I have ever done anything with my tractor and said, "Dang, I wish this tratcor weighed 1000 more pounds". I've definately said I wish it had 4wd or AC.

I tend to pick the size frame of the machine that I need to do the work, then get the largest engine/motor available in that frame.

 

[LouNY]

I tend to pick the size frame of the machine that I need to do the work, then get the largest engine/motor available in that frame.

I'll go along with getting the desired frame size, but I don't like to get the highest horsepower engine in a frame size.
If I need that much power I'll go up a frame size.
My preference is for the mid level to lower end horsepower in the frame size. Often that max horsepower is pushing the turbo and intercoolers to the max, I'd just as soon have enough horsepower and be midway in the range.

 

[MossRoad]

I'll go along with getting the desired frame size, but I don't like to get the highest horsepower engine in a frame size.
If I need that much power I'll go up a frame size.
My preference is for the mid level to lower end horsepower in the frame size. Often that max horsepower is pushing the turbo and intercoolers to the max, I'd just as soon have enough horsepower and be midway in the range.

I'm talking lawn mowers.

 

[MossRoad]

But seriously, I had the choice of 3 engine sizes in the frame that my current machine is. I wanted that frame size so it would fit in my truck/garage/gates and not crush my lawn or the ballpark and church fields. I chose the highest HP to spin the mower blades on the bigger deck.

 

[MossRoad]

And if I had my choice of a 69 Nova I'd get a 396 over a 350.