Trade Offs and Priorites: Maddening

MMM · Aug 31, 2004

For an all around tractor, I'd pick the heavier one and leave the lawn mowing to lawnmowers. I went to the neighbors other day to move a pile his 30somthin hp kbota wouldn't do. It would spin the minute he hit the pile and couldn't get anything in bucket. Enough can't be said about weight and the ability to do work. For their weight, a dozer or skidder for instance really doen't have that much hp. Many of the older IH dozers have same 179ci engine as my tractor, yet they can move things my 7k# machine won't budge. Who came up with the idea that tractors need race car power to weight ratios?

KiotiJohn · Aug 31, 2004

( did they do that because cast iron is simply a cheap material? Did they do that because they beleive tractors should be heavy? Did they do that because they don't have easy access to stronger & less brittle alloys? Did they do that because the foundry they have is not capable of casting modern materials? )
It doesn't now nor never has mattered to me why they use cast, but probably because it's cheaper and available. Tractors were made this way for many many years, and I prefer the configuration of engine/trans better than ladder frames. Hey, the Kubota frames are strong as heck, no argument there! John

shoppintractors · Aug 31, 2004

Who came up with the idea that tractors need race car power to weight ratios? 

Anybody heard from Bob "Nascar" Skurka lately? /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Don

PS: Powers back on.

Bob_Skurka · Aug 31, 2004

Don,
I know this is going to make me unpopular (more unpopular) but I really dislike NASCAR.

Now if you want to talk about Formula 1 racing, I can get into that, or the IRL, I like that too. (the lovely Mrs_Bob was princess of the Indy 500 -many years ago- and I got to circle the famed brickyard many times with her in the pace car, she was on the back and I was assigned the task of holding her legs so she didn't fly off the car!)

But as for the power to size and weight ratio, you guys are simply ignoring everything that the PTO is used for. Personally I test the limits of the PTO far more often than the traction. For my uses, a tractor with more power in a small package is a big benefit.

MessickFarmEqu · Aug 31, 2004

I like rally racing myself... it makes NASCAR look boring!

I think people make a much bigger issue out of weight than it needs to be. It comes up with comparing equipment, but how often do you hear people who own machines even mention the weight as factor in doing actual work. It always seems to be a Kioti vs World issue.

In my opinion and experience, weight is needed for ground engaging work. In any other situation extra mass is a disadvantage. Weight is different than ballast, any tractor still needs to be ballasted properly to handle the proper implements.

Unless you are going to plow with your 30 HP compact, just ballast your tractor properly and you'll never know the difference.

Bob_Skurka · Aug 31, 2004

Neil, I have to agree with you that the Kioti guys seem to really feel that weight is a big deal. The Mahindra guys tout it as well. The funny thing is that from what I can see, Kioti has a lot of strong selling points that actually matter and weight is certainly not one of them. But weight seems to be a hot button. What about the fact that the features of the CK line place them in the deluxe range, or the fit & finish quality, or loaders? The LK line is certainly a value line that stands on its own merits as well. But more type has been used up touting how great it is to have weight, or defending that "in my yard on my soil I don't leave ruts" discussions. Hey, these are darn good tractors and in some areas they are a bargain compared to more established brands. Sort of a shame.

As for the rally events, yea those are a lot of fun. SCCA races too. I used to get free pit passes to Winston Cup races (remember those?) and never bothered to attend. Now an open cockpit car that turns both directions and negotiates hairpin turns while running the streets of major cities . . . ahh, you gotto love F1.

To20Chris · Aug 31, 2004

It is important to understand the design process - engineers don't just sit down to design something, and out pops a CK30. They are designing to a spec. It would be unlikely if weight and cost were not part of it. Also, iron and steel ARE high tech alloys, and have many desireable properties, such as infinite cyclic stress endurance (which aluminum does not have). Given that, it would be foolish to second guess the choices the designers made, when in fact we don't know what the design requirements were. Engineering is the art of balencing a thousand competeing constraints.

BTW, I don't see all that much aluminum on the Kubotas - it seems to me that the light weight of the Bs is a result of using steel instead of cast iron, and the lighter weight of the Ls is probably more due to the use of thinner wall iron castings (perhaps of different alloys).

Last, no one has brought up one of the benefits of light weight that may be quite appealing to a manufacturer - lower shipping costs!

Bob_Skurka · Aug 31, 2004

BTW, I don't see all that much aluminum on the Kubotas 

Chris, for what it is worth, I never brought up aluminum. Might have been a Kioti owner? But not me.

 it would be foolish to second guess the choices the designers made 

Agreed, the question was asked why does Kioti weigh more than Kubota. I simply offered up several possibilities and said I really didn't know.

I suppose I should have kept my mouth shut because we are still talking about weight. Again, to no real productive end. And again, too bad because the can be lots to brag about when comparing features or designs or loaders or . . .

To20Chris · Aug 31, 2004

Bob, I combined my responses in one post, and didn't mean to direct it all toward you, and I agree - there are many other things to discuss than weight!

KiotiJohn · Aug 31, 2004

( Neil, I have to agree with you that the Kioti guys seem to really feel that weight is a big deal. The Mahindra guys tout it as well. The funny thing is that from what I can see, Kioti has a lot of strong selling points that actually matter and weight is certainly not one of them. )
Bob, you continually left-handedly assault Kioti owners as touting weight and ignoring the other features that make Kioti a good tractor and good buy when the truth is that it usually comes up within a post of those very things. Then you tell everyone that the guru of specs, B.SH. thinks that weight doesn't matter, then we tell why we think weight DOES matter and get accused of making so much of it. It's you who have continued to make so much of it, and we don't want others to be mislead that weight is not an important feature in using loaders, ploughs and getting the most from HP without having to add extra weights that will often have to be paid for beyond the tractor cost.
It's amazing that you can put it off on us Kioti, and now Mahindra owners as well when it's you who constantly stir the weight pot. Okay, lighter is better for you, heavier is better for most I've read. We all have our opinions on it, and if you'd let it be just that instead of coming back everytime and accusing us of doing something heinous, we could all just state our opinions on why WE think heavier or lighter is better and leave it at that.
John