Magilla1
New member
Seems like there's been a debate on this forum about the two machine solution. That is, a lot of us are country folks who have a decent little patch of land, maybe 8-30 acres, with a couple or three acres to mow, long gravel driveways to maintain, some snow to push in winter, various dirt, landscaping and big garden work, messing around in the woods, etc. Some guys are interested in one tractor to do it all. That's why JD sells so many of the 2000 series with a MMM and FEL as the big attachments. Other guys take the view that it's better to have two machines; a pure mower and then a tractor for everything else. I'm trying to get opinions/experiences with both, because I'm right at that decision point right now.
I think the do-it-all tractor folks would say:
1. Maintaining two machines is a pain.
2. Buying two machines, all other things being equal, is more expensive than one machine. Plus buying two machines requires you to store two machines, so you've got to have quite a bit of barn/shed space available.
3. The MMMs on the tractors mow pretty nicely, so you don't need a pure mower.
4. Unless you buy an x700 series mower, which is almost as expensive as a CUT anyway, the two machine solution means your mower is going to be a belt-driven machine, and there's just no way it'll hold up for more than a decade, while a well-maintained CUT should still have a lot of life and value a decade down the road.
I think the two-machine solution folks would say:
1. Maintaining two machines isn't such a big deal, really.
2. A good, dedicated mower (like an x300, say) mows better than a MMM on a 2000 series or 3000 series. Better cut, more manueverable and less tippy on hills.
3. Having a dedicated mower means you're not switching out the MMM (and FEL or other attachment) as you go back and forth between mowing and other work.
4. A MMM costs around $2500-$3000, and a good x300 or x500 series costs $4000-$6000, so the savings of one machine is there but not comparatively huge.
What do y'all think? Anyone out there start with the all-in-one tractor and then decide to go with the two machine solution? Anyone out there start with the two machine solution and then regret it? Anyone disagree with the considerations I suggest above or have different ones to add?
I think the do-it-all tractor folks would say:
1. Maintaining two machines is a pain.
2. Buying two machines, all other things being equal, is more expensive than one machine. Plus buying two machines requires you to store two machines, so you've got to have quite a bit of barn/shed space available.
3. The MMMs on the tractors mow pretty nicely, so you don't need a pure mower.
4. Unless you buy an x700 series mower, which is almost as expensive as a CUT anyway, the two machine solution means your mower is going to be a belt-driven machine, and there's just no way it'll hold up for more than a decade, while a well-maintained CUT should still have a lot of life and value a decade down the road.
I think the two-machine solution folks would say:
1. Maintaining two machines isn't such a big deal, really.
2. A good, dedicated mower (like an x300, say) mows better than a MMM on a 2000 series or 3000 series. Better cut, more manueverable and less tippy on hills.
3. Having a dedicated mower means you're not switching out the MMM (and FEL or other attachment) as you go back and forth between mowing and other work.
4. A MMM costs around $2500-$3000, and a good x300 or x500 series costs $4000-$6000, so the savings of one machine is there but not comparatively huge.
What do y'all think? Anyone out there start with the all-in-one tractor and then decide to go with the two machine solution? Anyone out there start with the two machine solution and then regret it? Anyone disagree with the considerations I suggest above or have different ones to add?