OP
Horridfiber
New member
Forest setting is rough, rocky, and I have a dozer coming in to clear wide trails.
Access road to the middle of the property is wide open.View attachment 4189
What features of a UT are superior to a CUT in a rough, hilly, forest setting
- Thread starter Horridfiber
- Start date
- Views: 4251
Forest setting is rough, rocky, and I have a dozer coming in to clear wide trails.
Access road to the middle of the property is wide open.View attachment 4189
TripleR
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Messages
- 18,084
- Location
- Missouri
- Tractor
- Kubota M8540HDC, L5740HSTC, BX2200, BX2660, John Deere 425&1025R, Case, Massey Ferguson, Ford
As I mentioned in another thread, I own and operate a Grand L CUT and M UT and while I can't debate physics etc., I know from personal experience and that of my sons and brother, all experienced drivers, our M is much more stable and will either operate in places our GL won't or if it will the pucker factor is way up there.
One day, I was bush hogging the farm where my son lives with the GL and got to a really rough section of land with some significant washouts and it was nerve wracking and I was getting bounced around pretty badly. I parked the GL and got the M and ten foot cutter out; much smoother and more stable.
I still prefer my GL, but there are times I must default to the M.
I fully understand why some prefer a UT and some a UT as in my experience, in many if not most operations any one tractor is going to be a compromise one way or another, you just have to balance your priorities.
One day, I was bush hogging the farm where my son lives with the GL and got to a really rough section of land with some significant washouts and it was nerve wracking and I was getting bounced around pretty badly. I parked the GL and got the M and ten foot cutter out; much smoother and more stable.
I still prefer my GL, but there are times I must default to the M.
I fully understand why some prefer a UT and some a UT as in my experience, in many if not most operations any one tractor is going to be a compromise one way or another, you just have to balance your priorities.
TSO
Elite Member
The very obvious difference will be strength and weight. The bigger tractor will have better stability due to size and weight, obviously more HP, bigger/stronger front end loaders with higher lift/reach, more 3pt lift capacity, more roomy operators area, etc. The added weight and usually larger tires will result in better traction, and better handling of heavy implements.
So, a UT will be basically better at everything .... Except ... If you have size & weight considerations. For me, I do commercial landscaping, so a larger, heavier tractor would lead to transport, maneuverability, and ground disruption issues. The sizes of the CUT'S vary widely, so if you have size limitations, there will be a CUT available to fit your size needs. For me, the largest of the CUT'S is what works best for me, though I'd like to add a smaller, SCUT sized TLB at some point for the real "access challenged" jobs, and also a bigger UT for some of my bigger jobs.
One other consideration is transmission options. Some people prefer old fashioned gear transmissions, or "souped-up" gear transmissions with clutchless direction changes (shuttle shift or upgraded power shuttles) ... And some prefer hydrostatic. Personal preference aside, each transmission will have its strong and weak points from a convenience and performance perspective, and depending on your intended uses, one transmission will be a better choice over another.. But the bottom line is, currently, hydrostatic is only available in CUT'S, and not in UT's. If you want hydro, you're obviously stuck with a CUT. If you want gear, then your options are expanded.
First figure out if you have specific size requirements (length, height, weight), and that will help you narrow down your options.
So, a UT will be basically better at everything .... Except ... If you have size & weight considerations. For me, I do commercial landscaping, so a larger, heavier tractor would lead to transport, maneuverability, and ground disruption issues. The sizes of the CUT'S vary widely, so if you have size limitations, there will be a CUT available to fit your size needs. For me, the largest of the CUT'S is what works best for me, though I'd like to add a smaller, SCUT sized TLB at some point for the real "access challenged" jobs, and also a bigger UT for some of my bigger jobs.
One other consideration is transmission options. Some people prefer old fashioned gear transmissions, or "souped-up" gear transmissions with clutchless direction changes (shuttle shift or upgraded power shuttles) ... And some prefer hydrostatic. Personal preference aside, each transmission will have its strong and weak points from a convenience and performance perspective, and depending on your intended uses, one transmission will be a better choice over another.. But the bottom line is, currently, hydrostatic is only available in CUT'S, and not in UT's. If you want hydro, you're obviously stuck with a CUT. If you want gear, then your options are expanded.
First figure out if you have specific size requirements (length, height, weight), and that will help you narrow down your options.
vtsnowedin
Elite Member
vtsnowedin
Elite Member
First off they call them utility tractors because they have inherent utility or usefulness. They are designed to be productive at numerous tasks and accomplish that work economically.
Compared to a CUT they will have a longer wheel base, wider tread, larger drive tires and a better horsepower to weight ratio. Often a utility tractor will have rims or adjustable axles that allow the tractor to change tread widths for different tasks so that you can adjust the tractor to match the row spacing, not the rows to match the tractor spacing.
The center of Gravity as a ratio of height to tread width need not be any higher then in a CUT but adding a heavy cab can fight you on this point.
A cut is smaller nimbler and can get into tight places too small for the full sized tractor and can drive over mowed lawns without making a mess. So if you have a lot of lawn with some tight places to get into and no big field to plow or hay the Cut may be a better option for you.
When it comes to cost I have a little under 30K in tractor , loader and 72" shredder. You can find a lot of CUTS and SCUTS out there that cost more then that with all sorts of bells and whistles but I think that makes for pretty expensive cup holders.
Compared to a CUT they will have a longer wheel base, wider tread, larger drive tires and a better horsepower to weight ratio. Often a utility tractor will have rims or adjustable axles that allow the tractor to change tread widths for different tasks so that you can adjust the tractor to match the row spacing, not the rows to match the tractor spacing.
The center of Gravity as a ratio of height to tread width need not be any higher then in a CUT but adding a heavy cab can fight you on this point.
A cut is smaller nimbler and can get into tight places too small for the full sized tractor and can drive over mowed lawns without making a mess. So if you have a lot of lawn with some tight places to get into and no big field to plow or hay the Cut may be a better option for you.
When it comes to cost I have a little under 30K in tractor , loader and 72" shredder. You can find a lot of CUTS and SCUTS out there that cost more then that with all sorts of bells and whistles but I think that makes for pretty expensive cup holders.
OP
Horridfiber
New member
Thanks for the pics VTSNOWEDIN-
The sidehill pictures look quite similar to our areas.
We are going to proceed with a full UT tractor.
Really like the way the CV boots are protected on a Massey or New Holland. They seem exposed on the Deere.
The Farmall 75c quote costs 40% more than the JD 5075e
Looks like we have the JD 5075e with cab in our sights for the final choice.
It still all seems far too much for a weekend warrior- but here's hoping it will be fun !
The sidehill pictures look quite similar to our areas.
We are going to proceed with a full UT tractor.
Really like the way the CV boots are protected on a Massey or New Holland. They seem exposed on the Deere.
The Farmall 75c quote costs 40% more than the JD 5075e
Looks like we have the JD 5075e with cab in our sights for the final choice.
It still all seems far too much for a weekend warrior- but here's hoping it will be fun !
nybirdman
Super Member
You also added wheel spacers?
vtsnowedin
Elite Member
Yes 4.1 inchers from JD installed before delivery. Plus have the rears loaded with Rimguard 460Lbs/side and have the rear rims set as wide as they will go. I can drive across a two to one slope with room to spare.
varmint
Elite Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,572
- Location
- Northern Maryland
- Tractor
- Kubota B8200, then a Kubota L3130 HST, now a Kubota L3400 HST
Yup- as snowedin showed and wrote, rear wheel spacers are good. Just adding 1.75" each side on my L3400 didn't change much in the way of maneuverability, but I can feel the difference in how it is planted, and tire chains are a piece of cake to install. (except for wrestling them around, of course.)
