Buying used advice and use expectations and classes of tractors

[Kodiak45]

I'm in the market for buying my first "slightly used" tractor. I currently have a Long 2460 that I inherited from my grandfather and use it on our 47 acres to plow and plant about 5 acres, mainly for fun and wildlife and a little hunting, garden, bush hogging, but I really just like watching things grow, turning dirt and the smell of diesel burning. The 45 hp long is on its last leg and I'm looking to get something with a loader. I guess my first question is the whole comparison between compact, compact utility, ag, etc. I became very confused after going to a dealer and although I am used to referencing HP as the primary criteria for searching for a tractor, he kept talking about the frame sizes instead of the rated hp.
I have about 25 acres of field that I might would like the ability to plow and plant in the future so I want to keep the tractor size consideration with that in mind. I found a jd 4520 that is 53 hp, but I am now afraid that the 53 hp 4520 wont meet my expectations. I had a 25 hp Belarus a few years ago and when comparing 25hp to 45hp its a world of a difference, and I'm assuming that going from 45hp to 60hp might not be a huge noticeable difference, is this accurate assumption?
I have thought that I might should stay in the 40-50 hp range for 90% of what I do and then if I wanted to start cutting hay or even plowing more acres, that I would find a used 80-100 hp to strictly use for the big jobs, like pulling a baler or a 10 ft disc and use my 40-50 tractor for spraying, planting and the smaller stuff. I could change my search to include 60-80 hp tractors, but I'm afraid that something that size might be a hindrance working in the garden or in the woods, along with putting it on the trailer to carry somewhere if needed.
So I guess my first priority is how to compare what load my 45hp long will currently handle vs what models and classes I need to be looking for. I am looking to spend about 20k, but will go to 25k range if is the right one. And opinions on getting one in the same hp range as I currently have and one day buying a used ag tractor in 80-100 hp range to do my heavy plowing and other jobs that would be too much for a 45hp tractor. So if anybody can help my thought process and help point me in the right direction, it would be greatly appreciated.
Any model suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

[jeff9366]

Is your Long 2460 2-WD or 4-WD?

Tractordata.com shows Long 2460 weight at 4,220 pounds.

TractorData.com Long 2460 tractor information

Certainly tractor weight is as important as tractor engine horsepower in the tractor's ability to do work.

If your Long 4520 has 4-WD why not start with 4,220 pounds as a reference and shop from there? Obviously, FEL will add weight to the new tractor.

If your Long 4520 has only 2-WD you will find a newer 4,220 pound tractor with 4-WD much more capable. Tractor design has progressed like (most) other things.

Buy for your five acres; 45-hp with 4-WD is ample, ample. You can pull a HEAVY Disc Harrow with a 4-WD, 45-hp tractor weighing 4,220 pounds, probably 8' wide.

I could change my search to include 60-80 hp tractors, but I'm afraid that something that size might be a hindrance working in the garden or in the woods, along with putting it on the trailer to carry somewhere if needed.

I always consider nemesis of soil compaction. I want enough tractor but not more weight than enough + 10%.

 

[KYDan]

If you are going to use the loader 4WD is a very good investment and that adds considerable weight to the front end of the tractor. Compact utility tractors cover a wide range. If you are going to use the loader extensively consider a tractor with HST which is generally limited to CUTs and SCUTs (compact and subcompact). Information is your friend, follow some old threads on this forum and you will learn a lot. There is a lot of discussion that is valuable, but there is also a lot that isn't. CUTs are generally lighter than utility tractors and don't have quite the ground engaging oomph of true utility tractors. However, there are a lot of good and used CUTs that will give you a lot of bang for your buck. If you are buying a used tractor ask to see the service records and if there are none caveat emptor. If the former owner kept meticulous records there is a very likelihood that he/she took good care of the tractor and if it is a reputable brand most likely you will do OK. If you are shopping new how close is the dealership, how long have they been in business and what is their service and support record? How close to you are they is another consideration and how handy are you at repairing things? I have a Kubota MX5100 CUT and it will do anything I could do with my old 2WD Ford 4000 and it is actually better for loader tasks. I also had a Kubota L2900 with loader and backhoe. I opted not to go with the backhoe this time as it made more sense financially to rent one when I need it. Good luck and enjoy your search.

 

[RedNeckRacin]

Don't compare the pto hp of older tractors to the flywheel hp of newer tractors!!! Also, these newer 4wd tractors are alot lighter than the older iron. Make sure you consider ballast cost in this. Also, if your plowing 5 acres with the potential of 25 more, ag tiresr-1 are going to work alot better than r-4s will for field work. You can get by with them but it makes a world of difference.

Also, you said that you want to do garden work and possibly haying. To me it sounds like you need three tractors. A cut for the garden, a small utility with 4wd for the chores and loader work, and an older iron horse for the big hp jobs.

 

[Kodiak45]

The 2460 is only 2wd. And I think that going with a 50hp utility 4wd is where i need to begin. Now it's just a matter of picking a color and trying to find a good used one. Down the road, I'd like to get the iron horse in the 80-100 hp range. For the 50ish with loader and 4wd, i assume that i would want shuttle or hst along with rear remotes. What other options are useful that I should look for?

 

[GManBart]

The 2460 is only 2wd. And I think that going with a 50hp utility 4wd is where i need to begin. Now it's just a matter of picking a color and trying to find a good used one. Down the road, I'd like to get the iron horse in the 80-100 hp range. For the 50ish with loader and 4wd, i assume that i would want shuttle or hst along with rear remotes. What other options are useful that I should look for?

Useful options are a SSQA (Skid Steer Quick Attach) FEL setup....lets you go from bucket, to forks, to grapple, etc with nothing more than flipping a lever or two. Extending 3pt lift arms make it easier to connect implements. A hydraulic top link would be a very nice option...nice to be able to adjust on the fly, and they seem to say set better than manual adjust top links.

 

[Kodiak45]

The SSQA is a must, but is there a remote cylinder on the FEL to operate a grapple and is this a common option or there is a work around? I didn't realize there was an option for extending 3pt lift arms, what a dream that would be to have. I remember as a kid my great uncle told me to have a tractor for every implement and now I completely understand why.

 

[KYDan]

The MX 5100/5200 and possibly the MX5000 have extendable arms with the CAT I & II compatible feature. For a front end PHD, grapple, or thumb you can add a 3rd function remote. There are aftermarket ones available. I just added the one from Land Pride and it cost about $800. It was about a 3 hour project for me and although I haven't used it yet I have tested it and it does work. The instructions provided with it included images and were detailed, it was an easy install. It included everything but the loader arm lift hangar for the hoses. That was not available until the LA 1065 loader for the MX5200, but I ordered it from my Kubota dealer for $39. I am welding a 1" steel bar that is drilled and tapped to bolt it onto the loader arm. It provides clearance for the loader hoses. Hangar straps will work, they are just not as clean. I have found the MX to be the most versatile small tractor I have ever owned and definitely the most reliable. I have the SSQA system and it's the berries, quick and easy. I have pallet forks, rock and debris bucket, HD rolled back bucket, and now the loader mount hydraulic PHD (I haven't picked it up yet) for it. I use a set of old 16" double bottom 3 pt. plows for what little plowing that I do and have a set of double gang lift harrows for it that work quite well along with rear blade, rollover box blade, lift chain harrows, etc. The MX handles them all efficiently. There are a lot of other brands available, but I am a big fan of orange paint for small tractors.

 

[RedNeckRacin]

The SSQA is a must, but is there a remote cylinder on the FEL to operate a grapple and is this a common option or there is a work around? I didn't realize there was an option for extending 3pt lift arms, what a dream that would be to have. I remember as a kid my great uncle told me to have a tractor for every implement and now I completely understand why.

Every cat 2 tractor I have played with has telescopic lower lift arms. There is a slide that releases the ball and it extend out and down about 6 inches. Slip it over the hitch pin, and back the tractor up until it clicks in, then just hook up your toplink. Better yet is a Quick Attach .

 

[GManBart]

The SSQA is a must, but is there a remote cylinder on the FEL to operate a grapple and is this a common option or there is a work around? I didn't realize there was an option for extending 3pt lift arms, what a dream that would be to have. I remember as a kid my great uncle told me to have a tractor for every implement and now I completely understand why.

Generally speaking, tractors don't come standard with a remote to operate a third function on the FEL (like a grapple), but it is a very common option that can usually be added easily. An alternative that doesn't work quite as well is to run lines from a rear remote to power the third function, but that means you have to take a hand off the FEL lever to operate the 3rd function lever...it works, and costs quite a bit less (usually a couple hundred dollars for lines and fittings) but isn't as smooth or efficient a setup.

Extending lift arms are very handy, but as already mentioned, a quick attack for the lift arms makes for an even better system. I like the Pat's Easy Change system because they don't require a corresponding part on the implement (they work on the standard pins). Add a hydraulic top link and you'll save yourself time and wear and tear on your body...no more hitting with a hammer, kicking, lifting, pulling, cranking on the top link, etc.

 

[TSO]

Mgraham ... Do you have a specific budget, both cash price or monthly, that you'd like to meet?

If money isn't a consideration, I'm sure we could all sell you on why our favorite brand is better than everyone else's. But if you give us a specific dollar amount, it allows us to place some of our personal bias aside and we can work together to get you the best and most-appropriate tractor for your application and budget.

 

[Kodiak45]

Budget is roughly 20k, but I might spend around 25k for the right machine.

 

[George2615]

I see a lot of machines on CL in my area that are in your price range. Most are year 2000 or newer. Horsepower ranges from mid 40's to 100. Most are 4wd. All colors seem to be available. Way too many to choose from.
You may want to check with your local dealers to see what's available. Local CL may be an option for previously owned tractors, just make sure they have a good service records but a dealer may be the better choice. Might even want to call a few of the dealers that are members here. In fact, if they read your post they may PM you to try and help you find something that meets your needs.

 

[Kodiak45]

how often does anyone unattach their loader assembly and then reattach. That seems like a nice feature, but is it as easy as it looks and are there any negatives to having this feature.

 

[GManBart]

how often does anyone unattach their loader assembly and then reattach. That seems like a nice feature, but is it as easy as it looks and are there any negatives to having this feature.

I tend to think that very few people ever take the FEL off their CUT. Some folks say they do when mowing to keep their footprint smaller, and to minimize damage to the grass, but I think that's a clear minority. It seems like more folks with SCUTs talk about taking off the FEL...not sure why, but it seems that way going off comments posted here (which may just be a coincidence). Generally speaking, they really are pretty easy to remove...although very level ground helps a great deal.

I don't know about negatives....maybe slightly higher cost, and a marginal difference in strength....but nothing worth worrying about.

 

[TomSeller]

I tend to think that very few people ever take the FEL off their CUT. Some folks say they do when mowing to keep their footprint smaller, and to minimize damage to the grass, but I think that's a clear minority. .

I just take whatever is on the SSQA off these days. That gets me most of the extra maneuvering room I need.

 

[paulfun9]

how often does anyone unattach their loader assembly and then reattach. That seems like a nice feature, but is it as easy as it looks and are there any negatives to having this feature.

For many of us its a very rare thing to take off the loader. Yes they are very easy to remove and reinstall. Like Gman said the only downside I see is a little more in cost and maybe a slight difference in strength. If you think that you might ever want a front mount attachment like a snow blower or a frame mounted plow/dozer type blade having the ability to remove the loader quickly will be well worth the cost of admission.

 

[newbury]

how often does anyone unattach their loader assembly and then reattach. That seems like a nice feature, but is it as easy as it looks and are there any negatives to having this feature.

I tend to think that very few people ever take the FEL off their CUT. Some folks say they do when mowing to keep their footprint smaller, and to minimize damage to the grass, but I think that's a clear minority. It seems like more folks with SCUTs talk about taking off the FEL...not sure why, but it seems that way going off comments posted here (which may just be a coincidence). Generally speaking, they really are pretty easy to remove...although very level ground helps a great deal.

I don't know about negatives....maybe slightly higher cost, and a marginal difference in strength....but nothing worth worrying about.

I've never done it on either tractor. But I have not graduated to a SSQA and grapple yet, and even then I wouldn't be swapping out the loader assembly.

A loader assembly on a CUT or or larger tractor is big and heavy to move around. On my M4700 w/ FEL it is about 1100 pounds or so. I read of more people swapping their FEL out for forks or a grapple up front than to minimize lawn damage. I'm finally getting in the market for a grapple and SSQA. The "slightly higher cost" translates to about 30% of the cost of my M4700 to put an SSQA and grapple on, not cheap in my book.

The loader on my B7610 is a lot lighter, but I don't mow with it or have other front end attachments.

 

[The Suburban Farmer]

I've had the full FEL assembly off of my tractor a total of 1 time -- and that was the day after I bought it just to make sure I knew how to do it. I DO take my bucket off a fair bit though -- to use a different front-mounted implement, or sometimes just to have better visibility when I'm mowing. But at the end of the day, Deere's "Quik-Park Loader Mounting System" really isn't a benefit for me.. it just came with the tractor.

 

[TSO]

The only time I take mine off is when I'm doing prolonged brush-hogging, and I know ahead of time that the terrain is dry and without major debris. I will say, it does make quite a difference in comfort.

Actually, I also take it off when doing maintenance, makes it easier to get to the engine, grease points, etc.

It's very easy on my Massey, and I assume similarly easy on other brands as well.