LS vs. Kubota questions

[coobie]

I would also look at Kioti tractors they have a strong loader in the 40-45 hp range.

 

[George2615]

I have the XR3037HC cab model and a few of your numbers are off.
The XR3037HC with R4's is 66" wide not 60" unless maybe the one you looked at had R1's.
XR3037HC weighs 3605 plus 1056 for the loader totals 4661Lb.
It has 2 remotes, not 4. 2 ports per remote.
It does have telescoping lower links and SSQA loader bucket which is also 66" wide.
XR3037HC has the Shibaura engine which regens about every 5 hours, 3135 has the new LS engine and regens about every 50 hours. The XR's are what LS calls premium tractors, the XG has Shibaura engine and fewer standard options.
TSO is right about comparing the LS to an L3540/3560 series Kubota which is probably more $$ to get comparable lift capacity.

 

[motownbrowne]

Or for a better value, more features, and added 3pt lift capacity, an LS XR4140-55

That's my main complaint with my MX: the three point capacity. Even lower HP grand Ls have 800-1000# more three point lift. What's up with that? I haven't looked into it, but if there's a way to bump it up, I'd consider it.

 

[ovrszd]

It has 2 remotes, not 4. 2 ports per remote.

Not picking on the OP. Just clarifying. This is a classic example of our individual differences when comparing tractors. Each of us have a varied knowledge and experience with tractors. A potential buyer should be very calculated in his comparisons.

In this situation we are comparing two very different tractors and are struggling comparing "like" features.

I'm impartial to specific brand. Just need to be very specific when doing comparisons.

 

[jaydee325]

Then you have ergonomics. This comes down to personal preferences.

I absolutely could not tolerate the treadle pedal on any tractor, so for me, Kubota was out when I shopped.

I'm not denigrating the Kubota at all. They build a very good, capable tractor. LS was a great choice for me.

 

[George2615]

Not picking on the OP. Just clarifying. This is a classic example of our individual differences when comparing tractors. Each of us have a varied knowledge and experience with tractors. A potential buyer should be very calculated in his comparisons.

In this situation we are comparing two very different tractors and are struggling comparing "like" features.

I'm impartial to specific brand. Just need to be very specific when doing comparisons.

I'm not picking on the OP either. There ARE 4 remote ports or fittings to plug into. each pair is controlled by one lever. IMO that is 2 remotes.

 

[HCROW]

I'm not picking on the OP either. There ARE 4 remote ports or fittings to plug into. each pair is controlled by one lever. IMO that is 2 remotes.

This what prompted me to put 4 on my sheet. I understood that to mean 2 pair, but I do appreciate the "clarifications". It also shows the width at 60".

 

[George2615]

This what prompted me to put 4 on my sheet. I understood that to mean 2 pair, but I do appreciate the "clarifications". It also shows the width at 60".
View attachment 460184

Unless something has changed in the past 2 years mine only came with remotes on the rear as pictured in my last post. Front remotes were available but were an option. Maybe that is now a standard feature but the official LS website only shows rear remotes as standard on the XR series. Front remotes may have been added by the dealer which is a 1K option.
Not sure where you got your comparison chart from.

As far as width I measured mine when purchased. 66" wide bucket and rear tire width with R4's.
Weights I posted were taken from the owners manual and loader manual.

 

[HCROW]

Unless something has changed in the past 2 years mine only came with remotes on the rear as pictured in my last post. Front remotes were available but were an option. Maybe that is now a standard feature but the official LS website only shows rear remotes as standard on the XR series. Front remotes may have been added by the dealer which is a 1K option. Not sure where you got your comparison chart from. As far as width I measured mine when purchased. 66" wide bucket and rear tire width with R4's. Weights I posted were taken from the owners manual and loader manual.

That pic was from the LS site.

 

[Cataclysm]

Some of you may have seen my earlier post about my Kubota 4310hst HERE or my search for a new tractor HERE. I have a few questions... due to the dealers that are available and what the different manufacturers offer I have narrowed my search down to one of the following:

Here's the short answer from what I see. Based on your criteria the LS XR3135 best fits your needs of the tractors you listed.

Why is the loader lift capacity so much less on the Kubotas? I think I would be pushing it trying to move round bales with the loader on either of the Kubotas. Having that capability is important to me so that I can leave my blower on the 3pt in the winter and still move round bales.

As mentioned above by TSO and others tractor weight, wheel base and width along with hydraulic pressure, cylinder size, front axle capacity and geometry all come into play for loader ratings.

If you need to regularly move a certain weight, in this case round bales, then I agree the loader lift capacity needs to be 30 to 50% higher than your regularly moved weight/round bale. Plus to get a better look at the tractor's ability to move round bales I would add in the weight of the loader and front bucket/fork set up. That will give you a much more accurate picture of the tractor's ability to move your round bales.

In my case the tractor spec sheet lists my tractor at about 4300 lbs plus about 1100 lbs for the loader (that doesn't include the bucket by the way), no weight listed for the bucket and in my case an added tooth bar. My tractor scales out at 6400 lbs with a full fuel tank and easily handles round bales. Just something else to consider.

How much value do you place on how much you like one dealer over the other? I much prefer the Kubota dealer to the LS dealer with regards to the salesperson, but I'm going to check another LS dealer tomorrow. Right now, I'm leaning towards one of the LS XR's and just fixing my old tractor at some point and selling it outright. The idea of trading it in as-is is tempting due to my plate being extremely full as it is, but $4,000 seems low, thoughts?

I wouldn't buy from anyone I didn't like. That being said, if your not handy with tools you need to be sure and have a good full service dealer that's going to be there for you. I would definitely sell my old tractor outright and probably get a better price for it even though it will take more of your time.

I just went through looking for and buying a tractor. The best thing that I can tell you is the same thing most everyone here says and that's get a bigger tractor that you think you need. I was originally looking at the LS 3000 and 3100 series. I listened to the advice given on this forum and I wound up with a LS 4100 series and couldn't be happier.

The one thing that I would add to the TBN advice is get a cab on whatever tractor you choose if there is any way you can possibly afford it. Especially if your going to blow snow and need to feed round bales in the winter.

 

[grm61]

People lift bales with that series tractor, but it always makes me nervous. If you know anything about making bales, their weight is not consistent. A wet bale can be quite a bit heavier than a dry one. I'd want a bigger frame tractor from any vendor.

I wouldn't buy from anyone I didn't like. That being said, if your not handy with tools you need to be sure and have a good full service dealer that's going to be there for you. I would definitely sell my old tractor outright and probably get a better price for it even though it will take more of your time.

I just went through looking for and buying a tractor. The best thing that I can tell you is the same thing most everyone here says and that's get a bigger tractor that you think you need. I was originally looking at the LS 3000 and 3100 series. I listened to the advice given on this forum and I wound up with a LS 4100 series and couldn't be happier.

The one thing that I would add to the TBN advice is get a cab on whatever tractor you choose if there is any way you can possibly afford it. Especially if your going to blow snow and need to feed round bales in the winter.

Listen to these guys, you need more tractor than what you are looking at.

 

[Monster5601]

Well the tractor weighs nearly 30% less so straight physics start there

If I take the heaviest in the list at 3285 and the lightest at 2778, the difference in percentage is just over 15%.

 

[George2615]

That pic was from the LS site.

I went to the official site for LS (lstractorusa.com) and didn't see any comparison chart like yours. Hope you find the tractor you need..

I forgot to ask, was the Kubota trade in quote for your tractor as is.
And you may want to consider a larger tractor other mentioned.

 

[Deezl Smoke]

With the GL60 series, Kubota standardized all FEL's to have SSQA mounts, pushing the mounting points a few inches out from previous pin-on configuration. That accounts for the apparent de-rating of the lift capacities. In terms of the rest of it - hyd. PSI, cylinders, basic geometry, etc., I think the FEL's are essentially the same as previous.

I agree with your point about looking at the machine as a whole. Putting a 2,000 lb capacity loader on a tractor that's just 5 ft. wide with a short wheelbase probably sells tractors but doesn't particularly make for safe, well-balanced equipment. Kind of reminds me of the '60's muscle cars I loved when I was much younger. Really impressive but not the most practical things to drive.

The SSQA adds almost 6" to the pin placement does it not? That is a very large addition to consider, as if the math were done, the reduction in measured capacity vs. a pin on would vary greatly. IMO.

 

[HCROW]

I went to the official site for LS (lstractorusa.com) and didn't see any comparison chart like yours. Hope you find the tractor you need.. I forgot to ask, was the Kubota trade in quote for your tractor as is. And you may want to consider a larger tractor other mentioned.

It's directly from the .pdf brochure that you can click on to download when you navigate to the XR3037H page on the LS website.

The trade in quote was as-is. The 3037/3135 LS specs are nearly identical to my 4310, with the exception of HP.

 

[George2615]

Found it. Thanks, its a different brochure from when I bought mine. That's a great deal IMO if you can get front and rear remotes included per the brochure. You may want to check the price difference moving up to the 4000 series.

 

[DT86]

Something else to think about, is a snow blower sufficient counterweight for a hay bale on a tractor that size?

With my tractor weighing 5,xxx lbs and 2,800 lbs of lift it can get interesting the few times I do lift a bale with out proper counterweight.

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

The SSQA adds almost 6" to the pin placement does it not? That is a very large addition to consider, as if the math were done, the reduction in measured capacity vs. a pin on would vary greatly. IMO.

You are correct, and this is why spreadsheets lie. We keep going back to purely comparing numbers as a poor way to evaluate a tractor unless you really know what your doing. ex, most of the Kubota's now have SSQA as standard equipment are therefore a spec'ed with the coupler on. A tractor that offers a pin-on bucket and is spec'ed with it has a significant mechanical advantage. If you order said tractor with an SSQA coupler, your not getting the performance thats on the spec sheet. This kinda stuff is done with skid loaders all the time as well, some vendors will spec them with a super short foundry bucket because it pumps the numbers compared to a long floor that most people actually use.

 

[TSO]

You are correct, and this is why spreadsheets lie. We keep going back to purely comparing numbers as a poor way to evaluate a tractor unless you really know what your doing. ex, most of the Kubota's now have SSQA as standard equipment are therefore a spec'ed with the coupler on. A tractor that offers a pin-on bucket and is spec'ed with it has a significant mechanical advantage. If you order said tractor with an SSQA coupler, your not getting the performance thats on the spec sheet. This kinda stuff is done with skid loaders all the time as well, some vendors will spec them with a super short foundry bucket because it pumps the numbers compared to a long floor that most people actually use.

I am finding cause to doubt your example... It's likely that the SSQA weight is added in, but not the movement of the lift point. Moving the lift point would result in a more drastic amount than what we see. The number seem to suggest this too, as it's reasonable to figure that the difference in the LA1055 (2361 @ pins) and LA854 (2489 @ pins) would account for the weight of the SSQA (approx 128 lbs)

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

I am finding cause to doubt your example... It's likely that the SSQA weight is added in, but not the movement of the lift point. Moving the lift point would result in a more drastic amount than what we see. The number seem to suggest this too, as it's reasonable to figure that the difference in the LA1055 (2361 @ pins) and LA854 (2489 @ pins) would account for the weight of the SSQA (approx 128 lbs)

I'm not quite following you. Try comparing LA853 to LA854 where the SSQA when from being optional to standard. The biggest change should not be in the lift capacity, but in the roll back.