Where does it stop?

[jeff9366]

And the engine horsepower of a Mahindra 1538 shuttle shift is.....?

 

[DK35vince]

Even something like a BX is probably 1000 pounds heavier than a mower.

My zero turn weighs 1600 lbs. It's heavier than a BX without a loader.

 

[dickfoster]

And the engine horsepower of a Mahindra 1538 shuttle shift is.....?

38 of course. They all seem to work the horsepower into their model numbers in some way. The Mahindra 1500 series 1538 is a Mitsubishi built 38 horsepower while their 2538 is a TYM (Korean) built 38 horsepower. The 1500 series is supposed to be a little bit nicer with a better seat, enclosed hydraulic lines on the FEL etc. I'm a real greenhorn so don't know a whole lot about tractors, YET. But this board sure helps a lot.

 

[AxleHub]

Deezl Smoke,

You've grown up around farm tractors so you know plenty about big project work.

But if you're doing projects for yourself and for some hobby money . . I'd suggest a different route . . Small project work. Think about all the developments created and are being built with 5 acre building sites. Then think how many guys arw running around with skid steers and zero turn mowers. My point is the middle ground. Just last week I watched this pretty lawn being assasinated by a landscsper's skidsteer. The job needed a subcompact tracror that could easily work on the lawn but be able to move big rocks and mulch. And neither a zero turn lawn mower or a skid steer were the good choices for it. Or clearing snow on long blacktop or concrete drivewats and sidewalks to be able to do a job moving cut down cut up log trunk pieces. Again not a good skid steer environment on lawns or blacktop driveways.

So lets talk about cockpit size.
1. Flat floor is imperative
2. Wider gap between control levers on each fender and the operator . . and more gap space with fall/winter ciats and expanding waistlines from when you wee 35 years old.
3. Leg room
4. Easy access brake pedal on the left and no treadle paddle hydro control but 2 pedals spaced for boots or feet larger than a size 9
5. Ability to have both 3pt hitch and backhoe on at same time.
6. A true Mulching deck option that has no discharge and DOES only require 55 total inches of width yet uses 6 blades.

I could list a long list of things that might include Kubota bx models . . . But the above list is for the Massey GC1700 series only.


A long list of features that allows a sub compact to act like a lawn mower in beautiful fashion yet handle the steep slopes and sidehills. Then turn around and till the ground . . Do post hole digging or haul loads of landscape block/rock/mulch/feature rock and not harm the lawn doing it.

And its easy to trailer.

Let lawn maintenance people do their thing with their zero turns and skid steers. While you can do the jobs they can't touch and still say "yes" to customers who want some standard things too.

But in the end . . You'll have a unit that does your things very well but doesn't push you into the tyoes of work that bigger tractors and skid steers have to take.

 

[Deezl Smoke]

Deezl Smoke,

You've grown up around farm tractors so you know plenty about big project work.

But if you're doing projects for yourself and for some hobby money . . I'd suggest a different route . . Small project work. Think about all the developments created and are being built with 5 acre building sites. Then think how many guys arw running around with skid steers and zero turn mowers. My point is the middle ground. Just last week I watched this pretty lawn being assasinated by a landscsper's skidsteer. The job needed a subcompact tracror that could easily work on the lawn but be able to move big rocks and mulch. And neither a zero turn lawn mower or a skid steer were the good choices for it. Or clearing snow on long blacktop or concrete drivewats and sidewalks to be able to do a job moving cut down cut up log trunk pieces. Again not a good skid steer environment on lawns or blacktop driveways.

So lets talk about cockpit size.
1. Flat floor is imperative
2. Wider gap between control levers on each fender and the operator . . and more gap space with fall/winter ciats and expanding waistlines from when you wee 35 years old.
3. Leg room
4. Easy access brake pedal on the left and no treadle paddle hydro control but 2 pedals spaced for boots or feet larger than a size 9
5. Ability to have both 3pt hitch and backhoe on at same time.
6. A true Mulching deck option that has no discharge and DOES only require 55 total inches of width yet uses 6 blades.

I could list a long list of things that might include Kubota bx models . . . But the above list is for the Massey GC1700 series only.


A long list of features that allows a sub compact to act like a lawn mower in beautiful fashion yet handle the steep slopes and sidehills. Then turn around and till the ground . . Do post hole digging or haul loads of landscape block/rock/mulch/feature rock and not harm the lawn doing it.

And its easy to trailer.

Let lawn maintenance people do their thing with their zero turns and skid steers. While you can do the jobs they can't touch and still say "yes" to customers who want some standard things too.

But in the end . . You'll have a unit that does your things very well but doesn't push you into the tyoes of work that bigger tractors and skid steers have to take.

Good thinking. Lots of competition for lawn mowing already. And, that's the job timing that would interfere with farming anyway.

The 4520in my link ended up being sold, which is probably a good thing as it would require a much larger trailer and tow vehicle.

So you dont like the kubota pedal? I guess I have not spent any real time on one so perhaps it would get frustrating with muddy size 12s.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[AxleHub]

Good thinking. Lots of competition for lawn mowing already. And, that's the job timing that would interfere with farming anyway.

The 4520in my link ended up being sold, which is probably a good thing as it would require a much larger trailer and tow vehicle.

So you dont like the kubota pedal? I guess I have not spent any real time on one so perhaps it would get frustrating with muddy size 12s.

Thanks for the reply.

Grass cutting is not a focus in my opinion for hobby money but msybevshould be forbyour own needs. But being able to cross back and forth across lawns is a key ability.

As far as Kubotas . . I spent from 2006 until end of March 2015 planning that I would buy a Kubota BX . . and then I met the back story of the Massey GC1700s. Why do I say the "back story"? Simple, I was finding out information myself on the Massey that the dealers (3) I contacted . . didn't know. Just a pile of things that were advantages.

And I discovered that 2 separate hydto pedals was much easier on my knee than the tredfle paddle. And then I discovered how I could easily create 3 more inches of leg room than anyone knew about.

I think the kubota bx units are great and if I was 35 or 40 again they would be rather competitive with the GC products on several points. But I'm not 35 or 40 anymore and my knee really does very well on the Massey GC. AND THE the massey came out with the new dl95 loader and cb65 backhoe in late 2014 and thatbwas a big benefit.

But I'm not posting about brands . . What I'm posting about is that a subcompact with some unique differences can offer you a flexibility that some will not understand unless you see and feel it.

If you need a cut . . The kubota b series or the massey 1700 series (note not GC1700 series) are great units. I'm just suggesting that for projects you are considering and for generating hobby money . . Being equipped for what competitors are not . . Allows you to make non stress related hobby money. Just my opinion. Besides you already know well what big tractors can do

 

[jenkinsph]

Deezl Smoke,

I use a 4520 compact and a 110tlb to build lawns and small projects, custom tractor work on small acreages. I use riding mowers or garden tractors to maintain lawns. Rarely do I need a sub compact tractor because they are not the best for mowing and their capability as a loader tractor is very limited. Hard to make any money with a tiny tractor but they are handy to have around a suburban lot. Your use and needs should dictate the correct size, figure this out first and decide what you need, a 6 hp mower or a 600hp field tractor. Lots of sizes in between.

 

[k0ua]

Well I just bought one. A Mahindra 1538 with shuttle shift. I started out with HST but I got the gear because much of my property slopes. Many who should know, say hilly terrain can be sometimes be a problem for HST. Even my dealer who was pushing HST before said I'd be better off with the shuttle shift. However I won't be doing a lot of FEL work requiring a lot of back and forth like mucking out horse stalls. It also shaved a thousand bucks off the price. But seeing as how you're in Florida I doubt you have any hills or slopes to contend with.
I also started out shopping lower power but ended up with the 38. I'll probably see more like 35 at my altitude, another problem you don't have.

Having owned 2 gear and 3 hydrostatic tractors, I would disagree with "many that know" and anyone else that says hydrostat is not good for hills. Hydrostatic tractors excel at tackling hilly terrain. And I know what I am talking about, I live near Branson Missouri, and we have two kinds of ground here, up hill and down hill. If you want any flat ground you have to make it. I have had one gear and two hydrostatic tractors here, and let me tell you, Hydrostat is far easier to operate and far safer. I have no idea where the idea that a hydro is not safe on hills comes from.

 

[4570Man]

I'll take my HST over a gear any day. A HST is far superior to a gear on hills.

 

[Gary Fowler]

Having owned 2 gear and 3 hydrostatic tractors, I would disagree with "many that know" and anyone else that says hydrostat is not good for hills. Hydrostatic tractors excel at tackling hilly terrain. And I know what I am talking about, I live near Branson Missouri, and we have two kinds of ground here, up hill and down hill. If you want any flat ground you have to make it. I have had one gear and two hydrostatic tractors here, and let me tell you, Hydrostat is far easier to operate and far safer. I have no idea where the idea that a hydro is not safe on hills comes from.

I totally agree. I cant imagine how a gear tractor would be better than HST on hills. Just compare a geared automobile and one with automatic transmission operation on hills. It is almost impossible to start off a geared machine on a hill without it rolling backward (or forward) prior to releasing the clutch. If you are close to or up against an object that you don't want to mangle, this could be an issue with gear but no issue with HST. Some folks say HST stalls going up hill, but I don't find that to be any more true than with gear. Many folks don't know how to properly operate HST to gain power while reducing speed and just try to jam the HST pedal to the metal when climbing a hill which is WRONG.
I have gear and HST and find that HST is better for just about all activities. I also like the treadle pedal better than the 2 pedal versions. I don't have to raise or move my foot to work them back and forward but I suppose that is a personal thing. I hate driving my brother in laws NH with the 2 pedal system, especially since it tends to creep a bit between shifting from pedal to pedal. I don't have that problem with my treadle pedal.

 

[jeff9366]

Hydrostatic tractors excel at tackling hilly terrain. I have had one gear and two hydrostatic tractors here, and let me tell you, Hydrostat is far easier to operate and far safer.

-- X 4 --

 

[jenkinsph]

Having owned 2 gear and 3 hydrostatic tractors, I would disagree with "many that know" and anyone else that says hydrostat is not good for hills. Hydrostatic tractors excel at tackling hilly terrain. And I know what I am talking about, I live near Branson Missouri, and we have two kinds of ground here, up hill and down hill. If you want any flat ground you have to make it. I have had one gear and two hydrostatic tractors here, and let me tell you, Hydrostat is far easier to operate and far safer. I have no idea where the idea that a hydro is not safe on hills comes from.

Ignorance is the leading reason why someone would choose gears over a hydro for steep hills. There are people out there that feel they are masters of a clutch and gear transmission there for they don't need a silly hydro transmission.

People that have used both hydro and gear know that a hydro is safer on hills because the transmission allows you to feather the movement without fear of free wheeling or moving abruptly and causing a roll over. I don't usually like to argue with "gearheads" as to which transmission is better but I would hate to read about some ones death.

Gear tractors are great for farm land because they are more efficient to operate. Most people with small acreages that use their tractors for a variety of tasks are better served with a hydro tractor. I am old enough to remember when automatic transmissions in vehicles were problematic but these hydro transmissions are completely different designs. Some people have a hard time getting past it.

 

[k0ua]

While I probably have more hours with gear tractors than Hydro tractors in around 25 years operation, for most tasks a Hydro machine not only easier on the operator (especially older operators) but is actually superior for some tasks such as loader work or any kind of work that requires lots of directional changes and speed changes. Gear tractors excel at constant work, like plowing or mowing that does not require a lot of speed changes as they put more of the engines available power to the ground without the loss inherent in hydro transmissions. But if mowing requires a lot of ground speed changes due to terrain or obstacles, then hydro machines will be superior there too. Hydro machines are without a doubt superior in hilly terrain. I will gladly give up some horsepower to the ground for the gains in operator efficiency, safety and convenience of a hydrostatic transmission.

 

[newbury]

So I started out intending to buy a 25hp tractor with a loader and backhoe. <snip>

So for a lower hour usage, loader, hoe and mower tractor, about where is the "best bang for the buck"? Is the small framer like the BX25D and 1025R the better value, or with all other things equal like trailering capacity etc., is the better value in like the L series lower numbers or the deere 3 family? Other brands included.

I do want to get into some custom work, but only for hobby money. Stuff like clearing a pad for a small out building or mowing down briers and digging a trench for a water line etc. I like the idea of full cat1 three point vs. cat1 limited.
<snip>

"Best bang for buck" and backhoe are a rare combination. With a small tractor ( less than 30HP ) you will need a subframe. If you can make it yourself, great. But if you need to buy one the subframes alone seem to run around $1K.

As others wrote more details about your usage and terrain would be helpful.

<snip>
We have a deere 955 here on the farm I work on. We bought a fel for it, but it sucks. Though the 955 hydro has been bullet proof and in 3k hours never a hickup, it is not very foot friendly, and somewhat jerky on rougher terrain. But gears, either dry clutch or torque converter, with a foot throttle, just work for me. I think the new, more refined hydros are way better and smoother than 25 years ago. I can, and am more than willing to get used to them if I need to. But if I dont need to, then I think I will be happier to spend time on the tractor if it has a foot throttle and a shuttle or "johnson bar" type reverser of some kind.

Here's a link to a machine finder ad for a 4 family deere without a hoe at a dealer near me. Maybe an hour drive and with the rainy windy weather, I'd happily be driving to check things out than cleaning gutters and picking up sticks. It's a low hour used rig, so the price reflects it and I can deal from there a bit. Then buy an aftermarket hoe or something maybe?

If your looking in the $30K price range there are a LOT of new tractors NOT the color of money that would fit your usage.

Also just to ad, this purchase is for me personally. We have downsized the farm some and I will have more time to take care of some personal projects. Figured I better ad that as many may wonder why I want to buy this tractor when I have access to so many on the farm. It's just something I want to do. I dont smoke or drink, so I'm not much fun at parties, but I'm not broke.

Good thinking. Lots of competition for lawn mowing already. And, that's the job timing that would interfere with farming anyway.

The 4520in my link ended up being sold, which is probably a good thing as it would require a much larger trailer and tow vehicle.

So you dont like the kubota pedal? I guess I have not spent any real time on one so perhaps it would get frustrating with muddy size 12s.

Thanks for the reply.

I've got muddy size 13's and run a B7610. Go to various dealers wearing your snow boots and try their tractors out for size. My 13's did not fit a BX25D.

 

[Oldpath05]

I have no idea where the idea that a hydro is not safe on hills comes from.

I said that when I bought a Hoyt-Clagwell Tractor form Mr. Haney, had nothing but problems with it.

 

[ultrarunner]

I love my BX23... really do and it would be the last to go... over the Deere 110

My brother wanted the BX25 for his ranch... he was confused when I questioned it.

I told him it was great and would help him a lot... my concern was with the small tires and his terrain.

Ended up getting a harvest return L3800 and couldn't be happier with the tractor... the larger tires and loader are a real benefit... of course he now use a rear rotary mower.

I guess the weakness for his set up is the backhoe... works well enough... just limited and expensive... in my opinion.

The L3800 reminds me of the old Ford Tractors for the 1950's...

 

[dickfoster]

Having owned 2 gear and 3 hydrostatic tractors, I would disagree with "many that know" and anyone else that says hydrostat is not good for hills. Hydrostatic tractors excel at tackling hilly terrain. And I know what I am talking about, I live near Branson Missouri, and we have two kinds of ground here, up hill and ddown hill If you want any flat ground you have to make it. I have had one gear and two hydrostatic tractors here, and let me tell you, Hydrostat is far easier to operate and far safer. I have no idea where the idea that a hydro is not safe on hills comes from.

Well I had folks with whole lot of experience say otherwise. People who've spent their lives on tractors of all makes and models. People who sell, service and drive them all, including the salesman with 40 years who had previously been pushing me toward HST until I brought up the terrain factor. Bear in mind I was sitting on the HST at the dealership while he had to go and fetch the shuttle from the distributor, where I drove it, then sell it to me for a grand less. I didn't really care either way, I just wanted to get what was right for my needs and terrain.
I'm beginning to think that this whole shuttle/hydro thing is more about personal preference than anything else.

All that said I got the shuttle after driving both and I actually thought the shuttle was easier to drive than the somewhat awkward and uncomfortable rocker pedal. I think a two pedal setup would likely have been better but it isn't offered on on that model. Even on flat ground the rocker actually felt uncomfortable and clumsy for me so I think it might need some work yet. It doesn't matter a whole lot because I won't be doing a lot of back and forth nor do I have great distances to drive at any speed. I'll likely spend most of my time with the seat turned around digging at stumps.

Being into rock crawling, I'm pretty comfortalbe with gear boxes and know how to feather a clutch, when to use 4WD and when and when not to lock up an axle along with how and when to use cutting brakes. I've also developed a pretty good sense of bottom end pucker factor when it comes to flopping and rolling over.

 

[jenkinsph]

Well I had folks with whole lot of experience say otherwise. People who've spent their lives on tractors of all makes and models. People who sell, service and drive them all, including the salesman with 40 years who had previously been pushing me toward HST until I brought up the terrain factor. Bear in mind I was sitting on the HST at the dealership while he had to go and fetch the shuttle from the distributor, where I drove it, then sell it to me for a grand less. I didn't really care either way, I just wanted to get what was right for my needs and terrain.
I'm beginning to think that this whole shuttle/hydro thing is more about personal preference than anything else.

All that said I got the shuttle after driving both and I actually thought the shuttle was easier to drive than the somewhat awkward and uncomfortable rocker pedal. I think a two pedal setup would likely have been better but it isn't offered on on that model. Even on flat ground the rocker actually felt uncomfortable and clumsy for me so I think it might need some work yet. It doesn't matter a whole lot because I won't be doing a lot of back and forth nor do I have great distances to drive at any speed. I'll likely spend most of my time with the seat turned around digging at stumps.

Being into rock crawling, I'm pretty comfortalbe with gear boxes and know how to feather a clutch, when to use 4WD and when and when not to lock up an axle along with how and when to use cutting brakes. I've also developed a pretty good sense of bottom end pucker factor when it comes to flopping and rolling over.

Last week I had to dig for a new waterline on a steep hill. Sitting in the rear seat on the 110tlb to let myself up and down the hill. The driveway was unsafe for vehicles because it was too steep. Most vehicles would slide down the hill. With the creep to reposition it was easier than I expected. Took my time to make sure I did not loose control and slide down. Having the electrically controlled transmission enabled me to use the dipper and bucket to grip the bottom of the ditch while at the same time engaging the transmission, wheels, bucket and stabilizers from the rear seat. Used a chain connected to the 4520 over the top of the hill for safety. This was steep enough the 4520 and box blade could not drive up the hill without the fronts coming up off the ground. Had to back up the hill. Long story short, the hydrostatic transmissions will handle as much as the tractors will and allow you to carefully pick your way up and down a hill.

Sorry about the pictures being rotated on their left side. Just loaded Windows 10 this morning and haven't got the bugs worked out yet.

 

[dickfoster]

It'll be awhile before I attempt working on a slope that steep. The only slope I have that's that bad is the very bottom corner, maybe 10 sq yards. so I just leave it alone.
I hate Win10 and still run XP on my own puter. It works and if it ain't broke, I don't fix it.

 

[s219]

Have to agree, HST is much better for hilly terrain, but do keep in mind it saps some power (10-15%) compared to gear. So if someone was suggesting a gear machine to maximize wheel power, I could see that being a valid point when it comes to hills. Me, I'd just make sure the HST machine's power was adequate enough with the losses, or go with an HST with more HP.

To me, the only place gear is better is for primarily mowing or ground engaging work on flat terrain. No real need for HST there, so why give up 10-15% HP. For loader work, no contest, HST wins for sure.

My first Deere tractor was gear, and my wife's uncle has a Deere 3005 gear which I use a lot. No real complaints, but when doing a lot of loader work, the HST on my current Kubota is so much better. When I have to use the Deere, I feel like a one-man band working all the levers just to maintain a fairly anemic and disjointed pace. With HST, it all goes smoother and faster with no effort.

Over the years here on TBN, I have seen more than one prospective shopper mention they were OK with gear because they know how to drive a manual transmission car or prefer manual transmission cars. I think that's about the most irrelevant connection one could make. The commonality only goes as far as knowing how to use your left foot and feather a clutch. The shifting and coordination of clutch/shifter/throttle between cars and tractors is worlds apart and I see very little connection. The reverse is true too -- I know quite a few people capable of operating gear mowers, tractors, and other equipment that can't drive a manual transmission car/truck at all. My wife can run a gear tractor but the couple times I tried to teach her to drive my manual transmission cars, we gave up.

Bottom line to me, if an operator has run gear (or shuttle) and HST in all different conditions, they will likely know and develop expertise and preferences, and they will certainly recognize and appreciate the advantages of each. If anybody universally says one is better than the other for everything, then they have missed some of the finer points of tractor operation.