Should we upgrade for 5 HP? Same model same options ... Hmmmm....

[RickB]

It takes a 50% increase in (Three Point Hitch) bare tractor weight before you notice a discernible increase in tractor capability. You would need to move from a Grand L at least to a Kubota 'M' for weight to make a difference you will feel.

That's a generalization based on a single opinion. My opinion is that your generalization is absurd.

 

[jyoutz]

I definitely get the picture there! I believe you’re thinking outside the box on this for sure. I suppose dropping down a size on the implements might be o e the best suggestions yet. Maybe most folks (me included) seem to want to answer these type of questions with simply adding more power. And while it may be the simplest in principal, who says taking a more conservative approach wouldn’t be just as fruitful.

For reference, I’m using a 72” cutter on my 60hp tractor.

 

[Doughknob]

That's a generalization based on a single opinion. My opinion is that your generalization is absurd.

Geez rick. Y dont u just throw in an obscenity while at it......

 

[jeff9366]

The 3560 is a 3 cylinder while the 4060 is a 4 cylinder. We wonder if we would increase fuel usage appreciably on the 4060 due to the added cylinder even though its only 5 HP more in size...? Is a 4 cylinder going to have a noticeable impact on torque and the other behaviors of the system... (Backhoe, Grapple, Bucket) considering everything else is going to be the same...


A four cylinder engine will have 25% more parts than a three cylinder engine. Any one of an engine' s parts can fail.

Considering the cost of your deluxe tractor and its low operating hours it is hard to comprehend how a minimal increase in fuel consumption, which I speculate might change from .6 gallon per hour to .7 gallon per hour, will influence your tractor operating budget significantly. Difference should be minimal as your contemplated change is from one naturally aspirated engine to another naturally aspirated engine. Going to a turbo-charged engine could increase fuel consumption to .8 gallon per hour, but with more power output and possibly more efficient mower operation.

( From my own L3560 records I consider my open station tractor operating cost to be $35/hour, but I have a big stable of implements which contribute perhaps $10/hour to tractor operating cost. With a cab and air conditioning I speculate your inclusive long term operating/depreciation cost is $30/hour.)

Running a 72" finish mower behind a cabbed tractor powering cab air conditioning I would order 45-horsepower minimum. If I contemplated mowing brush with a 72" bush hog I would order 50-horsepower minimum.

 

[RickB]

Geez rick. Y dont u just throw in an obscenity while at it......

There's no point in that.

 

[jeff9366]

That's a generalization based on a single opinion. My opinion is that your generalization is absurd.

Thank you. How is this?

From my experience of owning three tractors, each heavier than the one before, it takes a 50% increase in (Three Point Hitch) bare tractor weight before you notice a discernible increase in tractor capability. You would need to move from a Grand L t to a Kubota 'M' for weight to make a difference you will feel.

I stand by the above statement.

Neighbors around 85 years of age occasionally ask me to operate mid-weight Deere tractors over three distinct hobby farms, the point being my operating experience is reasonably broad.

 

[RickB]

Thank you. How is this?

From my experience of owning three tractors, each heavier than the one before, it takes a 50% increase in (Three Point Hitch) bare tractor weight before you notice a discernible increase in tractor capability. You would need to move from a Grand L t to a Kubota 'M' for weight to make a difference you will feel.

Neighbors around 85 years of age occasionally ask me to operate Deere tractors over three distinct hobby farms, the point being my operating experience is reasonably broad.

My contention is in the scheme of things your experience is quite narrow. Your claim that a 50% weight difference is required for a discernible difference in performance is a prime example. Thousands of real world examples of tractors with added ballast in the range of 5%-10% of their base weight bear witness.
Much of your own rhetoric concerning ballast and counterweight for FEL applications indicate much the same.
An inexperienced sales person sold an MX6000 less loader with an 8' heavy duty mounted cutter to a municipal purchasing agent that didn't know any better. It was literally impossible to drive the tractor up any grade with the mower raised without lifting the front tractor wheels off the ground. Less than 1000 lbs of front ballast made the combination safe to operate. That made a very "discernible difference" in the tractor's capability.

 

[Jchonline]

We are at an interesting point in time, with the demand for used Tractors up, and thinking that we may want to just make a slight change ... would it possibly pan out to Trade our almost pristine Kubota Grand L3560 HSTC Cab with an L805 Loader and BH92 Backhoe for an L4060 with the same accoutrements???

Can we Trade or sell the L3560 and still be happy?

I received an email from a Kubota Dealer that said that they can only sell a tractor brought in on trade within specified range based on its condition, but that I could get a "Lot more from an open market sale rather than trading it in". Hmmm so are there any dealers out there that want to chime in on this condition that Kubota may be holding their dealers to - with respect to trade in values offered within a Sellers market?

On the other side of things, there is a lot that goes into deciding to sell or trade your tractor, especially if its a unit that you have been extremely happy with and have taken extreme care of.

We used a 72" King Kutter finish mower that we rebuilt for the first time this year on the Tractor, and although it doesn't struggle, it seems to us that for a 72" mowing implement while driving up a hill, the tractor drags a bit.

Not an issue overall... but still, if we can feel better about a bit more HP without sacrificing much more in the weight of the tractor on turf (the 4060 is about 250 pounds heavier than the 3560), we would be probably be happier.

The 3560 is a 3 cylinder while the 4060 is a 4 cylinder. We wonder if we would increase fuel usage appreciably on the 4060 due to the added cylinder even though its only 5 HP more in size...? Is a 4 cylinder going to have a noticeable impact on torque and the other behaviors of the system... (Backhoe, Grapple, Bucket) considering everything else is going to be the same...

The physical characteristics of the 4060 are negligible sans the additional 4 to 6 inches in length and the additional weight.

One caveat...

On the L3560 I had issues with the tire hitting the front Lower Loader Mount when turning and under load. The 4060 is 4 to 6" longer to compensate for the 4 cylinder over the 3 cyl model 3560. (you can see the distance difference between the back of the hood at the windshield, to the opening for the engine compartment in the sheet metal that makes up the hood. My guess is the front lower Frame assembly is the same length, but the engine assembly mounted to the transmission is the difference in length. Therefore the axel is probably moved forward away from the FEL lower mount, and that would totally alleviate any issues with interference of the tire and the Lower FEL on either side of the tractor...

Should we upgrade?

You are NOT going to notice a 5HP difference. Go for the 4760, 5460 or keep your machine.

 

[DonaldP]

The 3560 is a 3 cylinder while the 4060 is a 4 cylinder. We wonder if we would increase fuel usage appreciably on the 4060 due to the added cylinder even though its only 5 HP more in size...? Is a 4 cylinder going to have a noticeable impact on torque and the other behaviors of the system... (Backhoe, Grapple, Bucket) considering everything else is going to be the same...


A four cylinder engine will have 25% more parts than a three cylinder engine. Any one of an engine' s parts can fail.

Considering the cost of your deluxe tractor and its low operating hours it is hard to comprehend how a minimal increase in fuel consumption, which I speculate might change from .6 gallon per hour to .7 gallon per hour, will influence your tractor operating budget significantly. Difference should be minimal as your contemplated change is from one naturally aspirated engine to another naturally aspirated engine. Going to a turbo-charged engine could increase fuel consumption to .8 gallon per hour, but with more power output and possibly more efficient mower operation.

( From my own L3560 records I consider my open station tractor operating cost to be $35/hour, but I have a big stable of implements which contribute perhaps $10/hour to tractor operating cost. With a cab and air conditioning I speculate your inclusive long term operating/depreciation cost is $30/hour.)

Running a 72" finish mower behind a cabbed tractor powering cab air conditioning I would order 45-horsepower minimum. If I contemplated mowing brush with a 72" bush hog I would order 50-horsepower minimum.

Now see... you are hitting the nail right on the head!!!

I have heard that AC can decrease HP by 5 to 10hp when its on... and in the summer on hills (only two 150 foot hills to deal with), I find myself attempting to push the seat forward help maintain speed . not that it bogs down, but it does slow down a bit.

I need to be more specific here though. I run the tractor in nothing but straight Auto Throttle Advance... that is, it drives like a Car... you push on the gas and it goes. I don't manage the throttle unless I'm using the backhoe or moving lots of dirt (usually while excavating). So given that the RPM is possibly sub 1800 to 2000 or so with the PTO engaged, there is probably a bit more top end that I could give her to make it maintain. Maybe therein lies the issue ?

You are probably very close on that $30/hr cost!!! I've paid off about $10,000 of the original $51,500 financed price of the unit. and that would work out close to that number for cost/hr.

And again you're right about the fuel usage... but I do look at refills as somewhat of a nuisance factor at times. even though I keep 2 to 4 full 5gal cans on hand depending on how much I'm using the tractor, and the season.

Really great input from you here on this.

 

[DonaldP]

You are NOT going to notice a 5HP difference. Go for the 4760, 5460 or keep your machine.

You make a ton of sense... I was looking at the specs for the tractor and am seeing that the actual increase in HP at the PTO is 4hp...

The torque goes up from 84.2 Lbf-ft to 98.5.... or 14 Lbf-ft. going to yhr 4060 from the 3560.

What I have seen locally is that the there is some inventory of the 3560 and 4060 but they may not be sharing the wealth of anything bigger as of yet. Its like playing cards... Do I hold it or throw it down!

 

[bdhsfz6]

FWIW, these are my real world experiences:

I mowed a slope with a 72" Befco 3pt mower behind my old L3010 HST. As in your case, the tractor did bog down somewhat on that hill and I had to back off on the speed to compensate. After a few years, I decided I wanted a few of the Grand L features so I traded the L3010 HST for an L3430 HST. There was a noticeable improvement when mowing with the same 72" deck. Both tractors used filled R4 tires. There was still some bogging but I could mow at a higher speed. I can't be sure however whether the improvement was due to the 3 PTO HP increase or the Grand L design. I noticed no significant difference in fuel consumption between the two 3 cylinder machines.

Two years ago, I traded the L3430 for an L6060 HST. I now mow that slope with a Land Pride 84" mower and experience no bogging at all. It's no surprise that the added 23 PTO HP made a huge difference. The trade off though is a 40% increase in fuel use.

Last December, I decided I wanted a cab and traded the mint L6060 HST with 240 hours for a new L6060 HSTC. I don't know whether it was the market or the fact that I'm a good customer but the dealer gave me 98% of the original purchase price in trade.

This was a year ago and the market is much tighter now. Every trade is different so take all this FWIW.

Unless you can afford to be without a tractor, I would take the advise of your dealer and first find a new L4060 before you sell your old one.

 

[DonaldP]

FWIW, these are my real world experiences:

I mowed a slope with a 72" Befco 3pt mower behind my old L3010 HST. As in your case, the tractor did bog down somewhat on that hill and I had to back off on the speed to compensate. After a few years, I decided I wanted a few of the Grand L features so I traded the L3010 HST for an L3430 HST. There was a noticeable improvement when mowing with the same 72" deck. Both tractors used filled R4 tires. There was still some bogging but I could mow at a higher speed. I can't be sure however whether the improvement was due to the 3 PTO HP increase or the Grand L design. I noticed no significant difference in fuel consumption between the two 3 cylinder machines.

Two years ago, I traded the L3430 for an L6060 HST. I now mow that slope with a Land Pride 84" mower and experience no bogging at all. It's no surprise that the added 23 PTO HP made a huge difference. The trade off though is a 40% increase in fuel use.

Last December, I decided I wanted a cab and traded the mint L6060 HST with 240 hours for a new L6060 HSTC. I don't know whether it was the market or the fact that I'm a good customer but the dealer gave me 98% of the original purchase price in trade.

This was a year ago and the market is much tighter now. Every trade is different so take all this FWIW.

Unless you can afford to be without a tractor, I would take the advise of your dealer and first find a new L4060 before you sell your old one.

Your personal experience is extremely VALUABLE!

Comments from others is positive as well, but your actual experiencing with probably the exact thing I would go through is priceless.

I agree that 4hp at the PTO is more than 4hp less... so there would be some gain. If everything depended on simply more HP to the PTO then it would be a close call, but I've experienced some slight degradation (IMO) to the use of the BH92 9ft backhoe that would definitely get an upgrade to the additional 1.4 Gal even though the system pressure is still the same between all the Grand L models at 256 psi. The back hoe is not pressure driven as much as flow rate (IMO). There are certain function combinations that prevent fast return or recovery when managing both sticks at the same time. so an increase in flow rate would positively impact that as well.

But like many have said, if its simply an incremental increase across the board, is it worth everything it might take to move up incrementally... over just jumping into a 50hp or larger. I really don't have a need for a monster... I could have a need for an incremental upgrade though.

Thanks you so much for commenting and being a part of the forum here!

 

[DonaldP]

Tractors are usually not referenced by year, so you ought to drop this notion of "2020", especially since that could hurt you. 470 hours is a pretty high amount of usage for a "2020" tractor in that market. In the lifetime of a Kubota, 470 hours is not a big deal at all, they should go at least 5000 hours before work is needed, but when you compare to typical hobby-farmer buyers of a L3560 and what they will put on a tractor, 470 is high for a tractor labeled as a "2020".

The recent model used tractors that sell for a hot price are ones with low hours that are "practically new" in the eyes of a buyer -- they are no-brainer alternatives to buying new and command new prices. At 470 hours, I think you are well past that honeymoon stage.

Have you sat on a 4060 and driven one? It is a much larger tractor with a completely different frame (shared with the larger Grand L models). When I was shopping all these tractors the L4060 was noticeably bigger than the L3560 when side by side and when driving them. Both great tractors but noticeably different in size.

I spec'ed these and height is the same albeit 1"

front wheels - 3560&4060 45.4" (4760 is 51.2")
Rear wheels 58.0" (4760 is 60")
Length C/L axel 3560 - 71.1", (4060 - 74.6")
Overall Length 3560 - 115.0", (4060 - 121.5

so overall 3560 to 4060
same width (roughly 2")
same height (roughtly 1")
Length 4060 3.5" wheel base longer and 6.5" body longer.

Maybe you were thinking of the 5460 with does step up to 7" wider at the front wheels, and 4" longer wheelbase but 11"longer body length?

 

[jyoutz]

Now see... you are hitting the nail right on the head!!!

I have heard that AC can decrease HP by 5 to 10hp when its on... and in the summer on hills (only two 150 foot hills to deal with), I find myself attempting to push the seat forward help maintain speed . not that it bogs down, but it does slow down a bit.

I need to be more specific here though. I run the tractor in nothing but straight Auto Throttle Advance... that is, it drives like a Car... you push on the gas and it goes. I don't manage the throttle unless I'm using the backhoe or moving lots of dirt (usually while excavating). So given that the RPM is possibly sub 1800 to 2000 or so with the PTO engaged, there is probably a bit more top end that I could give her to make it maintain. Maybe therein lies the issue ?

You are probably very close on that $30/hr cost!!! I've paid off about $10,000 of the original $51,500 financed price of the unit. and that would work out close to that number for cost/hr.

And again you're right about the fuel usage... but I do look at refills as somewhat of a nuisance factor at times. even though I keep 2 to 4 full 5gal cans on hand depending on how much I'm using the tractor, and the season.

Really great input from you here on this.

You have a nice tractor and you have a lot invested. Sell the 72” cutter, buy a 60” cutter, and all is good.

 

[shooterdon]

I am too cheap...smart?... to trade for a 5hp increase

OTOH, I may be too stupid to realize what a game changer 5hp is....lol.

 

[DonaldP]

I am too cheap...smart?... to trade for a 5hp increase

OTOH, I may be too stupid to realize what a game changer 5hp is....lol.

Don,

About a year ago I was talking to some folks here about the tractor after I had just purchased it and commented on what others thought were important to their choice in buying tractors.

A gentleman chimed in that he had purchased a 40hp unit that he used from time to time on his property for minor stuff... very minor.

Hearing that was unsettling for me. After all, I was - for the previous 2 years, all about studying how I would best fulfill everything that I could possibly use the tractor for and making determinations to skip this or add that based on what I was learning about as a newbie never owning anything like this ... a lot of that came from right here.

But this gentleman's response after I questioned the fact that he had spent so much money on something that he used so very little. Because that was what I had been working on in my head for the last 2 years...this Gentleman, so very wise and obviously much more a gentleman than I replied:

"Don, when you get to be a certain age, its not the cost. Its not how much you use it, maybe its not the color or the HP... but maybe it's having it when you want it, to do or not do whatever it is you want ... Life is short, being happy is imperative."

Now those may not be the exact words, but that's exactly what I gained from that short but wise conversation.

That concept my friend will never leave my side, and it came from this forum... awesome!!!

 

[Grandad4]

I have heard that AC can decrease HP by 5 to 10hp when its on... and in the summer on hills (only two 150 foot hills to deal with), I find myself attempting to push the seat forward help maintain speed . not that it bogs down, but it does slow down a bit.

I need to be more specific here though. I run the tractor in nothing but straight Auto Throttle Advance... that is, it drives like a Car... you push on the gas and it goes. I don't manage the throttle unless I'm using the backhoe or moving lots of dirt (usually while excavating). So given that the RPM is possibly sub 1800 to 2000 or so with the PTO engaged, there is probably a bit more top end that I could give her to make it maintain.

This brings up a recurring topic regarding HST drive tractors. The foot pedal acts like the gas pedal in a car, but is is NOT the same thing. In a car, the accelerator raises engine rpm to go faster; the foot pedal in a conventional HST tractor doesn't change engine speed but does change the "gear ratio" of the transmission to produce faster ground speed. As with any transmission, gear or hydraulic when you have more speed there is less pulling power. So, when you're heading up the hill and the engine starts to work harder, keeping the HST pedal to the floor is exactly backwards of what to do. You want to BACK OFF the foot pedal some, bringing the HST into a "lower gear" so the engine does't need to work as hard getting up the hill. I haven't run the advanced HST's, such as what you have, but suppose that when the Auto throttle has raised the engine throttle all the way, it's still up you to realize that backing off the foot pedal and slowing down a bit is the best way to get up the hill, that is if you know what you are doing.

If you are not doing it that way, I would seriously suggest a little time spent perfecting your driving technique before throwing money at the situation by replacing the tractor.

 

[s219]

I spec'ed these and height is the same albeit 1"

front wheels - 3560&4060 45.4" (4760 is 51.2")
Rear wheels 58.0" (4760 is 60")
Length C/L axel 3560 - 71.1", (4060 - 74.6")
Overall Length 3560 - 115.0", (4060 - 121.5

so overall 3560 to 4060
same width (roughly 2")
same height (roughtly 1")
Length 4060 3.5" wheel base longer and 6.5" body longer.

Maybe you were thinking of the 5460 with does step up to 7" wider at the front wheels, and 4" longer wheelbase but 11"longer body length?

The L3560 has a unique smaller chassis that is much different from all the other Grand L models. It's quite a bit smaller fundamentally even though the overall dimensions may appear close. The chassis itself is over 6" shorter than the next model L4060.

From the L4060 on up, it's a much larger chassis and tractor. L4060/4760 are identical chassis. L5060/5460/6060 are identical chassis. I seem to recall hearing that all of the L4060-6060 were actually the same chassis at some fundamental level but with minor variations on the bigger series. Someone else can probably confirm.

Anyhow, there is a big leap in chassis size from the L3560 to all the other Grand L models. When I was finally able to drive an L3560 and L4060 side by side, I was genuinely surprised at the leap between those two models. Overall the L4060 was a no brainer from a cost standpoint, but it would have been too large for my uses. If size or maneuverability is a factor in your case, then definitely get your butt in the seat of a 4060 before pulling the trigger. It really is quite a bit bigger than your L3560.

 

[bdhsfz6]

This brings up a recurring topic regarding HST drive tractors. The foot pedal acts like the gas pedal in a car, but is is NOT the same thing. In a car, the accelerator raises engine rpm to go faster; the foot pedal in a conventional HST tractor doesn't change engine speed but does change the "gear ratio" of the transmission to produce faster ground speed. As with any transmission, gear or hydraulic when you have more speed there is less pulling power. So, when you're heading up the hill and the engine starts to work harder, keeping the HST pedal to the floor is exactly backwards of what to do. You want to BACK OFF the foot pedal some, bringing the HST into a "lower gear" so the engine does't need to work as hard getting up the hill. I haven't run the advanced HST's, such as what you have, but suppose that when the Auto throttle has raised the engine throttle all the way, it's still up you to realize that backing off the foot pedal and slowing down a bit is the best way to get up the hill, that is if you know what you are doing.

If you are not doing it that way, I would seriously suggest a little time spent perfecting your driving technique before throwing money at the situation by replacing the tractor.

Most Grand L Kubota tractors have auto throttle advance and stall guard features that minimize this problem.

 

[nybirdman]

I went from a L3130 open station HST to a cabbed L4240 HST;so similar to what you are thinking;big difference in power but I kept all of my implements that were sized for the smaller machine.No problem.I did upgrade to a 6'brush-hog but kept the 5'.
In your case I would look bigger;L4760 and up.