2005 Kubota FEL and BH FAIR DEAL ?

[LD1]

Then explain why my Farmall cub cub with HP rating of 10HP can pull my landscape trailer with 1200 to 1500 pounds no sweat but my 24HP craftsman lawn tractor will burn out if I try and pull 500 with it. Both gas engines. The Briggs on that Craftsman won't do it because of the absence its torque capability or if you want to say less power. If I put that 24hp Briggs on that Cub it might work for a few hours if geared accordingly but will be toast in no time. Once again, both gas engines, so splain it to me Lucy, how can that be?

The only time HP meets torque is at 5250 RPM's. Way below these engines capabilities.

Torque is the static measurement of how much work an engine does, while power is a measure of how fast the work is being done. Since horsepower is calculated from torque, what we are all seeking is the greatest-possible torque value over the broadest-possible rpm range. Horsepower will follow suit, and it will fall in the engine speed range dictated by the many factors that affect the torque curve. I agree here

Engine designs are what go into all this. The cylinder size and bore and stroke lengths start to Both come into play. It's not all about "HP" IMO. It is about what the engine can do.

For starters, your farmall CUB is rated at 10HP drawbar, which is probabally more like 15HP at the engine. But that aside, your CUB is rated at only 1600RPM. The Brigs is probabally rated @ at least double that. Slow the Brigs down to 1600RPM and I am sure it has less HP than your Cub. If it didn't, obviously the torque would be exactally the same, simple mathematics.

But your example is covering BROAD ranve in RPM's. Since most new CUT run at nearly the same RPM across ALL Mfgs, if HP is the same, torque will also be the same.

But lets break down the fundamental deffination of HP and TQ.

Torque is how much work CAN be done.
HP is how fast it can do that work.

HP cannot be changed. Whatever the engine makes is its MAX. Torque however can be changed with gearing.

Trucks (average 1/2 ton and 3/4ton) have an average overall gear reduction of ~10:1. So If you have a P/U with 300HP/300TQ, you can esentally put ~3000ft-lbs to the ground.

Tractors on the other hand have an overally reduction in the 150:1 ballpark. So lets say a 40HP/100TQ tractor. It can put down ~15000ft-lbs to the ground (traction aside). There fore, it can absolutly pull more in a brute pulling contest. But if you geared it to run 55MPH, there is no chance of it pulling a 7k trailer at that speed like the truck. Because it lacks the overall HP.

Torque can always be changed with gearing. Simply be selecting a different gearbox, or different gear in the tranny, to accomplish what needs done. But HP remains constant. It is simply an equation of torque and RPM. Higher HP means more work dont in a given amount of time. So a higher HP engine can do more work in a given time. But higher torque can do more work at once, just at a slower pace.


And since earlier you mentioned that the "old Iron" had more torque, I looked up a few examples on tractordata.

Tractor........CI.............HP.............TQ
Ford 611.....134............48.4..........126.8
MF 135.......152............45.8..........121.7
JD4320.......149............48.1...........127

Ford 811.....172............62.6...........166
MF 165.......203............58.3...........169
Case JX70...179............62..............184

MF 185........248...........75..............292
JD 5075M......186..........75..............300

So I fail to see where the old Iron has more torque in a given HP class. Even when in some of the cases, the old iron has way more CI's. Like the MF185 and MF165.

And you still didn't explain how the 3130 makes more torque than the 3700??

The point I am trying to make is that tractors today all operate in roughly the same RPM range across the MFG's. So two tractors rated at The same HP and same RPM, torque is a spec that is not needed. Sure they can have slightly different characteristics under the curve, But not any that amount to meaningful differences. And with tractors have 150:1 gear reduction, torque is plentiful in the right gear. But HP doesnt change just by picking a higher or lower gear, that is why HP is more important. So IMO, HP and traction (tractor weight) are BOTH more important than torque when deciding which tractor can pull what and how fast.

 

[teg]

Looked at JD 4105 again :licking: , its BIG , but like new !!! Been thinking ALL day , I am ONLY going to buy a L3400 or larger . I must have HST :thumbsup:. So I guess I am going to keep looking . :confused2: Thanks for all the HELP :thumbsup:

So, you are not planning to buy the L3130 with the backhoe??? Want to spill the beans on where it's located???

 

[goochy]

Craigslist Huntsvillie Alabama

 

[ejkessler]

For starters, your farmall CUB is rated at 10HP drawbar, which is probabally more like 15HP at the engine. But that aside, your CUB is rated at only 1600RPM. The Brigs is probabally rated @ at least double that. Slow the Brigs down to 1600RPM and I am sure it has less HP than your Cub. If it didn't, obviously the torque would be exactally the same, simple mathematics.
If HP is HP than how can your statement be true. If you slow down the RPM's you lose HP? That very statement defeats your argument. I thought a 15HP was a 15HP engine and a 24HP engine is a 24HP engine according to you. You say below you can change the torque but the HP can not be changed

But your example is covering BROAD ranve in RPM's. Since most new CUT run at nearly the same RPM across ALL Mfgs, if HP is the same, torque will also be the same.

But lets break down the fundamental deffination of HP and TQ.

Torque is how much work CAN be done.
HP is how fast it can do that work.
There is a direct relationship between horsepower and torque. You can convert torque to horsepower with the following equation:

HP = Torque * RPM / 5,252
HP cannot be changed. Whatever the engine makes is its MAX. Torque however can be changed with gearing.

There are three variables that affect torque:

* The size of the piston face
* The amount of pressure that the ignited fuel applies to the face of the piston
* The distance the piston travels on each stroke (therefore the diameter of the crankshaft). The bigger the diameter of the crankshaft, the bigger the lever arm and therefore the more torque.

Hence the design of the engine comes into play.



Trucks (average 1/2 ton and 3/4ton) have an average overall gear reduction of ~10:1. So If you have a P/U with 300HP/300TQ, you can esentally put ~3000ft-lbs to the ground.

Tractors on the other hand have an overally reduction in the 150:1 ballpark. So lets say a 40HP/100TQ tractor. It can put down ~15000ft-lbs to the ground (traction aside). There fore, it can absolutly pull more in a brute pulling contest. But if you geared it to run 55MPH, there is no chance of it pulling a 7k trailer at that speed like the truck. Because it lacks the overall HP.

Torque can always be changed with gearing. Simply be selecting a different gearbox, or different gear in the tranny, to accomplish what needs done. But HP remains constant. It is simply an equation of torque and RPM. Higher HP means more work dont in a given amount of time. So a higher HP engine can do more work in a given time. But higher torque can do more work at once, just at a slower pace.


And since earlier you mentioned that the "old Iron" had more torque, I looked up a few examples on tractordata.

Tractor........CI.............HP.............TQ
Ford 611.....134............48.4..........126.8
MF 135.......152............45.8..........121.7
JD4320.......149............48.1...........127

Ford 811.....172............62.6...........166
MF 165.......203............58.3...........169
Case JX70...179............62..............184

MF 185........248...........75..............292
JD 5075M......186..........75..............300

So I fail to see where the old Iron has more torque in a given HP class. Even when in some of the cases, the old iron has way more CI's. Like the MF185 and MF165.

And you still didn't explain how the 3130 makes more torque than the 3700??

The point I am trying to make is that tractors today all operate in roughly the same RPM range across the MFG's. So two tractors rated at The same HP and same RPM, torque is a spec that is not needed. Sure they can have slightly different characteristics under the curve, But not any that amount to meaningful differences. And with tractors have 150:1 gear reduction, torque is plentiful in the right gear. But HP doesnt change just by picking a higher or lower gear, that is why HP is more important. So IMO, HP and traction (tractor weight) are BOTH more important than torque when deciding which tractor can pull what and how fast.

Well I disagree, the torque spec tells me if the engine is designed for harder work which is why diesel rigs use that determination or spec all the time. Choose what you want to determine your decision and I will use mine. I will prefer an engine that has as we commonly stated back in the day has more low end torque. That in my perception and what I state here has a lot to do with intrinsic engine design. That's what's important to me but not obviously you. For me there are engine designs that are better designed for hard work than others. My choice would be the 3130 over the 3700 for a number of reasons, just by looking at the loader and attachment specs and the additional weight, and what I perceive to be a work horse design, but that would be me.

 

[goochy]

even more lost now :confused2:


The L3130 is a GRAND L and the L3700 is reg .

 

[LD1]

[/B]
Well I disagree, the torque spec tells me if the engine is designed for harder work which is why diesel rigs use that determination or spec all the time. Choose what you want to determine your decision and I will use mine. I will prefer an engine that has as we commonly stated back in the day has more low end torque. That in my perception and what I state here has a lot to do with intrinsic engine design. That's what's important to me but not obviously you. For me there are engine designs that are better designed for hard work than others. My choice would be the 3130 over the 3700 for a number of reasons, just by looking at the loader and attachment specs and the additional weight, and what I perceive to be a work horse design, but that would be me.

You took my "HP cannot be changed" statement out of context.

Obviously HP changes as RPM changes. Typically, the faster you rev, the more HP you make. and vice versa.

What I am saying is you have to take the system as a WHOLE. Meaning engine, transmission, AND final drive. Whatever the MAX HP the engine makes, no combination of gearing or tire size is going to increase that.

But the MAX torque of an engine is NO indication of torque to the ground. You have to plug in the gear reduction. And since tractors have gobs of reduction, engine torque is NOT and accurate indication of how much torque is being put to the ground. An old 8n ford has a pretty steep first gear and taller tires than my kubota. My first gear is about half the speed as an 8n. So even if that "old iron" makes more torque at the engine, I am putting more to the ground through gear reduction.

If the only torque that means anything to me would be RWTQ and NOT engine torque.

But bottom line is that HP is a measure of speed and how fast you can get the work done. Torque is how much work CAN be done regardless of speed. The example of your cub. Put a 5' belly mower on it and see if it can mow 10+MPH like a 24HP ZTR without bogging down. Of course it cant. Because HP is a measure of speed.

I agree with you that a higher torque engine is designed for harder work. BUT, with higher torque, you get higher HP to boot. And for the sake of this thread and argument, all modern CUT's engines' are designed very similary. And in general, it is fair to say that the tractor with more HP will have more TQ, plain and simple.

AND I will disagree with you on your engine design theory. This has been debated at length MANY times over. Longer stroke and smaller bore doesnt automatically mean more torque.

If you have two engines with identical CI's, but one is an oversquare engine (short stroke, large bore) and one is an undersquare (long stroke, small bore).

The oversquare engine has a greater surface area it is pushing on, AND since it is a smaller stroke, the mechanical advantage it has to turn the crank IS less, BUT since the piston is proportionally larger, it is pushing with more force.

An undersquare engine is applying its force over a smaller piston, but has greater mechanical advantage to turn the crank, but since the piston is smaller, is pushing with less force.

In the end, it is a wash. There are far more important factors that decide the torque of an engine. Like compression ratio, volume of air (head/valve design), NA or forced induction, etc.

Typically, the undersquare engine will make peak torque at a lower RPM and an over square will make it at a higher RPM, but that doesnt mean that one will make more than the other.

In my previous post, comparing some of the "old iron" to newer tractors where I showed you that the old iron does NOT make more TQ, I didn't include the peak torque RPM in there. But guess what, they were ALL between 1300 rpm and 1600rpm. So even the argument that "old iron" makes more torque down low is NOT valid.

 

[goochy]

:ashamed::ashamed: I bought a 2008 John Deere 4105 , 278 Hrs , 300cx quick attatch loader and quick attach bucket , HST . Looks almost new !!

 

[LD1]

PICTURES???????????????????????

 

[goochy]

PICTURES???????????????????????

Report coming next month !! I pick it up Sat .

 

[LD1]

Very NICE:thumbsup:

Congradulations.