2WD HP vs MFWD HP

[bdog]

I know that everyone recommends a MFWD when using a loader. This is obviously because with a load in the bucket the load gets transferred off the rear wheels and onto the front and if you have 2WD this is no good. Also most tractors will break traction before they run out of HP so 4WD is better than two.

My question is how would you equate the two. For example would a 55 HP 2WD outperform a 45 HP 4WD? If you were trying to compare two tractors one 2WD and one 4WD how much more HP would the 2WD need to be equal to the 4WD? I know there are a lot of variables and under certain situations like in mud a 4WD will always be better but in general how would you compare them?

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Quick answer, NO. I would not even look at a 55hp 2WD vs a 45hp MFWD. Actually though, if we are talking new tractors here, I would not even look at any 2WD machines, but that is just me.

Weight, not hp is what is going to get the 2WD tractor closer to the MFWD tractor.

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

You could have 10 times the horsepower, but if the rear wheels are 1/4 inch off the ground, or spinning in deep mud what good is it?

More power doesnt equal more traction

 

[brandoro]

Landpride gives HP ratings for some of their implements for 2wd and 4wd.
For instance:
http://www.landpride.com/ari/attach/lp/public/specs/305-083s.pdf

 

[RoyJackson]

A key point would be how the tractor is ballasted (as far as keeping traction at the rear tires).
One big advantage of the MFWD over 2WD is ease of steering (make sure you have those front tires pumped up though).

With a CUT, MFWD is essential. Although MFWD would be preferable, a large utility tractor could do the job with 2WD. Most of the large UT with loaders I've seen around here (rural PA) are 2 wheel drive machines

 

[JoeinTX]

"Weight, not hp is what is going to get the 2WD tractor closer to the MFWD tractor....."

Agree 100%

FWD is nice, nothing wrong with it, don't have myself. But, the ultimate measure of a rig is how much engine power it can transfer to the ground efficiently.....2wd........4wd......heavy......light......etc. No perfect match or formula.

A lot depends upon the operator's ability to use his tractor and know a thing or two about it, the ground they're working, and the implements they're using. NEVER underestimate this. One tractor can do a number of things in one driver's hands that it can't in anothers. Vice Versa. There is no magic formula. There is no explaining those realities either. You either know how to figure it or you don't......pure and square.

 

[oldnslo]

Properly weighted in good footing a 100 HP is about the limit you can utilize efficiently on a 2WD tractor. MFWA adds about 25% or 125 HP.

Agree with the others that how well your tractor is weighted is the key.

Roy

 

[bdog]

You could have 10 times the horsepower, but if the rear wheels are 1/4 inch off the ground, or spinning in deep mud what good is it?

More power doesnt equal more traction

I agree 100% and I agree with what others are saying in that traction not HP is the key but at some point the extra weight of the higher HP 2WD tractor will equate to more traction or power to the ground than a smaller 4WD tractor.

I had two tractors a 125 HP 2WD JD 4430 and a 47 HP 4WD Branson. There was no comparison in what the two could do. Obviously they are very different tractors one weighed probably 4,000 lbs and the other 12,000 lbs and had more than double the HP. It just got me to thinking about how to equate them.

If you were doing a task like moving round bales, at some HP point a 2WD tractor would have enough weight that it really would not matter much if it had a round bale hanging off the front.

The landpride chart gives about 20% extra to a MFWD and oldnslo said about 25%. these seem to be good numbers.

 

[Duffster]

One has to keep in mind that not all tractor work is traction based.

A 100hp MFWD tractor will be similar money as a 125hp 2wd tractor and may do similar work in the field (I don't fully buy that claim) but the 2wd drive will excel at PTO work and be cheaper to run as a road tractor.

 

[wvpolekat]

Terrain is also very important. Add a hill and a 100hp 2wd may not be able to pull itself up the hill where a 25hm MFWD will motor right up it. Same goes for vehicles in snow. 2wd works OK in snow, until you need that little bit more traction to go up even a slight hill.

 

[art]

The two wheel drive tractor is about 20% off of a four wheel drive for load on the average. That is figuring on normal conditions not working in wet conditions or hills.

Two wheel drive tractors are ballasted different normally at a 75-25 ratio vs a 35-40 front 60-65% rear. That is what we look at when setting up tractors for optimum overall performance.

The optimum performance is setting the tractor up for what it will be doing the most of the time. Many people over weight their tractors for a few isolated jobs and then go out and buy a bigger one because they feel cheated on the horsepower for some of their chores.

On solid going with proper ballast there is really little difference in the two wheel drives pulling power vs the four wheel drive. Get them onto a field of loose dirt or on snow and wet ground and you could get to a 50% difference or a situation where "if only I had four wheel drive"!

 

[wolc123]

The case of the front loader is an obvious slam-dunk in favor of the 4wd, on that I am sure we all agree. Another task where the 4wd enjoys just as big an advantage, is pulling a disc. Here, the ground is always loose and pushing that "dead" front axle thru that loose ground wastes a tremendous amount of energy. Where this really shows up is fuel usage, and a 2wd tractor will use about 1/3 more fuel for this job. With 2wd, ballast is critical, and different for every implement. With 4wd, it dont mean much. I love to leave the loader on my 2wd when discing so I can push or pull my self out of the mud if I loose traction. I would not dream of discing with a loader on a 2wd.

 

[eatenabean]

I bought my tractor based on HP and what I wanted to do with it. I like FWD just to have, you never know. Just like my Truck I can count on my hand how many time I have put it in FWD. But the times I have used it, I was glad I had it.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

 

[bdog]

Good replies and good points. I still think many of you are just comparing 2wd vs 4wd on the same tractor though. Let me throw out there a specific scenario. All the tasks I need to do I can do with a 45 hp 4wd. I want a tractor with a cab. During my shopping I found a 45 hp 4wd with cab and loader and then a 95 hp 2wd with cab an loader that is the same manufacturer, same year, and within 100 hrs of the 45 hp. The 95 hp is $6000 cheaper. I don't need 95 hp, but I got to thinking that this tractor should be able to outperform the 45hp 4wd shouldn't it? My land is flat as a pancake and no trees or tight spots to manuever in so size is not a problem.

 

[RoyJackson]

Good replies and good points. I still think many of you are just comparing 2wd vs 4wd on the same tractor though. Let me throw out there a specific scenario. All the tasks I need to do I can do with a 45 hp 4wd. I want a tractor with a cab. During my shopping I found a 45 hp 4wd with cab and loader and then a 95 hp 2wd with cab an loader that is the same manufacturer, same year, and within 100 hrs of the 45 hp. The 95 hp is $6000 cheaper. I don't need 95 hp, but I got to thinking that this tractor should be able to outperform the 45hp 4wd shouldn't it? My land is flat as a pancake and no trees or tight spots to manuever in so size is not a problem.

A lot of how well it performs will be up to the operator. You'll have to ensure the tractor is ballasted adequately for loader operations. And you'll have to use a modicum of common sense.

 

[Duffster]

Good replies and good points. I still think many of you are just comparing 2wd vs 4wd on the same tractor though. Let me throw out there a specific scenario. All the tasks I need to do I can do with a 45 hp 4wd. I want a tractor with a cab. During my shopping I found a 45 hp 4wd with cab and loader and then a 95 hp 2wd with cab an loader that is the same manufacturer, same year, and within 100 hrs of the 45 hp. The 95 hp is $6000 cheaper. I don't need 95 hp, but I got to thinking that this tractor should be able to outperform the 45hp 4wd shouldn't it? My land is flat as a pancake and no trees or tight spots to manuever in so size is not a problem.

Yes

 

[roger 4400]

Hi. Don,t forget that a 95 hp will be hard on fuel compare to a 45 HP....and also think that braking with a 4 wd when you have a full load bucket is a lot more efficent because you brake on 4 wheels..:thumbsup:.. Yes tractors only have brake on the rear wheels but when you have less traction on your rear wheels (on 2 wd) because of your bucket load, that also mean less braking...but with a 4 wd braking is on front wheel also ( via the driving shaft).. good luck on your decision. Roger

 

[wolc123]

Also consider that demand for a 95hp, 2wd tractor is many times less than for a 45 hp, 4wd tractor. That has a major effect on resale value as you see now in the current price difference and that will only increase in the future as fuel gets more expensive and big 2wd's become even more unattractrive.

 

[Duffster]

Also consider that demand for a 95hp, 2wd tractor is many times less than for a 45 hp, 4wd tractor. That has a major effect on resale value as you see now in the current price difference and that will only increase in the future as fuel gets more expensive and big 2wd's become even more unattractrive.

Not around here.

 

[om21braz]

Last year I saw a local farmer pull into a wetter than optimum field to disc it. He was on a Kubota M6800 MFWD. He barely got started and the rear end started down. He raised the disc unit, then machine came to standstill and started spinning. He proceeded to engage 4WD, it was moving again and he lowered the discs, continued working. Without 4WD, he was stuck - no matter the HP. A heavier machine may have been stuck worse or kept moving, hard to say. Good Luck in your decision making !