4820 vs 5520 (DPF)
- Thread starter GT3 Mike
- Start date
Slowpoke Slim
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 3,760
- Location
- Bismarck, ND
- Tractor
- Husqvarna YTH24V48 riding mower, Branson 3725CH
Both tractors are the same in respect to both questions. Same emissions on both, and same weight.
By the time you add a loader to each and ballast in the rear tires, both will be over the weight rating on your trailer. Plus whatever implement you have on the 3 pt hitch.
This is overweight on my trailer too. Not to mention over length (18 foot trailer). I do put a flag on the back. Notice the cheap Harbor Freight jack stands I set under the back of the trailer when loading or unloading (I just put the ramps away from loading, and hadn't chained it down yet or taken the jack stands out). I also hadn't put a shot of air in my air bags on the truck yet (F-250).
As the tractor sits in that picture, it weighs 7100 lbs. Trailer weighs 1900 lbs. Yes, it's overweight (by 1000 lbs), no I shouldn't be hauling it this way. Trailer brakes work well and it will stop just as well as the truck would by itself.
It "works", and I'm getting by with it. All of my trips with it have been short hauls and on flat ground. Doesn't make it right though.
A gooseneck equipment trailer has been on my Christmas list for a while now, but Santa keeps bringing me coal instead.
CloverKnollFarms
Elite Member
I’ve got the 4820 and love it. I do a lot of PTO work
I my opinion the turbo failure rate is way over stated. Especially in tractors/equipment where the boost pressure is very low. Almost everyone I've seen failed on cars or trucks was from using crap oil or running with a boost leak that then overspins the turbo because it can't reach desired psi.
Torvy
Super Member
Thanks for the lead in @2manyrocks.
Yes, I went for the T574H (close cousin to the 5520). I preferred the creature comfort/quality of life stuff on it versus the 20 series. Both are great and use the same engine. Just a preference thing for me...3pt adjust lever in the back, 3rd function valve buttons pre-built into joystick, 2 sets of rear remotes standard.
I went turbo because of the low additional cost for extra HP. Some pto implements I am going to need want a bunch (chipper, for example). I don't like running out of spec or on the margins if I can help it. Spinning down the turbo is no big deal to me. I use that time to go over my 'post-flight' checklist and listening to the engine is part of that. I originally thought I would get the T494H but it really came down to a nice boost in HP for a small bump in price.
I'm not using it to make a living, so I decided I can wait on repairs and am willing to pay someone else to trailer it. I intentionally got a trailer that cannot haul it....that and as mentioned, you start to get a big trailer with a big load and for me it meant a bigger truck. That was out of budget scope. YMMV.
Yes, I went for the T574H (close cousin to the 5520). I preferred the creature comfort/quality of life stuff on it versus the 20 series. Both are great and use the same engine. Just a preference thing for me...3pt adjust lever in the back, 3rd function valve buttons pre-built into joystick, 2 sets of rear remotes standard.
I went turbo because of the low additional cost for extra HP. Some pto implements I am going to need want a bunch (chipper, for example). I don't like running out of spec or on the margins if I can help it. Spinning down the turbo is no big deal to me. I use that time to go over my 'post-flight' checklist and listening to the engine is part of that. I originally thought I would get the T494H but it really came down to a nice boost in HP for a small bump in price.
I'm not using it to make a living, so I decided I can wait on repairs and am willing to pay someone else to trailer it. I intentionally got a trailer that cannot haul it....that and as mentioned, you start to get a big trailer with a big load and for me it meant a bigger truck. That was out of budget scope. YMMV.
Thanks for the info. I have a 22' Rice Hauler. I only will have the Tractor/Loader on it at most. Only really need to move it a couple miles from my house to my pole barn. I more or less was asking because I might have to pick it up and bring it home, which is about a 40 mile trip. Im going to try and have them deliver it to me as part of the deal.
I am in the same boat as you. I may end up looking at the T574H because I mostly will be using it to move boat trailers around and the 3pt lever at the back would be extremely handy ! I also agree that at this dollar amount, the cost of the extra HP from the turbo motor is not really that big. I don't even need a 20 series tractor but I would rather over buy right now and never have to buy or upgrade again.
Torvy
Super Member
My guess (hope?) Is that when they next 'upgrade' models they will merge the two. The 4820/494 and 5520/574 would become a new model with all the best features of both lines. If they do that and keep the parts in production, I think they will be golden. They already share engines.
If you look at how they have done the merger, they have included the Kukje tech and branded it TYM. They not only acquired Branson US facilities, but are expanding. I don't think they will abandon that base, but will evolve...just like all brands. Remember, TYM started this purchase in 2016. They could have just taken the Kukje engine patents and production and shuttered the rest. They seem to be playing a long game and it looks promising.
If you look at how they have done the merger, they have included the Kukje tech and branded it TYM. They not only acquired Branson US facilities, but are expanding. I don't think they will abandon that base, but will evolve...just like all brands. Remember, TYM started this purchase in 2016. They could have just taken the Kukje engine patents and production and shuttered the rest. They seem to be playing a long game and it looks promising.
2manyrocks
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2007
- Messages
- 7,352
When two companies merge, it can be difficult to predict where things will end up.
Logically, it would be more efficient if they produce tractors with the most similar components, but allow for upscaling at minimal cost. The most obvious is sharing the 48hp engine among the T474 and T494, but then adding the turbo for the T574.
If the Bransons were made on entirely separate production lines, they probably have to figure what efficiencies can be gained by streamlining production vs continuing to produce and sell the Branson models including future parts distribution.
How this plays into continued production of the Bransons probably depends on some internal cost/benefit analysis. If TYM/Branson dealers are pleading with corporate for more Bransons to sell, that would be influential. They will certainly want to look at what sells and what continues to be profitable.
All that to say, I don't know.
Logically, it would be more efficient if they produce tractors with the most similar components, but allow for upscaling at minimal cost. The most obvious is sharing the 48hp engine among the T474 and T494, but then adding the turbo for the T574.
If the Bransons were made on entirely separate production lines, they probably have to figure what efficiencies can be gained by streamlining production vs continuing to produce and sell the Branson models including future parts distribution.
How this plays into continued production of the Bransons probably depends on some internal cost/benefit analysis. If TYM/Branson dealers are pleading with corporate for more Bransons to sell, that would be influential. They will certainly want to look at what sells and what continues to be profitable.
All that to say, I don't know.