5103 vs. 5105

[CWP37]

I got this quote on a 5103:

5103/512 loader/arm rests/horizontal exhaust/sealed tires - $17800
Armstrong Loader Bale Spear - $350
JD MX6 - $2200
Frontier Rear Blade RB2072 - $500
Frontier Landscape Rake LR2072 - $490
Imatch - $225
FEL Toothbar - $400
20 Foot Gooseneck $3000

My question is, should I spend a little more and get a 5105 or 5105 4WD? How much more would I be spending? Would it be worth it to get the synchro tranny and quick detach loader?

 

[lgcivttu]

Probably depends how much foward and backward on the roll shifting you'll be doing and how much you'll take the loader off. If the answer is seldom, then the answer is $6500 and probably not.

 

[joe_ferrari]

I don't think the transmission in the 5105 vs 5103 is a big trade off comparing the two machines. The MFWD with the 5105 will set you back more money, but it really enhances the loader. If you are going to do a lot of serious loader work, consider the 5105 MFWD.

I have a 5205 MFWD and it really is strong with the loader. I dug a 38x45 basement an average about 5' deep (walk out on one side) in about 10 hours. It worked the machine, but I got er done.

Joe

 

[Turkflyer]

The quiktach 520 loader will fit the 5103 perfectly if you do a lot of work and need to remove it often. 95% of all people seldom remove them. The 5103 is a lot stronger machine, if you need that. It is designed for up to 85 engine hp, where the 5x05 series is designed for 50 engine hp. The 5x05 series has the MFWD and syncro. The marketing department made your choices tough ones by setting it up this way.

 

[HillbillyFarmer]

I have a 5205 MFWD and it really is strong with the loader. I dug a 38x45 basement an average about 5' deep (walk out on one side) in about 10 hours. It worked the machine, but I got er done.

Joe

That's impressive Joe. I've got a 5205 with a 522 loader and I'm quite sure that in the rocky soil we have around here, I could not have done that. . . but I did level a spot that was +32" for our 16' round pool this spring!

 

[joe_ferrari]

All sand with a little clay here. I don't think I dug up one rock. Attached is a picture

Joe

 

[unreconstructed]

I agonized over that same issue and settled on the 03 and kept the extra money. I suppose if I had 4wd I would say don't get the 03, but I don't know the difference so have gotten along just fine. The 03 has plenty of power and is a heavier machine as one of the posters stated. Just depends on your druthers and your pocket book. I did get an extra bucket for my 512 loader--the materials handling bucket which holds about a yard. If you are hauling off prickley pear, it cuts the trips in half.

 

[unreconstructed]

Hey Chip,

I just got a JD sales brochure in the mail and it had a blurb about the new 5403. I think this new tractor has been discussed on TBN already. You might want to look at it before you pull the trigger on a 5103 or and 05 series. The 5403 I believe is on the same frame as the other 03 but has more hp and is available with 4wd. I am not sure whether it has the same collar shift tranny or something different. I am sure someone more knowledgable can speak to this.

 

[unreconstructed]

Just found the 5403 on JD site--does not appear is available with MFWD. My mistake.

 

[CWP37]

It appears that the 5403 is the same tractor with more HP. A 5103 has all the HP I'll need for my 13 acres, I guess I'm just worried I'll later regret not getting a hydro or a shuttle shift. I really doubt I'd regret not being able to detach the loader. I'm too lazy to constantly take it on and off anyways. I've also noticed that it's easy to find loader work detours while you're hogging.

I still have the rest of the year to mull it over.