5225 or 5303

bairman · Sep 6, 2008

I went yesterday to pick up a 5303 mfwd from the dealer to demo, but when I got there I noticed a 5225 mfwd they had. Both are rental tractors with few hours on them. The 5303 was a plain jane with not many options other than the one rear remote, and the mid mount with joystick, but I liked the pto hp it had. The 5225 just caught my eye the way it looked. It appears to be a more modern tractor. It had the telescoping draft links, and had the mid mount with the new joy stick, and it also had two rear scvs on it. The dealer said the 5225 would take the 542 loader, while the 5303 takes the 522. They appear to be about the same size (both have same size tires on them), but looking at the books it appears the 5225 weighs a little bit more. I brought the 5225 home instead and tried it out some today. It is a good running tractor, but it feels like to me it is lacking the hp i need to run my 840 dual wheel woods brush bull cutter, or is it just me being spoiled from my old 5400 tractor that had 60hp. I can not make my mind up on which tractor to get. The 5225 has more goodies on it, but only has 45 pto hp. The 5303 has 55 pto hp, but is just a plain tractor. They are wanting $20,000 for the 5225, and $18150 for the 5303, plus $778 for the draft links, which puts me with in 1000 of each other. Is it possible to have the hp turned up on the 5225? I think I still might get the 5303 and demo it also. Both are being sold as new tractors at reduced prices. Any feed back to help out would be greatly appreciated.

AKfish · Sep 6, 2008

Sounds like that 10hp at the PTO makes a real difference to your needs. But, the creature comforts of the 5225 are a strong point.

The 542 FEL is alot more loader than the 522. So, there's some $$$ differences as well as performance.

Is the 5225 tranny a 12x12 power-reverser? If so, there's some added performance (and cost) over the 9x3 on the 5303. Having the added flexibility of the transmission for field work can be a real improvement in getting the job done in less time.

But, a better comparison might be the 5325 vs the 5303. Or, the 5225 vs the 5203.

More apples to apples and you can better judge whether or not the tranny, FEL, SCV options, etc. are worth the extra $$$ and it's not a simple question of hp to run your mower.

My $0.02.

AKfish

bairman · Sep 7, 2008

They both have the 9/3 syncshuttle transmission. There is no doubt the 5325 would be better but they do not have one.

tjkadar · Sep 8, 2008

I believe the 5225 and 5325 use the same motor. It is likely you can turn a 5225 into a 5325, but I do not know what that would entail. I have heard of a 5425 being turned into a 5525 with some new parts - injector pump, injectors, etc. Not sure how cost effective that would be though.

Turkeyman · Sep 8, 2008

There is a 5325 at a dealer in Scranton, FWD, power revereser, loader package with 131 hours. I assume you want FWD? you may want to look at Machine Finder too. I wonder how the torque is on those 2 tractors.
My 4720 is 50 pto hp but only has 120 lbs of torque while a 5325 is only 55 pto hp but has 180 lbs of torque.

unreconstructed · Sep 10, 2008

I have one of the older 5203 in 2WD with crash box tranny. I have just bot a 5325 but have not got to use it in the field.

I kept the 5203 and really like it. However, the 5X25's are heavier tractors with more hydraulic capability. Unless something has changed, you can only get one rear remote with a loader on the 5X03. Without the loader you can get two. My 5325 has three rear remotes. Seems like the 5325 in 4wd is about 1800 lbs heavier than the 5203 in 2WD.

These two machines compared have altogether different feels to me and as another poster said the 542 is much more loader. They do look similar in size sitting side by side, but I think that is deceiving.

Have not operated one of the 5X03 in 4WD and as I said have not gotten to work the 5325 so I cannot say for sure one over the other. The 5203 was a good starter tractor for me, after being gone from the farm for 40 years, but I can say now that I have refined what I want in a tractor, I would pick the 5325 over the 5203 in the configuration that I own them if I knew then what I know now. (that was a mouthful--sorry). My 5325 has the power reverser also. I definitely bought the 5235 to upgrade the tranny to the 12x12 power reverser as I seem to find more loader projects.

You may have more torque with the 5225 over the 5303--I don't know. If PTO horses are equal, I guess you are looking at more rear remote potential, a little heavier tractor, and a stronger loader with the 5225 for a 1000 bucks. I think faster loader time too.

Best I can do.

RollingsFarms · Sep 10, 2008

unreconstructed said:
I have one of the older 5203 in 2WD with crash box tranny. I have just bot a 5325 but have not got to use it in the field.

I kept the 5203 and really like it. However, the 5X25's are heavier tractors with more hydraulic capability. Unless something has changed, you can only get one rear remote with a loader on the 5X03. Without the loader you can get two. My 5325 has three rear remotes. Seems like the 5325 in 4wd is about 1800 lbs heavier than the 5203 in 2WD.

These two machines compared have altogether different feels to me and as another poster said the 542 is much more loader. They do look similar in size sitting side by side, but I think that is deceiving.

Have not operated one of the 5X03 in 4WD and as I said have not gotten to work the 5325 so I cannot say for sure one over the other. The 5203 was a good starter tractor for me, after being gone from the farm for 40 years, but I can say now that I have refined what I want in a tractor, I would pick the 5325 over the 5203 in the configuration that I own them if I knew then what I know now. (that was a mouthful--sorry). My 5325 has the power reverser also. I definitely bought the 5235 to upgrade the tranny to the 12x12 power reverser as I seem to find more loader projects.

You may have more torque with the 5225 over the 5303--I don't know. If PTO horses are equal, I guess you are looking at more rear remote potential, a little heavier tractor, and a stronger loader with the 5225 for a 1000 bucks. I think faster loader time too.

Best I can do.

on the 5003 series, you can now get two rear remotes(one comes standard). this doesn't include your mid mounts for your loader.

unreconstructed · Sep 10, 2008

Roger that on the rear remotes. That is indeed an improvement which makes the 03s more versatile of course.

RollingsFarms · Sep 10, 2008

unreconstructed said:
Roger that on the rear remotes. That is indeed an improvement which makes the 03s more versatile of course.

also the transmission options you can get on them now are a great improvment. syncreverser on 2wd models and syncshuttle on the 4wd models. there is also an "e-pto" setting on the dash. i'm sure it's not the same e-pto as what's on the 5025 series but i have found it to be very handy and fuel efficient when i didn't need to run the tractor at full 540 pto speed.

bairman · Sep 10, 2008

The dealer said that the 522 loader would fit the 5225 tractor, and according to the deer web site they make the brackets for the 5225. I know there is a big difference between them but there is also a big jump in the price. Someone also told me that you could get the injector pump beefed up, and it would give it more horse power. Has anyone heard of this?