Any underpowered tractors??

art · Nov 25, 2003

The first thing that I like to do when there is a problem is to make sure that everything is right. From time to time a tractor isn't running up to snuff. There are some that are just to heavy for the horsepower. Case-IH CX50 is one as well as it's predacesor and the model before that. The rear end is used all the way to what you call 100 horsepower but at fifty it would last 20,000 to 30,000 hours if you weren't in need of a power aggressive tractor.

centex · Nov 25, 2003

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( By chance is your JD 4700 a hydrostatic tractor? )</font>

Yes, this is a hydrostatic tractor. I agree that the hydrostatic Transmission is great for loader work but I was supprised how easy it is to load the engine down with it. It has always been my assumption that the engine is underpowered for this size tractor. 48HP is really a tiny engine for a machine that weighs 6000# with the BH attached. Add 2000# of material in the FEL bucket and it is a wonder that it works at all.

Tractors4u · Nov 25, 2003

48 hp for that size isn't too shabby. The hydrostatic tractor I had was great for everything else and yes hydro is great for back and forth, but when I would use the loader to try to really dig, it would load up the engine and the engine would die. I had better luck before and after with equal hp grey market tractors with loaders. It was rare if ever that I killed the engine doing loader work with those. It really surprizes me though that a 48 hp would bog down like that. Yes there is a hp loss through the hydro trans and you can see it in the specs of the hydro version verses the equivalent gear model, but like I said at 48 hp I would think you would have enough power.

frank_f15 · Nov 25, 2003

AT some time or another any tractor is goin to feel underpowered. it is all realative to the task at hand.

art · Nov 25, 2003

The 4700 you described is heavy at 166lbs per engine horsepower. In ag tractors we like to see 120 lbs on the pto horsepower

BRUSHTAMERS · Nov 25, 2003

If the equipment is feeling sluggish and is smoking heavier than usual, make sure to check the air filters.

Soundguy · Nov 26, 2003

Hard to answer as is. Just about every tractor I have ever been on, is powered for it's frame and size.. for pulling, etc. As in.. you hitch the tractor to something and le tthe clutch out and the object either moves or the tractor tires spin.. I've yet to see an engine 'die' from not being able to spin its tires in place, under load / weight.

Pto is another option... if you run too large a pto load it is very easy to bog down a tractor.

I even bogged down my NH 1920 pulling a 4' rotary cutter ( easilly pulls a 6' ) in 3.5 tall thick wet grass...

Just gotta match implement size to tractor.. and tractor to job.

Small tractors aren't bad... sometimes you need the maneuverability... you loose power and weight.. but it is a trade off.

In short.. I never met a tractor I didn't like...

Soundguy

slowzuki · Nov 26, 2003

To tractors 4u, I'm curious about your technique.

Are you operating the engine at high enough rpm?

When digging, are you trying to push the hydro pedal down to dig harder? With a hydro this effectively shifts the tractor to a higher gear and can force the pressure relief to dump fluid, killing loader performance.

The local dealer tell me the only hydros they have repaired are owners who won't use anything but high range for everything and those who try to "step on the gas" by pushing the hydro pedal harder going up hills when they should be backing off or increasing the throttle.

Tractors4u · Nov 26, 2003

It has been a while since I had the Deere hydro. I ran the throttle up to operating speed and never push with the peddle all the way down. My comparison was between a Deere 855 25hp and a grey market Hinomoto E2304 gear tractor at 26 hp. The Hinomoto would dig circles around the 855. The thing I was really curious about was that most pro hydro folks on TBN talk about hydro being so great for loader work yet the brochures I have from Kubota and Deere push their shuttle shift gear tractors as being ideal for loader work or where forward to reverse work is being done. I will admit that a hydro would be super convienent for anything in that you free up a hand from shifting, but by reducing your h.p. by going hydro do you feel you are sacrificing anything? I am not trying to start a hydro vs gear war, I am just wondering whether there is a real advantage or is it convienence? I guess convienence could be an advantage.

CTyler · Nov 26, 2003

I'm not sure how the shuttle shift works so I can't comment on it. I love the hydro. Its' nice being able to have the RPM's up for faster loader response/power and creeping foward as though your idleing for example. The instant forward/reverse just seems more productive and convienient.

I can say that if you try to use the hydro peddle like a gas peddle you'll run out of power in a hurry. And you'll be unimpressed with it. It took me a few times of nearly killing the engine to figure it out. Didn't take long.

I haven't noticed the loader having less power while using the hydro to move at the same time, If indeed there is a difference.

Having a little more HP would be nice. My driveway is long and has a good slope to it. Driving up in meduim range it barely hangs on to 2000 RPM with the loader and BB. Pulling a 65" BB, rippers down and a full box really slows it down but it pulls.

The only time I have truely run out of power was when we got the CAT 613 scraper stuck driving off a slope. The L3130 would spin the tires a bit then bog out. Spent about 10 min digging with the loader then pushed it out while the CAT was spinning the tires.