Baling hay with a CUT

[MikePA]

According to this <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.chuckstractor.com/h-balers.htm>site</A> the Hesston 540 makes bales that are 47" wide by up to 51" in diameter. The minimum recommended hp is 45 hp, so the L4310 at 45.3 hp just qualifies, unless the equipment manufacturers hp recommendations are at the PTO.

 

[cowboydoc]

Can anyone give me the site or the pamphlet that is in. My friend would like to see it and send it kubota as his kubota was rated above the hp to run that square baler. I think you guys may have saved him. I don't see how they can deny his warranty if they are saying that that tractor can pull a round baler. I'm pretty sure Mike that those hp ratings are for pto. I know that's how most ag. equipment is rated.

 

[MikePA]

<font color=blue>I'm pretty sure Mike that those hp ratings are for pto. I know that's how most ag. equipment is rated. </font color=blue>

The L4310 is only rated at 37.5 hp at the PTO so it would be underpowered for running the 540. The Hesston 530, which can make 39" x 54" (550 lbs) bales, only needs 30 PTO hp.

Followup note: I sent an email to the Hesston dealer and they confirmed cowboydoc's supposition..the horsepower figures for the balers are PTO horsepower and not engine horsepower. So, an L4310 is over 16% underpowered to run a Hesston 540 baler. I searched the Kubota web site for the word 'baler' and the only place it's referenced in relation to a tractor model is with the M4900/M5700 tractors.

 

[ddl]

hp is not the only measurement that is needed in determining load on a pto. The torque is very important which deals with size of shafts used in the pto drive line. If a pto drive line is not designed for heavy loads, shafts could be twisted off with the applied horsepower. I still think the pto should have stalled before damage was done. Did they taske the tractor apart to look at the damage before they made their decisions.

Dan L

 

[AuCivil]

Sorry but I don't have a scanner to scan a picture of the L4310 with the round baler. If I can find one I will.

The picture is in a kubota sales booklet/brochure labled "KUBOTA DIESEL TRACTOR L3010/L3410/L3710/L4310/L4610. On the back of the booklet it says "2001 Kubota Corporation". I got the booklet at a local kubota dealer within the last 2 months.

The tractor in the picture is the L4310 (appears to be HST but there is a glare) and the baler is a Hesston 540. Also there is a round bale behind the baler and the tractor is on a wind-row (sp) of hay. So the picture shows the tractor as baling not just moving the baler.

Hope this helps.

 

[cowboydoc]

Dan,
I'm not sure of the specifics of how much they tore down or what. He had just called and told me what had happened.

Aucivil,
Thanks for the info. I will pass it along.

 

[JohnMiller3]

Re: Baling hay with a CUT-Kubota L4310 Round bales

From Kubota's Sept. 2000 "L-series" Brochure "Centerfold"

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.tractorbynet.com/forumfiles/47-174963-KubotaL4310HSTBalingHay-cropped.jpg>Kubota L4310 HST w/Cab -round baling with a Hesston 540..</A>

 

[cowboydoc]

Re: Baling hay with a CUT-Kubota L4310 Round bales

Thanks John. I know Bob will be real happy to see that!! That tractor isn't considered a utility tractor is it? When I talked to Bob last he said that Kubota told him he had to have a utility tractor to run the baling equipment.

 

[MikePA]

Re: Baling hay with a CUT-Kubota L4310 Round bales

<font color=blue>That tractor isn't considered a utility tractor is it?</font color=blue>

The "L" series of tractors are considered Compact. The "M" series are Utility/Ag tractors. All this according to the Kubota web site.

 

[JohnMiller3]

Re: Baling hay with a CUT-Kubota L4310 Round bales

Hi Richard...

I think your friend may still have a problem with Kubota... with it only being a L3710 and probably no cab (less bulk wt)... how much can you possibly expect a 30 PTO hp to do...?

It's possible the Kubota PTO broke from some unknown problem to us and now they are "using" the baler as a way out to avoid a warranty issue...? No offense intended... but Don't know...? & may never know... but I don't think I'd be foolish enough to use a baler on a 30 PTO hp compact tractor... /w3tcompact/icons/frown.gif
(that's an expensive lesson for sure...)

 

[cowboydoc]

Re: Baling hay with a CUT-Kubota L4310 Round bales

Yes you're exactly right John. I also wouldn't even dream of pulling that round baler behind that 4710 either. I know that tractor isn't enough for that round baler either. I agree that he shouldn't have pulled the square baler and I told him so but I also think it's pretty ridiculous that kubota shows that tractor behind that round baler too. People are just asking for trouble doing that kind of work with CUT tractors. You really at least need a utility tractor for that kind of work.

 

[Darren]

I called the Kubota corporate office and was told as long as the baler hp requirement didn't exceed the tractor pto hp there isn't a warranty problem which is exactly what the local dealer said.

If you try to use anything beyond what it was designed for, you're taking a chance. The question now is what baler was hooked up to the pto? If it required more hp than the pto was rated for, forget about a warranty claim. If the baler requirements were within the tractor rating, something's not right.

 

[cowboydoc]

Well interesting story developing here. It seems that the tractor was within the gross hp ratings but not the pto hp ratings. Kubota is saying that the tractor must meet pto hp ratings. Bob told them to show him where his baler was rated for pto and not gross hp ratings. It seems they told him that all agricultural equipment was rated for pto hp. He said what about the picture of kubota with the round baler that is over it's rated pto hp? They said they were going to check into that and let him know. Guess we'll see what happens.

 

[hayden]

I think your argument hold up just fine. At 540 PTO RPM, same HP means same torque - that's the definition. I also agree that if you are within rated HP, it should darn well work and not break because of "overload".

Personally, I expect that a PTO shaft and everthing between it and the engine should be able to survive without damage any load that you can apply to the PTO, even at full engine power. If it breaks, it's a poor design and there's no excuse for it. An overload should only stall the engine, not break something.

 

[ddl]

that is not really ture. Horsepower is work per time and torque is turning force no matter how long the force is applied.

I have had different dearlers use different books to find the rating of a tractor. I also have been told the different tractor companies calulate the PTO horesepower different, JD is rated differently then Kubota and such. Who knows for sure unless you see the actual calculations used to see who is really right or wrong.

Dan L

 

[JerryG]

Richard,
I will start by saying that I don’t know a lot about Kubota sizing. Have him find out what parts broke or tore up. Then compare the part numbers from his tractor to the ones from the L4310. If they are the same and they rule that the PTO horse is the problem, it would be very interesting to tell them that both tractors have the same parts…….

 

[cowboydoc]

Good point Jerry.

 

[cmsedore]

It is true that horsepower is work per unit time. You calculate horsepower at the PTO (roughly) by multiplying RPM * torque. Since PTO rotation is standardized at 540 RPM, the torque will be the same at a given HP.

Measurement methods can differ (like the "Craftsman" horsepower debate you sometimes see rage). If the differences were very dramatic, though, you'd see vendors with ratings per equipment manufacturer (44 JD horsepower, 33 Kubota horsepower, 37 NH horsepower, etc).

-Chris

 

[ddl]

you are correct, My mistake. You still have to divide the rpm by 60 for horsepower is work per second, but no big deal. I still think we are hearing only part of the story. But who knows, I am sure Doc is telling all he knows.

Dan L

 

[cowboydoc]

DDL,
You've heard the whole story. Kubota has officially denied the warranty work because of the square baler. There really weren't any other circumstances. Other than the square baler he just used the tractor for loader work, mowing pastures, and raking his 8 acres of hay ground.