DK5010 vs NX4510 HST both with loaders and rear remotes

[swilk]

My 4000 is worth more to me than it is to most anyone else so I will be keeping it .... itll likely live out the rest of its years with a cutter on the back of it and mow trails. The new tractor will hopefully have a 3rd function and a grapple and maintain 7 acres of plots as well as grapple work collecting debri from yearly river floods.

Loaded rear tires will be a must no matter which way I go .....

My transport trailer is only a 7000lb but the frame is the same as the company uses on its 10k models so depending on what the tractor ends up weighing I might need to swap axles and wheels/tires.

 

[Btown]

The consensus used to be that the earth was flat and we know how that worked out. Here's my 2 cents. Others may disagree. However, all tests I've seen in this area confirm what I state below.

Same model with gear vs HST and same engine, gear will have more PTO hp and much more draw bar hp. You can confirm the difference in PTO hp by looking at published specs. There are a few Nebraska tests out there that show the even greater difference in draw bar hp gear vs HST. The difference is quite large and most people don't understand this because it is not a spec that is frequently published for small tractors. Given this difference, there is no doubt that a gear tractor should be the choice for field work. Add in that for the price of HST you can typically get a bigger engine instead and available hp for field work at a price point is much higher with gear.

I'll take a stab at the turbo question but I have never done/seen any testing in this area and I'm sure there are others who can shed more light on this. In short... it depends...

Take any normally aspirated diesel engine and make it spin a turbo and it will suck more fuel (it takes power to spin that turbo!) until you load it so much that the normally aspirated versions burn efficiency suffers enough (due to not enough oxygen) to offset the mechanical load of the turbo version which has much more oxygen available to it. Part of the efficiency gained in turbo applications often comes from down sizing the engine for a given hp so that when at low pressure you're running a smaller air pump (and engine is just an air pump) and when needed it becomes a bigger air pump by increasing air pressure and getting more oxygen through the engine. This kind of gives you the efficiency of the small engine when full power isn't needed, and the ability to become a bigger air pump by increasing air pressure when needed. So you can see there are lots of variables and it's hard to even give a theoretical answer to your question without knowing more about what you're trying to ask.

At higher elevation, the power output at which the turbo version becomes more efficient (back to assuming same engine displacement) is lower than at lower elevation because there is less oxygen available (meaning less fuel can be burned, less power made) but a waste gaited turbo can go a long way to fixing this. A 45hp naturally aspirated engine wont make 45hp at 7000 ft. It might make ~30-35hp. But a turbo 45 hp engine may still be able to make the full 45hp depending on how the turbo is set up. And at the limit of the power the non-turbo engine can make (i.e. starting to blow black smoke), I would think that the improved burn efficiency of the turbo version would more than offset the mechanical load of running the turbo.

My understanding is that it takes no power to spin a turbo, the exhaust gases spin it, but to spin a supercharger since it runs off a belt attached to the crank, uses hp to turn it. Supercharger is instant power, but consumes some hp, turbo has a lag to spool up and uses no hp. But I could be wrong. Turbo use a very small amount more fuel than non turbo. But I could be wrong.

 

[870wing]

Happy New Year Swilk,

There are a few differences between the DK and NX version of tractors.
1) The NX comes with position and draught on the rear 3 point. DK only has position.
2) The NX is a bit heavier than the DK.
3) The NX gear versions come with 24 gears, which gives you a great choice of speeds, especially if you can pick up a rotory tiller. HST version is also only available on NX.
4) The NX has a slight advanntage in loader capacity as well.

Have you asked the price on a RX tractor. Around here there wasn't that much of a difference between the NX hst vs a 12 speed RX. If memory serves me right, it was like less than 10%. Remember that the tractor will be lasting you at least 20 years, so amortised over 20 years the diference becomes a mute point, that's depending on your cash follow situation right now ;-)

Take care

870Wing

 

[swilk]

Like many things this is a toy ... a useful toy but a toy nonetheless. I have the wifes blessing but I dont want to take advantage of that too much. I went back in to my local dealer today and the NX4510 was sold so I talked to him some more about the DK series and I think we came to an agreement on the DK5010HS. After a crash course on all things tractor I think the HS will be a nice compromise for loader work.

I sent him a link to the 3rd function kit sold by everything attachments and he will be installing that as well. I also called my two local tire shops and inquired about having the tires filled .... one is roughly $100 per tire and the other is $150. The only thing that needs clarification on the cheaper is he said they used "alcohol" ... thats it. Didnt say washer fluid or a mixture of any kind.

I watched a few videos and read some threads on this site about using a grapple to remove trees and from what I saw much more is possible than I ever imagined. I have acres and acres of saplings, buttonbush and other stuff that after what I saw I think it will be well equipped to take out.

I came really, really close to buying an LS cab tractor but the more I thought about a cab the more I pictured broken windows and doors. It would be great to have but that AC and heat wont do me any good if I knock a window out of it.

 

[SloppyJoe]

Great choice! That is a beast of a tractor! Here is my CK4010HST with a 66" Tomahawk Grapple. Yours should be able to grapple a small church.

 

[swilk]

How does yours do with saplings and such? My ground is WRP planted 12 years ago but the same year it was planted we had one of those 100 year floods which seem to happen about every 5 years. It is thick meshes of maple, ash, cottonwood and other such trees in certain areas. Most in that 1-3 inch range. I hope to be able to just sink the grapple teeth a bit and rip them out as I push. That's the hope anyway.

 

[SloppyJoe]

How does yours do with saplings and such? My ground is WRP planted 12 years ago but the same year it was planted we had one of those 100 year floods which seem to happen about every 5 years. It is thick meshes of maple, ash, cottonwood and other such trees in certain areas. Most in that 1-3 inch range. I hope to be able to just sink the grapple teeth a bit and rip them out as I push. That's the hope anyway.

Sorry, but the site wouldn't let me re-post until I had five post so here is what I was going to post


Let me mention a thing or two that I failed to on my first post. For what you are doing the the Hydroshuttle should do what you want (since you are an experienced tractor operator) without lost pto hp or burned up clutch discs from loader worker. Second I wanted to go with a 54" Grapple and my dealer talked me into the 66". I was hesitant but became VERY thankful afterwards. The smaller Grapple would not have been able to do nearly as much work. I would recommend a 78" grapple for your or no less than 72". Your loader lifts @ 800 more lbs than mine and the work that I have accomplished is incredible. Make darn well sure you have the thing ballast well, use a heavy rear implement and drive off with the load backwards for safety. Grapples get things done! As to your question, I have not done that (uprooting) yet but will in a few weeks at a different part of my land. You should have very little problem up rooting the small seedlings up to 3 inches though especially with the power of your tractor. Just don't get a running start or you may bend the grapple.

 

[swilk]

I ended up going with a 66" dual lid Wicked grapple .... just slightly wider than the tractor itself and I think it will offer a compromise when maneuvering in the woods. Rear tires will be filled and I will either make a ballast box if needed or hang an implement on the back while I do heavy loader or grapple work.

Im trying to get an accurate idea of the weight of this thing ... the Kioti website lists it as 3373 which I assume is without the loader. Loader and bucket add another 1653 and filled rear tires should add another 750 or so. Total weight 5776?

 

[SloppyJoe]

I ended up going with a 66" dual lid Wicked grapple .... just slightly wider than the tractor itself and I think it will offer a compromise when maneuvering in the woods. Rear tires will be filled and I will either make a ballast box if needed or hang an implement on the back while I do heavy loader or grapple work.

Im trying to get an accurate idea of the weight of this thing ... the Kioti website lists it as 3373 which I assume is without the loader. Loader and bucket add another 1653 and filled rear tires should add another 750 or so. Total weight 5776?

I think that was not a bad choice. Everything attachments are kind of expensive but they seem to be very quality. the 66" width like you said will make maneuvering easier. You may very well wish you had gotten a little bigger grapple, a 72" would have been what I would have gone with but you know you land the best. I would estimate you tractor weight to be @ 5600 - 5800 as well. Good luck and keep us posted!