Grand L6060 Cab...

[ovrszd]

I have 16 acres and own a 70 hp tractor like roger said and try pulling a 3 bottom plow with 40hp tractor and lifting whole trees 40 -50 foot long

Like this??





or this??

 

[Matt in Virginia]

Guys,
I believe what I said was:

" I wish I had 10 acres to take care of and could plan the purchase to the exact width of the box scraper and 100 pounds on lift strength of the FEL. Unfortunately I own many properties that have very specific needs. Some are one of two times every five years and some are every couple of months"

The "I WISH" part being the key point missed by a few...

As far as buying a ladder I suppose there is a lot to be said for being able to work from a ladder. That said anyone in construction who would rather use a ladder than a Lull for putting material to the work sight by hydraulics. Well I have yet to meet them on my jobs. My barn would not have been built had it not been for a John Deere 310C Backhoe. It was not uncommon for some days on trim for the bucket to go and down 100 times. And yes I have a ladder...

I also do a lot of headrow maintenance as I am trying to give the Bobwhite Population a place develop. Hence I have to take care of storm damage in order not to burden the farmer...

fwiw & IMHO ,Matt.

I also have a 4 row HD JD Disc, 4 row Bedders, a 45,000 Watt/188 amp PTO Generator, etc. that occasionally get used with the 4020.

ovrszd,
Like the pictures. Sturdy and capable looking pair...

Regards, Matt.

 

[ovrszd]

Matt, sorry I missed the "I wish" part of the 10 acres.

I'll still say buy an M model versus an L model. It would be more comparable to familiar equipment such as the JD 310 hoe and 4020.

I'm a HP freak so I bought the biggest HP I could get in the chassis size I needed/wanted. My Brother has a Grand L3240, it just frustrates me cause it's always struggling for power.

 

[SDT]

Re: A further deeper commentary and question.

Gentlemen,

To be honest I held the paperwork up as I really did not get a warm and fuzzy with this machine. It lead me to consider the 9960 Cab tractor beside it. I am going to hold off on that test drive. Looking at one of JD Youtube videos, purely by chance of searching for specs on the 9960, the Deere Rep mentions the 4.4 or 4.5 liter Deere engine as compared to the 3.8 Liter engine on the 9960. He noted the "no replacement for displacement" argument. Everything in my driveway is Diesel. Needless to say the 03' 7.3 Liter PSD Excursion versus the 05' 6.0 Liter PSD in my F350 did not help. Granted the 6.0 PSD has issues beyond displacement. That said it does come to mind.

In short I thought I would be remiss in not making mention of this concern. I am going to rely on high RPMs to make enough power for these tractors to function normally? Do they have a decent torque reserve in the field. I'm used to everything making "working HP" at 2100 or less with yard movement capable at half that figure. Do I need to relearn what is necessary RPMs?

Bingo.

Most modern small/medium sized tractors, especially CUTs, achieve rated HP at much higher RPMs than in times past. Worse, it is usually necessary to operate the engine at or near rated speed to obtain specified PTO RPM, e.g., 540 RPM. This increases wear and adds hours when doing light PTO work such as mowing light cover.


For this reason, and others, I too prefer the "old tech" approach, i.e., CID.

Last fall, I shopped for a 60 PTO HP tractor for mostly mowing duty. I really wanted an M7040 but ended up buying an "old tech" MF 2635 after shopping several brands. The 220 CI long stroke Perkins designed engine in the MF achieves 540 PTO RPM at 1750 engine RPM allowing me to cruise along with plenty of governor and foot throttle left for the tough spot, saving fuel, wear and tear and keeping hours down. It is also much heavier than the M7040 and significantly less expensive.

Dean

 

[jim_wilson]

I really never understood the reasoning behind this? So many people try to size the tractor to the amount of land they own. I can own 5 acres of land but if I have to lift a 2500 lb log to get onto my mill, an L series isn't going to to cut it, no matter how long I have.

Sizing the tractor to the amount of land is good for some aspects, but there are SO MANY other reasons someone may need a larger tractor. There is a thread on here about "how many hp per acre" or something like that. Some people have really large tractors for very little land, and some people have very small tractors for a lot of land.

I must be in the "large tractor for small amount of land" category. I've got a B3200 and 1/2 acre. I agree with you - I bought a bigger tractor because some of the jobs I had to get done - I just simply could not do with a smaller tractor. It's a side benefit that the larger tractor does some of the jobs that could be handled by a smaller tractor - just that much faster. I just added a 60" Landpride deck about 5 weeks ago - now I can mow the entire property in about 15 minutes. It would take an hour and a half or more with a push mower - and I'm sure it would still take a good 45 minutes with a riding mower. The deck was cheaper than a rider - and since I already have the tractor - it's one less engine to maintain.

People buy tractors for all sorts of different reasons.

I'm trying to figure out how I can get more land - so I can have an excuse to get a bigger tractor ! :laughing:

 

[case245]

yes like that without the grapple just the bucket @ oversized

 

[Matt in Virginia]

Gentlemen,
I've decided on, and am finishing specing out, a new John Deere 6105 M with an H310 loader. The difference between this tractor and the 6105 D is that it's made in Germany versus Mexico, and offers far more workable transmission choices. I'm going with a Power Quad 24F/24R... Only hitch between the M and the D is about $30K uptick, however, they are very different tractors...



Deere online brochure for anyone interested...

6M Series Tractors

Regards, Matt.

 

[TripleR]

No doubt that is a very nice tractor, I really like them, but after looking at one, it was just way too big for our needs; hope it works out for you.

 

[Baby Grand]

So the M is made in Deutchesland and the D is made in Mexico?

 

[ovrszd]

I'm with TripleR. They are a remarkable tractor. I just couldn't swing the size for my use.

Matt, we want pictures of course!!! Awesome tractor that you'll get years of use and enjoyment out of.

 

[wmonroe]

Add me to the list of would like to have one but can't justify it. Congrats on the new tractor, I'm sure it will serve your purposes very well.

 

[Piston]

That is one HECK OF A TRACTOR! Congratulations. Can't wait to see pics, your obligated by the way

 

[Mx113]

It's probably a very good thing that you purchased that tractor now. At the pace that you went from a 53hp tractor to an 86 hp tractor, you would have had a dual rear wheel row cropper by July.

 

[Matt in Virginia]

Gentlemen,
Pictures will be forthcoming. It may take a while as 6105 M & R production is behind schedule in Germany. My dealer is trying to get in on an existing build to beat the current Mid-September estimate.

I would like to thank everyone for the constructive comments that have been offered. I suppose we all come from different backgrounds with different experiences and ultimately needs. I would also like to thank Piston and ovrszd, amongst others, for questioning the formula of tractor to acreage assumption.

In closing it never struck me as odd that we did not have smaller "big" tractors on the farm. You had the highest horse two wheel drive tractor(until the 4850) and a 60 HP tractor to run the drain digger. My father actually welded a category 3 hitch to an 8 foot box scraper to keep up the drive way. Nor did it strike me as odd keeping the driveway up with a 20,000 pound 190 hp Front Wheel Assist Tractor with 30 inch wide rear tires. I failed to see the point in a 4050 at the time and I still do... One tractor will do what the other will do BUT NOT vice versa...

Mx113,
I actually had concluded in 2010 or early 2011 that a 6330 Premium would be ideal, however, I had two deaths in the family(My father at 66 and my older brother at 45) that completely put ALL of this stuff on the back burner. I then regrouped and tried to find a smaller less invasive answer to what I thought I needed. When you see how close you are financially between a CUT and a real tractor it becomes, for some of us, a more difficult choice to make...

I'll never go duals again short of farming and I don't have the desire for the worry that depending on the weather and commodities pricing leads to... I'll never forget my time in the 4840 & 4850 when we were farming row crop, however, as a young teenager I had the best of both worlds. I was farming without having to worry about paying the tab for the ride.

Though your comment is timely as I'm seriously wondering about going to the John Deere 6115 M to up my PTO HP to 95. This would match my 4020 Diesel almost exactly while adding Front Wheel Assist which is yet another performance booster.

Regards, Matt.

Btw, I can't believe I mentioned 6.0 liters on the 4020 404 Cubic Inch Diesel. It is 6.6 Liters. This is a kick in the pants as my first truck, a clean 69' Step Side, had a fully built 4 bolt main 400 Small Block, which bored .030" led to 406 Cubic Inches and 6.6 liters. How soon we forget...;-)

 

[MHarryE]

Gentlemen,
Pictures will be forthcoming. It may take a while as 6105 M & R production is behind schedule in Germany. My dealer is trying to get in on an existing build to beat the current Mid-September estimate.

I would like to thank everyone for the constructive comments that have been offered. I suppose we all come from different backgrounds with different experiences and ultimately needs. I would also like to thank Piston and ovrszd, amongst others, for questioning the formula of tractor to acreage assumption.

In closing it never struck me as odd that we did not have smaller "big" tractors on the farm. You had the highest horse two wheel drive tractor(until the 4850) and a 60 HP tractor to run the drain digger. My father actually welded a category 3 hitch to an 8 foot box scraper to keep up the drive way. Nor did it strike me as odd keeping the driveway up with a 20,000 pound 190 hp Front Wheel Assist Tractor with 30 inch wide rear tires. I failed to see the point in a 4050 at the time and I still do... One tractor will do what the other will do BUT NOT vice versa...

Mx113,
I actually had concluded in 2010 or early 2011 that a 6330 Premium would be ideal, however, I had two deaths in the family(My father at 66 and my older brother at 45) that completely put ALL of this stuff on the back burner. I then regrouped and tried to find a smaller less invasive answer to what I thought I needed. When you see how close you are financially between a CUT and a real tractor it becomes, for some of us, a more difficult choice to make...

I'll never go duals again short of farming and I don't have the desire for the worry that depending on the weather and commodities pricing leads to... I'll never forget my time in the 4840 & 4850 when we were farming row crop, however, as a young teenager I had the best of both worlds. I was farming without having to worry about paying the tab for the ride.

Though your comment is timely as I'm seriously wondering about going to the John Deere 6115 M to up my PTO HP to 95. This would match my 4020 Diesel almost exactly while adding Front Wheel Assist which is yet another performance booster.

Regards, Matt.

Btw, I can't believe I mentioned 6.0 liters on the 4020 404 Cubic Inch Diesel. It is 6.6 Liters. This is a kick in the pants as my first truck, a clean 69' Step Side, had a fully built 4 bolt main 400 Small Block, which bored .030" led to 406 Cubic Inches and 6.6 liters. How soon we forget...;-)

I had a 6105 M quoted but although the dealer came a long way off of list, I still felt it was too high so I went another color. Two weeks later I got the ad from Deere saying they would throw in a loader at no extra cost if I bought before July 31. That would have put it in the ballpark but the result is we have an even mixture - 2 green, 2 blue, and 2 orange. I feel certain the 6105 more than match the 4020. Everybody is getting more out of smaller engines. Pump in more oxygen, break up and distribute the fuel better making use of all the oxygen, and reduced losses due to reduced friction from fewer pistons. The same JD flyer advertising the loader deal also said to look for the 3 cylinder engines to be introduced in the new 5 series.

 

[Matt in Virginia]

I had a 6105 M quoted but although the dealer came a long way off of list, I still felt it was too high so I went another color. Two weeks later I got the ad from Deere saying they would throw in a loader at no extra cost if I bought before July 31. That would have put it in the ballpark but the result is we have an even mixture - 2 green, 2 blue, and 2 orange. I feel certain the 6105 more than match the 4020. Everybody is getting more out of smaller engines. Pump in more oxygen, break up and distribute the fuel better making use of all the oxygen, and reduced losses due to reduced friction from fewer pistons. The same JD flyer advertising the loader deal also said to look for the 3 cylinder engines to be introduced in the new 5 series.

Harry,
As far as I know the free loader deal is for the D series only. I was discussing the tractor this afternoon with my dealer. They are having a hard time moving the 6105 Ds for a number of reasons and hence 5 years with 0% interest AND a free loader. Albeit a light loader. Believe it was comparable to a 573. I'm going with an H310 or H340. At any rate the 6105 M and R only have 3 years at 0% interest. No free loader. Matter of fact NOTHING FREE on the 6M or 6R. To put it into perspective it would be akin to ordering a Cheeseburger and finding the bun, lettuce, pickels, tomato, mayo, etc. all came extra. You didn't want that heated up did you?...

You are probably right about the 6105 M being more than match for the 4020 but I do wonder on torque. I idled into a pile of vegetation and hard packed dirt today and filled the bucket even after the front end came 2 feet off the ground and the rear radials continued to push. This at JUST ABOVE an idle. That said this loader is worn out. Further the hydraulics have always been weak on this tractor. Though I've never found another 10,000 pound plus(with ballast) tractor with 95 HP that has the torque on the low end this one has... Granted compared to a new 6105M the 4020 is primitive. I look forward to less maintenance and more time getting the job done...

Regards, Matt.

 

[Matt in Virginia]

I feel certain the 6105 more than match the 4020. Everybody is getting more out of smaller engines. Pump in more oxygen, break up and distribute the fuel better making use of all the oxygen, and reduced losses due to reduced friction from fewer pistons. The same JD flyer advertising the loader deal also said to look for the 3 cylinder engines to be introduced in the new 5 series.

Harry,
You lost me on increased friction from more cylinders. I've noted that cummins and cat have not strayed from 14 plus liter INLINE 6 CYLINDERS in their over the road engines running up to 600 HP. How does one get more torque from fewer cylinders?

Where I HAVE seen progress on heavy engines is more efficient fuel management and turbocharger pressures, however, I've yet to see the INLINE 6 changed to the great new INLINE 4 or 5. Granted new engines do make more power, however, the bones are largely the same. I'll not be lining up for an improved 3 cylinder engine.

Respectfully, Matt.

 

[MHarryE]

Harry,
As far as I know the free loader deal is for the D series only. I was discussing the tractor this afternoon with my dealer. They are having a hard time moving the 6105 Ds for a number of reasons and hence 5 years with 0% interest AND a free loader. Albeit a light loader. Believe it was comparable to a 573. I'm going with an H310 or H340. At any rate the 6105 M and R only have 3 years at 0% interest. No free loader. Matter of fact NOTHING FREE on the 6M or 6R. To put it into perspective it would be akin to ordering a Cheeseburger and finding the bun, lettuce, pickels, tomato, mayo, etc. all came extra. You didn't want that heated up did you?...

You are probably right about the 6105 M being more than match for the 4020 but I do wonder on torque. I idled into a pile of vegetation and hard packed dirt today and filled the bucket even after the front end came 2 feet off the ground and the rear radials continued to push. This at JUST ABOVE an idle. That said this loader is worn out. Further the hydraulics have always been weak on this tractor. Though I've never found another 10,000 pound plus(with ballast) tractor with 95 HP that has the torque on the low end this one has... Granted compared to a new 6105M the 4020 is primitive. I look forward to less maintenance and more time getting the job done...

Regards, Matt.

Nope, got the flier right here. Get a free loader with a new 6M tractor! Loader valued at more than $7,000! Selected models, 6105M, 6115M, 6125M, and 6140M. Offer valid 5/1/13 through 7/31/13. Some restrictions apply so see your dealer for complete details. Valid only at participating US dealers.

That is the same flier advertising the new 5E Series Cab and PowerReverser models 3 cylinder 55 - 75 HP.

You say the 6Ms are hard to come by getting them out of Germany but I wonder if these monthly fliers I keep getting indicate JD is having a problem moving many models, the reason my stock is tanking even though they posted their best quarter ever last quarter. I assumed it was due to the rotten Midwest weather. They make more money from one combine sale than a dozen CUTs.

 

[Matt in Virginia]

Harry,
I would be in your debt if you would fax me a copy of that flier at 757-482-1593. I have to talk with my dealer tomorrow. As far as availability I'm going on what he told me. He's been a straight shooter for some time...

Regards, Matt Garrett.
757-581-6270

 

[Matt in Virginia]

Harry,
PDF is just fine. Thank you for the effort...

Regards, Matt.