Have I got this figured out?

[CumminsLuke]

I guess I am

 

[garyfisher123]

You know, after all this talk, I went home last night and looked at my 7040 and it has four different settings for the front and rear wheels.

After I read your first post I was actually going to reply that the 7040 does have adjustable wheels, but you figured that out before I could post!!

 

[slowzuki]

Also the larger Kubotas that may actually get used for row crop have an axle spacer kit that widens the 4wd housing to give you 4 more wheel spacing options. I don't know anyone who has ever bought it. The 2wd kubotas have adjustable axles just like any old 2wd tractor.

My friends TW-25 only has few wheel spacings, 4 I think. Doesn't stop him from planting 800 acres of corn.

 

[CumminsLuke]

Yeah this is a pretty irrelevant thread. Seems kinda like trolling to me. If the market demanded more wheel spacing options, I think the manufacturers would make them?

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Yeah this is a pretty irrelevant thread. Seems kinda like trolling to me. If the market demanded more wheel spacing options, I think the manufacturers would make them?

I don't think it's an "irrelevent thread", but will agree it's relevency is with a somewhat limited audience. Adjustable tread width on compact tractors is very limited, and probably for good reason. It just isn't a nessecity. There are multitudes of utility and conventional rowcrop farm tractors still on the market. If a person needs that option, he should choose the model and brand that fits his needs. The typical compact buyer and/or non-rowcrop farmer probably couldn't care any less. However, for a few of us, it IS an important factor in choosing tractors

 

[Harold_J]

Yeah this is a pretty irrelevant thread. Seems kinda like trolling to me. If the market demanded more wheel spacing options, I think the manufacturers would make them?

Of limited interest, maybe, irrelevant no, and as far as trolling I can't read people's minds, but we are in the Ag Tractors forum.

I know it was relevant to the Kubota dealer last year when I told him I had 3 other tractors set at 68" and I needed the 7040 to be the same or very close to it. He told me he had lost two sales recently because of just this concern and questions about tire options.

KUBOTA 7040 4WD front = 55.9"-59.9", rear =55.9"-67.7"
JD 5325 4WD FRONT =52.8" - 75.0", rear = 55.7"-74"

My understanding is that the Kubota spacer option someone mentioned is only for the rear, so is pretty much useless; I think it's mainly for the 2wd versions so you can line the back up with the front. It may be that Kubota doesn't want the front widened out on the 4WD because of extra stress on the axle components. I believe I read somewhere (on this site?) that the Kubota axle design is different.

I looked at the manual for a 3X16" plow I have and the wheels have to be set at 68"-72", so no good with the Kubota. But I guess real farmers don't use plows anymore either

I liked a lot of features of the Kubota and I'm glad you're happy with yours but for me the machine was too inflexible.

 

[Robert_in_NY]

Of limited interest, maybe, irrelevant no, and as far as trolling I can't read people's minds, but we are in the Ag Tractors forum.

I know it was relevant to the Kubota dealer last year when I told him I had 3 other tractors set at 68" and I needed the 7040 to be the same or very close to it. He told me he had lost two sales recently because of just this concern and questions about tire options.

KUBOTA 7040 4WD front = 55.9"-59.9", rear =55.9"-67.7"
JD 5325 4WD FRONT =52.8" - 75.0", rear = 55.7"-74"

My understanding is that the Kubota spacer option someone mentioned is only for the rear, so is pretty much useless; I think it's mainly for the 2wd versions so you can line the back up with the front. It may be that Kubota doesn't want the front widened out on the 4WD because of extra stress on the axle components. I believe I read somewhere (on this site?) that the Kubota axle design is different.

I looked at the manual for a 3X16" plow I have and the wheels have to be set at 68"-72", so no good with the Kubota. But I guess real farmers don't use plows anymore either

I liked a lot of features of the Kubota and I'm glad you're happy with yours but for me the machine was too inflexible.

If the minimum required for a 3 bottom plow is 68" I think the 67.7" spacing on the Kubota would be close enough. The plow won't recognize the .3" difference.

Most of the utility tractors have adjustable rims but when it comes to compacts I really do not see adjustable rims as being a major item. Most of the time the owners either set them out as wide as possible or to where they are comfortable with them. So if the vast majority of the compact owners do not need adjustable rims why would any of the compact makers worry about it? Most utility tractors have enough adjustment to their rims to suit their owners except maybe the Kubota line but I don't know enough about their product line to say.

 

[Harold_J]

If the minimum required for a 3 bottom plow is 68" I think the 67.7" spacing on the Kubota would be close enough. The plow won't recognize the .3" difference.

I understand what you're saying, 3/10" wouldn't make any difference.

But the problem with the Kubota FWD M-series is that the front axle has only 4" of adjustment. The widest it can be set is 56.3" on the M6040 and 59.9" on the M7040. The 67.7" you refer to is for the REAR wheels only. Even allowing for the fact that the front tires are narrower than the rear and you could cheat a little by having a narrower front setting it still wouldn't work correctly.

 

[Robert_in_NY]

I understand what you're saying, 3/10" wouldn't make any difference.

But the problem with the Kubota FWD M-series is that the front axle has only 4" of adjustment. The widest it can be set is 56.3" on the M6040 and 59.9" on the M7040. The 67.7" you refer to is for the REAR wheels only. Even allowing for the fact that the front tires are narrower than the rear and you could cheat a little by having a narrower front setting it still wouldn't work correctly.

I see what you are saying, as I said, I don't know much about the Kubota utility tractors but so far they seem to be the only one that doesn't have a lot of adjustment on their utility tractors

 

[DLMaine01]

Now hold on!!!!
Just what is the critical measurment here? Is it inside track? Kubota is using centerline numbers and it is a little differant if you are talking about a 9.5" Front tire or a 16.9" Rear tire. My tires are set at min. front setting and max rear( Kubota spec for a FEL ). My inside track "appears" to be the same (F&R) I did not measure it. If it is outside track then it will be off( How could this be). Please correct me if I am wrong on this.
My plowing experiance is limited to a JD Model M single bottom two way plow that was very easy to set up as Dad said do this and it will work!! He was right!!!!
Dave

 

[rutwad]

Not being a member here for very long....I have enjoyed immensely the discussions and information presented. However, am I correct in assuming that most of the tractors being discussed, do not have adjustable wheels? Meaning if you wanted to plant corn in 36 inch rows, most of the tractors that people talk about on board can not adjust their wheels out to match that type of planting....or conversely if you wanted to plant 24 inch rows....no can do?

That seems to me to limit the uses for the tractor. They basically are an overgrown mower that has a front end loader and the ability to have a small backhoe or blade or rototiller. There is a Kioti dealer about ten miles from me and I will not even look at the tractors for that very reason.

Just thinking and wondering.

Unless I misunderstand you, it sounds like you bought 2 tractors because you thought newer tractors do not have adjustable wheels.


DLMaine01, unless it is a clearance issue for the FEL arms or something, I would think the widest setting for the front wheels would be best. Are you saying Kubota recommends putting them at the narrowest setting?

Maybe I've been looking at my computer too long and misunderstood you both.

 

[DLMaine01]

For my tractor, Kubota M4900, they say( Kubota Tractor Corp.) to to set the front wheels at min. setting and rear wheels at max. wheel setting for FEL use. That still puts the front tire track's inside the rear tire track.
rutwald; it is not a clearance issue but a load issue. By the way I think they are very conservative on load issues.
Dave

 

[Robert_in_NY]

Now hold on!!!!
Just what is the critical measurment here? Is it inside track? Kubota is using centerline numbers and it is a little differant if you are talking about a 9.5" Front tire or a 16.9" Rear tire. My tires are set at min. front setting and max rear( Kubota spec for a FEL ). My inside track "appears" to be the same (F&R) I did not measure it. If it is outside track then it will be off( How could this be). Please correct me if I am wrong on this.
My plowing experiance is limited to a JD Model M single bottom two way plow that was very easy to set up as Dad said do this and it will work!! He was right!!!!
Dave

Wheel spacings are from center to center of the wheels.

 

[WarrenF]

Unless I misunderstand you, it sounds like you bought 2 tractors because you thought newer tractors do not have adjustable wheels.


DLMaine01, unless it is a clearance issue for the FEL arms or something, I would think the widest setting for the front wheels would be best. Are you saying Kubota recommends putting them at the narrowest setting?

Maybe I've been looking at my computer too long and misunderstood you both.

I bought two tractors....the first one was because I needed one and it fit my budget. When you are a tightwad like me spending upwards of 15 grand for a tractor causes all sorts of angst. I bought the second tractor because I got an EXCEPTIONAL GOOD BUY....$500!! It is a Massey 165 and didn't run but was all there. It now runs and will be for sale soon. Looking on the net, most of the 165's are selling for $6000. Figure I will have at most $1000 in it by the time I put it out front of my home for sale.

I had looked long and hard at the sub-compact and compact tractors available. All the brands and all the models. Finally I got up close and personal to those tractors at a farm show. It was then it hit me...you can not adjust the tread width. For my needs I thought that a tractor that did not adjust for tread width....was about half a tractor. I want something I can hook a planter to...then hook up a mower....and a cultivator bar, etc.. Yes I even want to be able to hook up a plow and or a rototiller.

My original post was simply an opinion as if the light had just come on....I am not sorry I made the observation....I simply am astounded that some have seemingly taken offense. Those who wish to purchase a tractor that, in my mind, limits what you can do with them....is just fine by me. As I always say, that is why God invented horse racing.

 

[milkman]

My wheels wouldn't adjust out wide enough so I fixed 'em.

 

[Robert_in_NY]

I bought two tractors....the first one was because I needed one and it fit my budget. When you are a tightwad like me spending upwards of 15 grand for a tractor causes all sorts of angst. I bought the second tractor because I got an EXCEPTIONAL GOOD BUY....$500!! It is a Massey 165 and didn't run but was all there. It now runs and will be for sale soon. Looking on the net, most of the 165's are selling for $6000. Figure I will have at most $1000 in it by the time I put it out front of my home for sale.

I had looked long and hard at the sub-compact and compact tractors available. All the brands and all the models. Finally I got up close and personal to those tractors at a farm show. It was then it hit me...you can not adjust the tread width. For my needs I thought that a tractor that did not adjust for tread width....was about half a tractor. I want something I can hook a planter to...then hook up a mower....and a cultivator bar, etc.. Yes I even want to be able to hook up a plow and or a rototiller.

My original post was simply an opinion as if the light had just come on....I am not sorry I made the observation....I simply am astounded that some have seemingly taken offense. Those who wish to purchase a tractor that, in my mind, limits what you can do with them....is just fine by me. As I always say, that is why God invented horse racing.

Warren, If you are looking at compacts or subcompacts what size planter or cultivator are you hoping to use? A mower and rototiller does not care what the tread width is. Also, most of these tractors (even the smallest ones) have some width adjustment. You flip the rims is the most common on one piece wheels. So if you need to pull a 2 row planter you just set the wheels out as far as possible. Of if the tractor is a sub compact you will most likely be using a one row planter in which case wheel spacing isn't going to matter on it as the planter will follow the centerline. The same with a one row cultivator.

 

[WarrenF]

Warren, If you are looking at compacts or subcompacts what size planter or cultivator are you hoping to use? A mower and rototiller does not care what the tread width is. Also, most of these tractors (even the smallest ones) have some width adjustment. You flip the rims is the most common on one piece wheels. So if you need to pull a 2 row planter you just set the wheels out as far as possible. Of if the tractor is a sub compact you will most likely be using a one row planter in which case wheel spacing isn't going to matter on it as the planter will follow the centerline. The same with a one row cultivator.

You are correct with regard to a rototiller and a mower. With your logic your are correct all the way around. Why would I use a one row planter? Why would I use a one row cultivator? I would think a four row planter and cultivator would probably be more efficient.

Also with the measurements that have been posted as to width adjustment...If you are planting a 36 inch row...lets say hmmmmmm for corn, without adjustable tread width, it would seem to me to be a bit difficult getting that spacing correct. Let alone without compacting the seed bed in your all ready planted row. However you can use whatever you chose. That is my opinion.

 

[Robert_in_NY]

[/b][/color]

You are correct with regard to a rototiller and a mower. With your logic your are correct all the way around. Why would I use a one row planter? Why would I use a one row cultivator? I would think a four row planter and cultivator would probably be more efficient.

Also with the measurements that have been posted as to width adjustment...If you are planting a 36 inch row...lets say hmmmmmm for corn, without adjustable tread width, it would seem to me to be a bit difficult getting that spacing correct. Let alone without compacting the seed bed in your all ready planted row. However you can use whatever you chose. That is my opinion.

A subcompact or small compact tractor will not like pulling a 4 row planter. If you are talking about pulling larger planters then you are looking at utility class tractors which for the most part have adjustable treads. I would not even begin to think about pulling a 4 row planter with a subcompact tractor. A sub compact is designed for very small implements usually 1 row units.

I pull a 4 row International 56 planter on 38" spacing with my TN with no problems at all. I also can pull it with my 7710-II if I need to. But I would not even begin to try and pull it with my 1920 as if you find a soft spot the tractor will be done with.

So if you are looking for a 30hp tractor to do 45hp work then you are not going to be happy. You buy the tractor suited to do the work required. Now if you can give me specific examples as to what the major problem is then I might understand your point better. What model tractor were you looking at, what were you going to use it for? What size and model equipment?

 

[Harold_J]

...So if you are looking for a 30hp tractor to do 45hp work then you are not going to be happy. You buy the tractor suited to do the work required. Now if you can give me specific examples as to what the major problem is then I might understand your point better. What model tractor were you looking at, what were you going to use it for? What size and model equipment?

Lets simplify this a little. Forget about 4 row planters and 1 row planters.

Say I want a tractor to plant/cultivate 2 rows spaced at 34-36", pull a 2-bottom plow, 3-pt disk maybe 6-8'. Say I have a couple old tractors like an 8N or Ford 600/2000 type and maybe a Farmall 350. They can do all this but I would like to replace with modern equivalent diesels. 4WD would be nice but I can settle for 2WD since that's what the old tractors were. So something in high 20hp to low-mid 30 hp, draft control, 28"-38" rear tires, adjustable wheel width like the old tractors, etc. What would you recommend?

I think there might be something out there but it would be slim pickings. To get the versatility the older tractors had it seems you have to go with larger HP modern machines, and even then only JD seems to have some of the bases covered unless you go to much higher hp tractors.

On the subject of the plow, dlmaine01 is absolutely correct; it's the inside track dimension that's important. My book says you want to have 29" from the centerline of the tractor to the inside edge of the rear tires. So, 29+29=58". Then you have to add a conservative 12" for the tire width in the rear and is why I said you need 68"-72" center-to-center. If you were using 16.9" tires, which are the narrowest available on the Kubota M6040 and M7040, then you would need to set wider still. Like I said, on the front you could cheat a little and go narrower because if the FWD front tire is only 9" wide you could go 3-6" narrower depending on the rear tire size.

 

[Robert_in_NY]

Lets simplify this a little. Forget about 4 row planters and 1 row planters.

Say I want a tractor to plant/cultivate 2 rows spaced at 34-36", pull a 2-bottom plow, 3-pt disk maybe 6-8'. Say I have a couple old tractors like an 8N or Ford 600/2000 type and maybe a Farmall 350. They can do all this but I would like to replace with modern equivalent diesels. 4WD would be nice but I can settle for 2WD since that's what the old tractors were. So something in high 20hp to low-mid 30 hp, draft control, 28"-38" rear tires, adjustable wheel width like the old tractors, etc. What would you recommend?

I think there might be something out there but it would be slim pickings. To get the versatility the older tractors had it seems you have to go with larger HP modern machines, and even then only JD seems to have some of the bases covered unless you go to much higher hp tractors.

On the subject of the plow, dlmaine01 is absolutely correct; it's the inside track dimension that's important. My book says you want to have 29" from the centerline of the tractor to the inside edge of the rear tires. So, 29+29=58". Then you have to add a conservative 12" for the tire width in the rear and is why I said you need 68"-72" center-to-center. If you were using 16.9" tires, which are the narrowest available on the Kubota M6040 and M7040, then you would need to set wider still. Like I said, on the front you could cheat a little and go narrower because if the FWD front tire is only 9" wide you could go 3-6" narrower depending on the rear tire size.

The new compacts are not compareable to the older utility tractors. I have a Ford 640 and I want to update it and I am leaning towards a TT series from New Holland. You can get them in 2wd or 4wd, have a nice modern diesel with adjustable treads and excellent sight lines and it will do everything your old tractor would do

Why force a compact into a role it isn't perfect for. If you want a utility tractor like the old Fords then buy a utility tractor. If you need it in a compact frame then you are not going to want to set the wheels out anyway as you will no longer be compact. All tractors are good at something. Compacts are great for homeowners and can be made to work on a farm. My neighbor farmed the last 10 years of his life with a Ford 1920. He used a 2 bottom plow, 5' disc and 5' brush chopper. He also had a transplanter for planting vegetables.

If your main use is row crop work then you need to buy a tractor suited for that job. Compact tractors are called compact tractors for a reason. Utility tractors are called utility tractors for a reason. I don't see what the problem is. But I know I would never be looking at sub-compacts for farming purposes. A small garden, yes it will work but if you want to farm then get a tractor suited for it. A base model TT 2wd will cost around $12-14k if my memory serves me right. John Deere has the 5003 series and Agco has their own line of base models that are very affordable. I can not comment on the Kubota line because I have no experience with them but if Kubota is the only brand anyone can use as an example to support this argument then look at any other brand besides Kubota and buy your tractor from one of them.