I would never have guessed the 8N was 3000 lb. bare. Wider, yes, but I didn't think it was that heavy. My FIL had an 8N and then a WD-45 (which seems to be much bigger when sitting on it due to the higher perch but wears the same size rear tires). His professional opinion, having farmed for a living with both, is that his WD-45 would all but pull the 8N sideways through a field. I don't know the weight of the WD-45, but the engine seems a lot stronger than any 8N I ever drove.
I used my second 8N, the one with the Sherman tranny, equipped with chains and a 6' blade to try to clear my driveway here several years ago. Even with chains, it wouldn't pull the grade up to the house with any snow in front of the blade. I went back to my old Cadet 109 with the front blade and chains to get the job done. My little Kubota, acquired a year or two after selling the 8N, will run up and down the same driveway pulling the same amount of snow that the 8N wouldn't. This an old
B7100 with FEL, tipping the scales at about 1250 lb and making 16 hp when new..
Weight is not always a good thing. In fact, one of the selling points of the Ferguson system Fords was that they could pull the same amount of plow as a much heavier tractor due to the design of the then new 3 point hitch that transferred the weight of the plow to the tractor.
I am not advocating that anyone move on from a grand machine like an 8N if it's getting the job done. However, if someone is looking for a machine in that power range, I think the 4wd of the newer compacts will in the end win out in sheer ability to pull more things in more situations. A Kubota is built light for it's power, a Mahindra is built heavy, and others are in between. A person shopping has a choice, depending on whether they think sheer weight is important in their situation. For me, weight is something that can be added a lot easier than it can be removed, so I tend toward lighter construction unless the weight is the result of construction to reach a needed design parameter such as resistance to flexing.
Maybe I'm too much influenced by the Colin Chapman philosphy of "simplicate and add lightness". Granted, that was intended toward a totally different scenario (sports car design), but it goes well with the "Form follows function" philosophy of Frank Lloyd Wright, another man whose work I admire. Weight with a purpose, yes. But weight for it's own sake, no.
