Is the L4400 enough tractor?

[trook]

I have been looking at the L4400 2WD tractor for using a 6ft. meduim duty Woods brush cutter, and I would like to use a 8ft disk instead of a 6ft disk if possible. According to the specs on the brush cutter, the MINIMUM HP is 35 at the PTO. I am a little concerned that the 37.5 PTO HP rating on the L4400 may cause the engine to strain during heavy cutting.

Will the L4400 have enough HP in less than perfect conditions, or would I be better served with a larger tractor? Also, would 4WD make $4,000 worth of difference pulling the 8ft disk?

I am also considering a John Deere 5103 2WD. It has 38 HP at the PTO

 

[art]

There are some questions that need to be addressed such as the type of mowing, we often are light on horsepower on mowers as there is ground speed as well as what we are mowing.
On the disc, is it three point or tow? What is the weight? The four wheel drive for a 4400 is about 3300 and in this area it would be worth a lot more then the initial price at trade time.

 

[Bob_Young]

Hi trook,
I have a med. duty 6' Woods (BB720) and an L4300 (same size predecessor to the L4400). The 4300 is NOT enough tractor for the BB720. It will run it and once it gets the blades spun up, seems to have enough power. The big factor is weight.

The BB720 weighs around 1200lbs. (with chains). The Kubota Operator Manual for the L4300 has a table which lists the max. recommended weight/size for a variety of implements. For the rotary cutter, Max weight is 880 lbs., max. size is 6'. The problem is that the weight is centered about 3 feet aft of the 3PH and applies lots of leverage to the tractor.

When running the 720 behind the 4300, it seems like the tail is wagging the dog. The big heavy mower swinging around tight turns has got to be putting real stress on the 3PH. Without the FEL on the front, you can't raise the 720 clear of the ground without pulling the front wheels off the ground. I used it without the top link (2 pt.) for awhile and that did work but it's not optimum.

What's really a PITA is that the 3PH geometry on the tractor (smallish Cat I) is too tight for the CatII dimensions of the cutter. Hooked up, everything matches but the 3PH arms are spread nearly as wide as they will go...which means that to get hooked up, you have to partially disassemble the 3PH. From what I've seen of the L4400, you'd be faced with the same thing.

I bought the two together and my dealer recommended the standard duty 6 footer instead. I went ahead with the 720 under the rationale that I had a bigger tractor to pull it if necessary (old Ford 4000). After using the cutter on the Kubota a few times, the Ford and the BB720 have become practically inseperable. Even the Ford gets a bit light in the front at times and is not ideal. I'm hoping to upgrade it to a M-series in a couple years.

I'd recommend Woods new Extreme Standard Duty BB72 if you stick with the L4400. Woods Standard Duty cutters are pretty tough. I just sold a 30 year old 5 footer to the neighbor. It was rough and the deck starting to crack, but still did the job after loads of abuse.

If you must have the Medium Duty, you should be looking at the smaller M-series tractors...I think the M4800SU or the M5040 would be the smallest to comfortably handle it, from what I've read. The MX5000 is limited to around 1000lbs. with a rotary cutter, so it doesn't make the cut.

Again, it's not the HP that's the big issue, it's weight and how it's distributed. The 5103 is heavier and would probably be a better choice than the L4400, but check with the JD dealer.

Definitely get 4WD...it'll keep you going instead of cussing.

Sorry this is so long, must have keyboard diarrhea this morning.
FWIW
Bob

 

[Don R.]

I purchased a brand new 4240HST with 4wd and was operating a 6' Bush Hog "Squealer" shredder. It absolutely would not mow in higher grass and weeds with that set up. It may have been the tractor; or some say it was the design of the shredder which did not have a rear eject for the grass. I would be careful about going too small. I did have a 2800 which pulled a 5' Rhino shredder with no problems.

The key to this, and IMHO your needs, is the 4WD option. There are times when you may be mowing in an apparent open field and you will hit a small draw and the 4WD is necessary to get you out without raising the deck.

My advice? If you think the 4400 is "adequate", go up at leasat one size. But, do get the 4WD. You won't regret it.

 

[trook]

Thanks for all your replies. Bob, your reply was not too long, but rather an excellent post!! It appears that the 4400 will only be efficient with a 5ft cutter. The reason I was asking about this tractor is because I have the opportunity to buy a 2WD with 15 hrs for $12,500. From reading the previous posts, it also appears that I may not be happy pulling a 6-8ft disk with 2WD. Thanks for all your help.

 

[N80]

I have an L4400 4wd. I also agree that the weight of the implements is the issue, not the hp. I have mowed 20 acre pastures in deep grass and briars with my JD LX-6 mower, which is a standard (light) duty mower. I had no problems at all. Here is a pic. It wasn't all this deep, but plenty of it was. Still, no problems:

So don't worry about hp. But do worry about weight. As mentioned, the 3pt lift capacity is so-so and the L4400 is very light. Mowing with the loader on does help.

As for an 8 foot disk, well, depends on the disk. Pulling it will not be an issue at all. But carrying it, if it is too heavy, will be an issue. Most standard duty 8 footers should be fine.

If you must have heavy implements, look at the M5040. Otherwise the L4400 is fine. The power is wonderful. I've been plowing hard dry clay with a two bottom plow and power has not been an issue at all. BUT, that is with 4wd! In a tractor as small and light as the L4400, 4wd is a must for ground engaging and any serious loader work. I would not even consider a CUT or small utility tractor without 4wd unless all you'll be doing is mowing and level ground tasks.

I'm curious though, what do you need a medium duty 6 foot cutter for?

Here is a pic of the finished job:

 

[EastTexFrank]

Now you guys have really got me worried. I have a L4740 with a Bush Hog SQ172 on order and waiting on delivery. I have some pretty steep slopes to run up and down and the dealer said that the tractor would pull it with "no problem", in fact he was trying to sell me a heavier model, but from what you guys are saying, that might not be the case. I suppose I'm just going to have to wait and see ..... and worry.

 

[CDsdad]

Now you guys have really got me worried. I have a L4740 with a Bush Hog SQ172 on order and waiting on delivery. I have some pretty steep slopes to run up and down and the dealer said that the tractor would pull it with "no problem", in fact he was trying to sell me a heavier model, but from what you guys are saying, that might not be the case. I suppose I'm just going to have to wait and see ..... and worry.

I'm not 100% on this, because I don't own one, but I want to say the Grand Ls are a good deal heavier than the L4400. I was looking at the 4330 and the 4400 when I was shopping, and the 4330 was more tractor. Unless they changed the Grand L 40s a lot, I imagine it's the same. I do have a distant neighbor who's running a SQ720 on a 4330. I know that's a lighter mower, but also a smaller tractor, so hopefully you'll be fine.

 

[Bob_Young]

CDsDad is right, Frank. The L4740 is built on a bigger chassis than either the L4300 or the L4400.

I've been studying the specs lately and noticed that the 71.1 inch wheelbase 'chassis' used on my L4300 is also used as the basis for the smaller Grand Ls (3240 & 3540). The L4740 is built on the 74.6" WB chassis, so it's a significantly bigger tractor.

Also noticed that the L4400 has been stretched slightly over the older L4300 (if the specs can be believed). It's on a 72.6" chassis now....but, from what someone here reported, the Owner's manual still recommend max. BHog weight of 880 lbs. Oddly, the MX5000 is also on the 71.1" wheelbase, so it's really compact for an M-series, though probably built heavier than the Ls.

If you can lay hands on the L4740's Owner Manual and look for the table of Implement Limitations, you'll have a better idea of where you stand. Of course, you'll also need to know the weight of your new BHog.

There's still some question in my mind as to how much the table of Limitations can be believed. The BHog limits are about right, from my experience. However, the table also limits the L4300 to a 90" Backhoe.

The Kubota L4300 brochure I picked up when first shopping, recommended the 9ft. (108") L4560 Backhoe, which is sort of a beast. It seems from this that Kubota doesn't believe it's published limitations.

For purposes of comparison (and because there may be a large Grand L in my future), I would like to know what Implement Limitations for the L4740 are...once you get a look at them.
Bob

 

[Double Orange]

Now you guys have really got me worried. I have a L4740 with a Bush Hog SQ172 on order and waiting on delivery. I have some pretty steep slopes to run up and down and the dealer said that the tractor would pull it with "no problem", in fact he was trying to sell me a heavier model, but from what you guys are saying, that might not be the case. I suppose I'm just going to have to wait and see ..... and worry.

East Texas Frank, The SQ172 weighs 764#.

As you know I have the L5240, I'll assure you, that you will'nt even know it's behind you!