Kubota vs. Deere

Bob_Skurka · Sep 12, 2005

Please show us the comparison, if you have it. We'll be able to judge whether it's deceptive rather than just take your word for it as (you are) a saleperson for other brands Thanks

Pete 

Neil & Pete,
Sorry to jump in withOUT the information, but I'm in Florida and all my comparison materials are back in my Indiana office. But to give you some general information, John Deere publishes "pivot point" load capacities on their front end loaders, at least they do on their CUTs. Kioti and Mahindra also publish 'pivot point' specs for their FELs. In fairness to JD, they do have complete specs available on the internet in their product manuals, it is harder for a typical consumer to find those specs, but with some digging they can be found.

Kubota, Case, Massey and New Holland list their FEL specs at multiple points, but typically people see the so-called "bucket center" rating, it is measured at 500mm (roughly 19.5") forward of the pivot point. The problem with making these comparision is that the capacity at the 'pivot point' is roughly 30% higher than it is at the bucket center. So if a loader has a 1000# capacity at the pivot point, it would actually have about a 700# capacity at the bucket center.

Obviously the bucket center is going to be more of a 'real life' capacity simply because the last time I used my bucket the load was actually carried inside the bucket, not behind it at the pivot point.

Unfortunately, many people don't realize they are not comparing 'apples-to-apples' when they look at the loader specs. I've seen many people tout that they bought "brand X" because it had a stronger loader than "brand Y" and it turned out they actually bought the weaker loader, or at least bought a loader than was MUCH weaker than they thought they did, simply because they mistakenly compared pivot point to bucket center ratings.

Now if you want to go look at some of the threads that have been done, please do a search. In the past I have posted actual data several times. Also here is a thread that I stated on Bucket Capacity versus Loader Capacity, after a couple pages, it gets into a very good discussion of exactly these issues you are questioning : Bucket Capacity Tread

EDIT : I've got some time between business meetings so I dug up some information. JD says the 200CX loader will lift 800# at the pivot point, that would equal about 560# at the bucket center. Now one thing I can't tell is where they measured it, but they list the ASAE spec. I suspect the capacity is lifted at either 12" or 36" but not at full height. Lifting to full height would lower the capacity. A quick check of the Kubota LA211 loader shows it has a capacity of 460# at the pivot point AT FULL HEIGHT of lift, so if it was measured at 12" or 36" instead of at full height, it would likely be rated higher.

My guess is, without digging deeper into the ASAE spec, is that these are loaders of EQUAL capacity or so very close to equal that it really doesn't matter in the real world.

jim_wilson · Sep 12, 2005

I don't know about any of the other brands but I pretty much believe the Kubota specs when they say that the BX loaders will lift 460 pounds (or is it 480 ) to full height. Last year after I got my tractor I loaded up the bucket one day with a couple of pairs of forklift forks and weightlifting weights. The relief valve opened finally when I had 675 pounds in the bucket - it would lift this to about half height. I did not try to lift 460 pounds to fully height to verify the Kubota spec but I think that it would have done it.

It would be nice if somebody would actually start doing head to head tractor tests where some of these published specs could be independently verified.

Bob_Skurka · Sep 12, 2005

( I don't know about any of the other brands but I pretty much believe the Kubota specs when they say that the BX loaders will lift 460 pounds (or is it 480 ) to full height. Last year after I got my tractor I loaded up the bucket one day with a couple of pairs of forklift forks and weightlifting weights. The relief valve opened finally when I had 675 pounds in the bucket - it would lift this to about half height. I did not try to lift 460 pounds to fully height to verify the Kubota spec but I think that it would have done it.

It would be nice if somebody would actually start doing head to head tractor tests where some of these published specs could be independently verified. )

The experiment you did illustrates how easy it is to play with numbers. It is very likely that if you only wanted to lift to 12" off the ground you could have put something on the order of 800# into the bucket!

Loaders capacities are always HIGHER when the load is CLOSER and LOWER. Loades capacities are always LOWER when the load is FARTHER and HIGHER.

So the WAY the manufacturer measures and the points of measurement are CRITICAL in determining an accurate apple-to-apple comparision.

Deere3120 · Sep 12, 2005

Ok I will say this I'm new to tractors, But not new to Hydraulics. This is a safe way to go about buying a Tractor/Loader. Always get a loader with alot more capacity then you will ever lift. I know you guys are pivot point and whatever else lifting capacitys at a certain height. My way of thinking is this BUY MORE THEN WHAT YOU NEED and forget about it. KEEP IN MIND THIS ONLY MY 2 CENTS.

Bob_Skurka · Sep 12, 2005

( Ok I will say this I'm new to tractors, But not new to Hydraulics. This is a safe way to go about buying a Tractor/Loader. Always get a loader with alot more capacity then you will ever lift. I know you guys are pivot point and whatever else lifting capacitys at a certain height. My way of thinking is this BUY MORE THEN WHAT YOU NEED and forget about it. KEEP IN MIND THIS ONLY MY 2 CENTS. )

I think a lot of people would totally agree with you that you should buy extra capacity, but let me ask this question. If you don't know how to read the specs, and if you don't know that "pivot point" capacity can be as much as 30% ABOVE "bucket center" capacity, and if you buy based on the wrong set of specs because you didn't know that they were different and you figured all manufacturers used the same specs so you were assuming you have a 25% 'cushion' and you actually end up 5% below your real needs then who is to blame? You because you didn't know how to read the specs? The manufacturer for publishing specs that, while they were honest, really are confusing at least and deceptive at worst? The tractor dealer who often doesn't know his own product?

orangebluegreen · Sep 13, 2005

Totally agree with your assessments on ratings, wonder however if there is such a thing as extra capacity? Appears to me a tractor with more hydraulic and cylinder performance just increases the bucket size which tend to put you loading the thing to capacity regardless of hydraulic performance. Suppose if one doesn’t fill the bucket you might have extra capacity that way. Perhaps there is a size of tractor where the hydraulics exceed the bucket size, that would certainly be a treat. It’s been years since I owned an old Ford TLB, it was HEAVY like a tank, not large HP (I forget how much probably less that 35) but I can never ever remember that loader not being able to pick up a full load of anything, and we had blue clay in Ohio and the bucket was large. In comparison...the tractors I’ve rented or borrowed over the past few years were an instant disappointment in loader performance until I got used to being hindered. Most of them when filling the bucket from the bottom of the pile of sandy dirt were unable to lift that load up through the pile without backing up a bit to lighten the load. The Massey 1250 I rented had a couple small cracks in the support reinforcements that run parallel with the loader arms, by the time I was done the steel had completely broken through on both sides creating a dangerous and unusable condition. They still charged me for that time I couldn’t use it though....should not have paid them.

Cliff_Johns · Sep 13, 2005

( . . . typically people see the so-called "bucket center" rating, it is measured at 500mm (roughly 19.5") forward of the pivot point. . . . )

Bob,

Is this a SASE type spec, or is "bucket center" a variable distance from the pivot points depending on the size of the tractor and bucket etc.? I always suspected that Deere used SASE pivot point spec because it takes the variables of bucket size and design out of the equasion and gives the valid canonical measurement no matter what tractor/bucket/attachment style you use.

If bucket center is 500mm as a spec, then I think they should say it that way, as they do the 3pt specification as in "capacity so many inches beyond pivot," rather than the squishy title of bucket center.

Saying it differently, if you want to compare a larger tractor with a big bucket with a smaller tractor with a smaller bucket, it seems like the only valid compare would be at the pivot point.

Anyway, it makes sense to me that way.

Cliff.

MessickFarmEqu · Sep 13, 2005

its typicaly 500mm forward. The most recent set of Kubota literature includes three measurements (as if we need to confuse this further) Pivot Pin, 500mm, and true bucket center.

johndeere_2210 · Sep 13, 2005

If you are interested, this is my comments regarding the two machines. I have owned them both (BX2230 and now a 2210). I really think you can toss a blanket across them in terms of "which will last longer" for they are both built at a very high level. I feel the 2210 or 2305 has some significant advantages. First, the 3-point arms on the 2210 are significantly longer and open wider/easier than the BX. In fact, I had a Kubota dealer guy tell me the arms on the BX are Cat 0 size in terms of length and opening, but the pins are Cat 1 and I'm here to tell you there is a MAJOR difference in ease in hooking attachments up behind a 2210 (easy) vs. BX (much more difficult) and keep in mind, it is the same carry over attachments. IMO, this is the single biggest advantage.

IMO, the overall ergonomics of the 2210 are nicerr, quick joy stick to operate at your leg level vs. holding your right arm up to operate a joystick mounted to the loader and this would be my assessment of the foot pedals as well, great design on the Deere and I don't like the overall tread design on the Kubota.

The things I do like about the Kubota vs. the Deere are the following: a) the Kubota pulls air between your legs and shoots it out the front and this is important because Deere is reverse and attracts significant grass clipping on the front grill and no doubt alters cooling, and I have seen post on this; b) Kubota has a temp gauge, so you can monitor the cooling, Deere has no temp gauge, simple light; c) I like where the fuel filling cap is on Kubota low and over a rear fender, Deere is centered in the hood and makes it tough not to spill things on the hood and at the same time, a pain to hold 5-gallons of fuel so high, while refueling. One big advantage of the Kubota is the mower deck will raise very high, and much more so than the 2210.

As mentioned earlier, the quality and life of these machines are most likely identical. I would give Deere the overall advantage, because it's simple to use, quick response (fast hydraulics, and more loader capacity) and for me, EASIER 3-POINT hook ups.

Bob_Skurka · Sep 13, 2005

Cliff,

Neil answered your question but let me clarify it just a bit.

Most people refer to the 500mm measurement as "bucket center" but the advent of quick attach buckets, different bucket shapes, etc really makes the "bucket center" term sort of a generic term. 500mm is the technically correct measurment and often it really is not the center of the bucket, sometimes it is forward of the center, sometimes it is behind the center. Kubota, based on the brand new brochure I have, gives the true bucket center, in addition to the 500mm number, but at this point they are the only company that I know that goes the extra step to provide this. I am under the impression that the 500mm number is one of the many ASAE measurement points for capacity.

Also, as was also pointed out by 'orangebluegreen' capacity is really a fuzzy question too. As we have been discussing capacity in this thread, it is not related to volume, but rather it is related to weight.

bigpete · Sep 13, 2005

Okay, I jumped in because a Kubota/New Holland salesman stated in a JD Forum that he thought JD's literature was deceptive to consumers--a very strong statement, indeed. Now I learn that all tractor manufacturers except Kubota are deceiving customers if that standard holds water. Where are we with that allegation? ...and does anyone actually have the comparable numbers--center bucket. 500 MM, pivot pin, breakout force, whatever--since Kubota is forthright enought to provide all measurement points, including possibly the same point as is used by JD for the 210 or 200CX. Why doesn't Kubota make those spec statements on their Website and which literature are you guys talking about? Kubota sell-in or tech literature? Just curious and still a little befuddled about the reason for the sniping when there are still no facts offered /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif.

dmax03 · Sep 13, 2005

You seem to be well informed. Do you know the difference in engines between the 2210 and 2305? I test drove both and could tell an audible difference. I know there is about 1 hp diff. but I just wondered if there was more to it than a bore or stroke change.

johndeere_2210 · Sep 13, 2005

Not sure anyone would notice the .5 hp difference 23.5 vs. 24, but I will say the 2210 is not underpowered and has plenty of power to do what the machine is capable of doing; that is, I have never been in a situation where I thought power was a concern vs. what I think the tractor is capable of doing, and I would add this was the same for the BX2230.

Bob_Skurka · Sep 13, 2005

( Okay, I jumped in because a Kubota/New Holland salesman stated in a JD Forum that he thought JD's literature was deceptive to consumers--a very strong statement, indeed. Now I learn that all tractor manufacturers except Kubota are deceiving customers if that standard holds water. Where are we with that allegation? ...and does anyone actually have the comparable numbers--center bucket. 500 MM, pivot pin, breakout force, whatever--since Kubota is forthright enought to provide all measurement points, including possibly the same point as is used by JD for the 210 or 200CX. Why doesn't Kubota make those spec statements on their Website and which literature are you guys talking about? Kubota sell-in or tech literature? Just curious and still a little befuddled about the reason for the sniping when there are still no facts offered to back up a criminal, or at least ethical, allegation (of which deceptive advertising is) /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif. )

Pete,

My observations are these.

Case, Kubota, Massey and New Holland provide FEL numbers at the 500mm point in front of the pivot point. That point is commonly (but not technically accurately) called the bucket center point. The 500mm measuring point is a "real world" measuring point since it actually measures the load as it would be inside the bucket where you and I actually put a load.

Deere quotes ASAE standards and typically provides a standard number, but it is virutally impossible for a normal consumer to find out where that point is with a reasonable level of due dillegence. But I can tell you that in their marketing material they provide pivot point, not so-called bucket center, or the 500mm point. However, Deere does provide infromation if you dig really hard (it took Mike Mc/rockeyridgefarm to point out to me where to find the data and I dug for it pretty darn hard).

Most of the minor brands provide even less information, don't provide any standard, don't support the Nebraska tests (which are standard tests of 40hp+ tractors) and some are downright vague.

As for some of your specific questions about Kubota, their brochures list multiple measuring points. Their website does the same thing. If you can get the downloadable brochure from New Holland, you will find the same type of information. Ditto Case. Ditto Massey. All of these sources are sales/marketing materials. None are tech materials. The fact they they list the lower 500mm number actually makes their capacities appear to be weak, to me that is actually the honest number.

I'm not here to defend Neil, but I don't see anywhere in his statement that he said JD was acting in a criminal way. Do I think that JD is being honest. Yes I do. But they are being honest in a limited way. They give a technically correct answer.

But I ask you, are they giving a useful answer? Or maybe who is giving a useful answer? JMHO, but my suggestion is that when I load a bucket I actually put material inside the bucket, I don't hang it on a load cell from the pivot point.

To carry the point futher, when I attach something to a 3pt hitch, usually the load I attach is carried well behind the ball eyes. So for that I applaud the companies who provide capacities at the point 24" behind the ball eyes. JD is one of those companies. But so are Case, Kubota, & New Holland.

I think when we look at deceptive, there is the question of legally correct, but still confusing. That is a form of being deceptive, yet still providing information that is legal. Does JD participate in that? Well I won't say yes, nor will I say no. But I will say that some of their marketing materials certainly could be more useful.

Bob_Skurka · Sep 13, 2005

( You seem to be well informed. Do you know the difference in engines between the 2210 and 2305? I test drove both and could tell an audible difference. I know there is about 1 hp diff. but I just wondered if there was more to it than a bore or stroke change. )

Nope. Sorry but I've done extensive studies of the loaders of various brands but I'm not really an engine guy.

I do know that the JD loaders are of very high quality and are very capable, and while my prior posts may be taken as being very critical of the loaders, the fact is the loader are good. The marketing materials that sell the loaders are what I think need some dramatic improvement.

rockyridgefarm · Sep 14, 2005

2210 3TNE74
2305 3TNV76

The new machine has a Tier2 Emmissions ready engine. This is a total new design that is cleaner and designes to be much quieter. While Yanamr shows the new engines to match the old spec for spec; Deere acts as if they are slightly detuned, and each model was bumped up an engine size.

74 and 76 refers to bore in mm.

orangebluegreen · Sep 14, 2005

I have done a lot of stock analysis over the years and read many annual and quarterly reports. One thing I have found to be universal throughout any company has been the following:

All companies are able to reduce their reading and/or specifications to easily understood and compared terms. In almost every case I have seen where you scratch your head and have to read and reread something to understand it and are still not sure you understand, there is a reason the person wrote it that way (they usually do not want you to understand it.) The only case where this might differ is a company who doesn’t agree with a standard and is trying to change it. I am not familiar with the standards on measure of loaders, (if not used for business it makes little difference if it takes 20 loads or 100) but the measuring numbers not being directly comparable is similar to what I’ve experienced in many company reports.

I’ve also noticed overall “rear tread” and “overall widths” missing from JD’s 2210 info vs. BX2230’s. To anyone interested in a subcut this is a critical measurement. So do I believe this information is not there because JD’s width does not compare favorably to KUB?

dmax03 · Sep 14, 2005

Thanks that is some good info. I suspected there was a difference, but the dealer did not know. How did you find this info out? Have any good web sites?

rockyridgefarm · Sep 14, 2005

How did you find this info out? Have any good web sites? 

Yup! Super Secret web page Don't tell! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

18KwPower · Sep 15, 2005

I agree with most of what you said... However the comment about the BX2230 3pt seems strange. I've a full size Cat 1 implement on my BX2230 now.... The main thing is that the Kubota 3pt has link adjustments that need a wrench. BTW, my previous tractors were a JD445 (Cat0) and Ford 9N(Cat1). Where the difference is between the JD2210 and KubotaBX2230 is in the 3pt lift height and draft... Otherwise the specs aren't that far apart. They will both accept the smaller Cat1 implements found at most farm stores... and depending on size/weight/power necessary they will accept a number of the Full Cat1 implements. I didn't spend much time comparing how easy or hard it was to hook up 3pt items to the BX2230 vs JD2210 (3305now?). I was more impressed with the fact that the loader on the BX2230 came off/on easier than the deere. Esp compared to my JD445. Not to mention that the 60"mower deck went on/off the BX2230 way better than my JD445. I usually had to jack the front of the JD445 up to get the mower deck off/on. On the BX2230, I turn the front wheels a little one direction and it rolls right out from under.

Gone are the days I had to crawl around on the floor hooking up hydraulic connectors on the JD445 too. The BX2230 hydraulics connectors are up by the loader control, so are easy to connect/disconnect.

The major factor in my choice of the BX2230 over the 2210 was the turning radius. The BX2230 turns almost as tight as my 445 did... The longer wheelbase of the 2210 wasn't in its favor on this.

-Dave

( If you are interested, this is my comments regarding the two machines. I have owned them both (BX2230 and now a 2210). I really think you can toss a blanket across them in terms of "which will last longer" for they are both built at a very high level. I feel the 2210 or 2305 has some significant advantages. First, the 3-point arms on the 2210 are significantly longer and open wider/easier than the BX. In fact, I had a Kubota dealer guy tell me the arms on the BX are Cat 0 size in terms of length and opening, but the pins are Cat 1 and I'm here to tell you there is a MAJOR difference in ease in hooking attachments up behind a 2210 (easy) vs. BX (much more difficult) and keep in mind, it is the same carry over attachments. IMO, this is the single biggest advantage.

[snip]
) /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif