</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Has anyone compared these two tractors closely? Their hydraulic specs are almost identical as far as gpm and capacity, making me think loader operations would be the same, but the 5030 does have a higher 3 pt lift capacity.
Also, how much difference does the extra 5 hp of the
L5030 make in terms of overall performance and ability? The
L5030's hitch is listed for both Category I and II. Are there connected bushings on the lower links that can be slipped over the pins for Category II or what )</font>
Okay Guys:
Here it comes, I mean my 5030 or my 3050. You'll have to excuse me, I have a 4020 J.D. too and I get my numbers mixed up. That's probably because I'm old....
I paid $33,930.00 for the 5030. That included the front loader which is an LA853 and the H.D. excavation bucket. I traded in an L-3710 and a Bobcat so the actual price was much less. I opted for the H.D. bucket as I attach a bale spear for moving round bales and I broke the material bucket on the 3710 at least 3 times and I hate to keep on welding a bucket.
I am very pleased with the 5030 and it will handle a 4 square round with no additional weight on the rear of the tractor. The 3710 required an implement, usually a back blade on the rear for stability.
I opted for the R4 tires as they wear much better than ag tires and do better on pavement. I optioned the cab out with every option, am/fm, rear defogger, rear wiper and heat grid. I also got the auxilliary lighting package.
The 5030 comes with Cat. II and bushings for Cat. I.
I have already worked the 5030 pretty hard moving bales from the outside stockpile to the barn in the mud and have used my rear mount blower to clear the road.
I considered the 46, but for our operation, the 50 is a better choice. Actually, the 5030 is very comparable to Kubota's M series Ag. tractors. Height consideration was the deciding factor in my purchase. The overall height of the 5030 is no more than the L-3710 and I keep the tractor in my shop and the door height is low. The 5030 is a very easy tractor to operate and I opted for full hydrostatic. We are in the commercial forage business and baling with a hydrostatic tractor is a joy as you can control the infeed to the baler whether a round baler or square baler with great precision insuring proper feed stops plugging of the baler and the controlled ground speed with a hydro is better than getting a cramp in your clutch foot. We are on our 3rd. cluthch in the 4020 because we always used it for running the balers.
It takes at least 45 pto to operate my 630 NH Round baler and every bit of the 5030's power to operate the J.D. Hydra Swing 13 foot mower conditioner but I am confident that the 5030 will handle it as it is my experience from my past 3 Kubota's that Kubota rates their PTO power conservatively. I also like the digital panel as it is similar in function to our large row crop Deeres.
Another deciding factor for this tractor was the actual weight to power ratio. The 5030 has a low gross weight which equates to lower crop loss due to crushing under the wheels during the harvest operation, and ground clearance is more than adequate for straddling a large windrow while baling.
I'm looking forward to getting her out in the field and putting it through the paces or should I say harvest. When we start the 1st. cut, I be shooting pictures and will post them on TBN for your enjoyment.
I have attached a picture looking through the cab at a bale, so you can see what I see. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
Daryl
Forage Services L.P.
