Comparison LA844 Specs

[kuboman]

It might be helpful to new Kubota shoppers, like myself a few years back, if we reminded folks that the "number" on a Kubota loader has meaning. If it were in pounds, (English) we'd all understand right away, but because it is in kilograms, the rest of the world's unit of measurement, it doesn't "click" with us.

To get a quick idea, just double it, in your head, and add 10% more and you'll be close enough for hand grenades and horseshoes.

2.2 times kilograms will give you pounds. Thus,
an LA243 loader = 535 lbs.
an LA524 loader = 1153 lbs.
an LA854 loader = 1879 lbs. and so forth.

Wish someone had hit me over the head with that obvious 2x4 when I was shopping, early on. Just rough rule of thumb, but it'd been helpful.

You are close, the last number is the series number the first 2 indicate the lifting capabilities in kg at the bucket pivot pin.

 

[LD1]

You are close, the last number is the series number the first 2 indicate the lifting capabilities in kg at the bucket pivot pin.

You have to be careful with that one as well.

It used to be the first two numbers, (and add a zero) gave you the lift at the BUCKET CENTER.

Now they are going to the PINS.

For example, my L3400 has the LA463 loader. It is the same loader as the newer LA524. BUT the 524 cannot lift anymore. They just changed where it is measured at. The LA463 will lift 460 kgs @ bucket center. The LA524 will lift 520 kgs at the pins. BUT THEY ARE THE SAME

 

[SmokemanGRP]

It might be helpful to new Kubota shoppers, like myself a few years back, if we reminded folks that the "number" on a Kubota loader has meaning. If it were in pounds, (English) we'd all understand right away, but because it is in kilograms, the rest of the world's unit of measurement, it doesn't "click" with us.

To get a quick idea, just double it, in your head, and add 10% more and you'll be close enough for hand grenades and horseshoes.

2.2 times kilograms will give you pounds. Thus,
an LA243 loader = 535 lbs.
an LA524 loader = 1153 lbs.
an LA854 loader = 1879 lbs. and so forth.

Wish someone had hit me over the head with that obvious 2x4 when I was shopping, early on. Just rough rule of thumb, but it'd been helpful.

BP,

That's great info for getting a ballpark comparison. Thanks

 

[Country1]

It might be helpful to new Kubota shoppers, like myself a few years back, if we reminded folks that the "number" on a Kubota loader has meaning. If it were in pounds, (English) we'd all understand right away, but because it is in kilograms, the rest of the world's unit of measurement, it doesn't "click" with us.

To get a quick idea, just double it, in your head, and add 10% more and you'll be close enough for hand grenades and horseshoes.

2.2 times kilograms will give you pounds. Thus,
an LA243 loader = 535 lbs.
an LA524 loader = 1153 lbs.
an LA854 loader = 1879 lbs. and so forth.

Wish someone had hit me over the head with that obvious 2x4 when I was shopping, early on. Just rough rule of thumb, but it'd been helpful.

Very good info!:thumbsup:

Thanks for posting that.

 

[kuboman]

You have to be careful with that one as well.

It used to be the first two numbers, (and add a zero) gave you the lift at the BUCKET CENTER.

Now they are going to the PINS.

For example, my L3400 has the LA463 loader. It is the same loader as the newer LA524. BUT the 524 cannot lift anymore. They just changed where it is measured at. The LA463 will lift 460 kgs @ bucket center. The LA524 will lift 520 kgs at the pins. BUT THEY ARE THE SAME

Well what fun would that be if they were consistent.:laughing::laughing:

 

[CANdiyMXER]

I have an MX 5000 machine with a LA 852 loader and QA forks and loaded tires. Over the past 3 years, i am still learning what it won't do safely and how quickly you can get into trouble, even with a rear counterweight!!

Loader specs are quite confusing the Kubota's reference spec is based on kilograms, a kilo being 2.2 pounds. A 844 can lift 844 Kg's X 2.2Kg=1857 lbs to full height. Nobody lifts anything from a pivot point! If you put forks on, the lift capacity plummets as you are moving the load farther from the pivot point. All lift capacities require ballasted tires and/ or counterweight. Rear tire spacing is important as it determines stability during maneuvering to dump an elevated load. Everyone talks about boosting pressures to get more out of a loader, all they are really doing is removing the built in safety factor. It may not be an issue at slow speed and low height, it definitely will be an issue with an elevated load on a rough ground...even just a few inches of ground height difference.

Kubota tractors are narrow, short and light, and have a high center of gravity, all things that work against loader stability.

In the past I have run backhoes and track loaders, no one is ever happy with their lifting capacities, we always want more! I have never heard any one complain about too much machine!

 

[LD1]

In the past I have run backhoes and track loaders, no one is ever happy with their lifting capacities, we always want more! I have never heard any one complain about too much machine!

Well, I have a L3400. And my Bushhog is my heaviest counter weight. That AND loaded tires and I can still lift the rears in the air. So more loader lift would do me absolutly no good, other than causing me to spend more money on a heavier counter weight or BH.

So I guess you kinda now heard me complain about TOO much machine. Either that, or too light of a machine for the loader it is equipped with.

 

[mike69440]

Well, I have a L3400. And my Bushhog is my heaviest counter weight. That AND loaded tires and I can still lift the rears in the air. So more loader lift would do me absolutly no good, other than causing me to spend more money on a heavier counter weight or BH.

So I guess you kinda now heard me complain about TOO much machine. Either that, or too light of a machine for the loader it is equipped with.

I am very familiar with the L3400HST as I borrow my neighbors fairly often when I need a second tractor. Their tractor has loaded tires and usually has my 600 Lb box blade hanging off the back. It gets a little bouncy with 1000 lbs in the buck but the rears don't lift.

Your loader set pressure seems high as you should not be able to lift the rears on level ground with loaded tires and an implement, especially with the L463 loader. It is weak.

Still the L3400 is a lightweight. I would not want to lift 1000 Lbs to full height on uneven ground.

My L39 was also unstable until I added spacers and weights to get the machine up to about 8100 lbs. Unless you are doing muddy field work, I think it best to ballast the tractor to the weight it is comfortable with.

If doing ground work and digging, I recommend the grand L. For a given frame size, they are heavier with a stronger loader.

I bet that hi low speed split in each speed range is real nice too. It could sell me on HST over GST.

 

[kuboman]

Not sure what the specs mean anyway. I lifted the back of a chevy 3/4 ton 4x4 with the top of my bucket completely off the ground. So I weighed the back of the truck and it was 1600 lbs. About 40% more than the spec say it can lift. Go figure. Oh and yes I had a counter weight of 1000 lbs on the 3pt.
B3200 with LA 504 loader.

 

[LD1]

I am very familiar with the L3400HST as I borrow my neighbors fairly often when I need a second tractor. Their tractor has loaded tires and usually has my 600 Lb box blade hanging off the back. It gets a little bouncy with 1000 lbs in the buck but the rears don't lift.

Your loader set pressure seems high as you should not be able to lift the rears on level ground with loaded tires and an implement, especially with the L463 loader. It is weak.

Still the L3400 is a lightweight. I would not want to lift 1000 Lbs to full height on uneven ground.

My L39 was also unstable until I added spacers and weights to get the machine up to about 8100 lbs. Unless you are doing muddy field work, I think it best to ballast the tractor to the weight it is comfortable with.

If doing ground work and digging, I recommend the grand L. For a given frame size, they are heavier with a stronger loader.

I bet that hi low speed split in each speed range is real nice too. It could sell me on HST over GST.

Yes I hear that the L3400 loader is weak ALOT. And on paper, it seems that way. And if you spent the 8k on a BH, it may indeed be weak. BUT, If you dont have a BH, the loader is indeed NOT weak.

I have yet to lift the rear with the bush hog on while doing any sort of material handeling. A full bucket of sand, wet clay, limestone, gravel, etc. It doesnt matter, it lifts them all. Full loads of firewood, big rounds, etc. Doesnt matter. The few times that I have maxed it out was when digging stumps out. Then it will cause the rears to lift with no trouble at all.

And I did put a guage on it to check pressure. It was 2300psi. Spec is like 2400. I pit a shim in and it is currently 2600psi. Not much gain. The only reason I did this is because with the forks on, the curl function needed improvement. I use the forks to lift logs out of the dirt to cut. Logs that are WAY too heavy to actually lift. BUT I can get the forks under, and just curl. This plants the heel of the bucket into the ground and allows the log to be lifted about 10" or so.

I look at some other brands of tractors that dont weight much more but have significantly higher FEL specs and I cant help but wonder if it is actually usable. Kubota could put bigger cylinders and up the PSI on the L3400 loader and make it double what it currently is, but it would do me absolutly NO good whatsoever.