Limitations of a sub compact?

[bp fick]

I'm not exactly sure myself where the line/ devides the 2 size tractors,
But I'm thinking the tractors the size of ridding mowers but with diesel engines under 20 hp, PTO.s and 3 pnt lift are considered Sub-cut and then the 21 hp thru 40?Hp I would think are the Cut tractors, am I close to being right Folks?

Not quite. These are arbitrary labels.

That said, the sub-cut can have the hp of some CUTS, right up to 26 horse. The issue seems to be the lower to the ground stance, matched with smaller wheels and tires, than a CUT. Again, there are CUTS with less hp than some SUBCUTS, so the whole thing is a bit arbitrary, but usually refers to very compact tractors. Kubota BX, MF GC, Deere 2305, etc. BTW, these subcuts are much more than riding lawn mowers with diesel engines. They are the real deal, just very compact.

 

[RoyJackson]

Guys,

Just for clarification, what it the difference between a scut and a cut.

I've never heard a dealer or manufacturer describe a tractor as a subCUT although compact utility tractor (CUT) is fairly common.
As far as size, it's been small frame, medium frame and large frame CUTs (at lease that's how Deere describes them).
Maybe subCUT is a TBN invention?

 

[TripleR]

I've never heard a dealer or manufacturer describe a tractor as a subCUT although compact utility tractor (CUT) is fairly common.
As far as size, it's been small frame, medium frame and large frame CUTs (at lease that's how Deere describes them).
Maybe subCUT is a TBN invention?

Kubota describes the BX line as "sub compact" while John Deere just lists "compact", so who knows; sometimes the line seems blurred at least to me.

 

[bp fick]

I've never heard a dealer or manufacturer describe a tractor as a subCUT although compact utility tractor (CUT) is fairly common.
As far as size, it's been small frame, medium frame and large frame CUTs (at lease that's how Deere describes them).
Maybe subCUT is a TBN invention?

No, but, who knows? Cub Cadet refers to their sub cuts, as well, sub cuts, too. Right on their web page. LS Tractor web page uses the same designation. So does Massey! Didn't check Mahindra.

Yes, absolutely, the lines are blurry. I think, however, it makes sense to just think of subcuts as those compact tractors on the smaller frames, with smaller wheels/tires. It is indeed arbitrary designations.

 

[deepNdirt]

:thumbsup:

Not quite. These are arbitrary labels.

That said, the sub-cut can have the hp of some CUTS, right up to 26 horse. The issue seems to be the lower to the ground stance, matched with smaller wheels and tires, than a CUT. Again, there are CUTS with less hp than some SUBCUTS, so the whole thing is a bit arbitrary, but usually refers to very compact tractors. Kubota BX, MF GC, Deere 2305, etc. BTW, these subcuts are much more than riding lawn mowers with diesel engines. They are the real deal, just very compact.

I was making comparison in size not power when I refer to as a ridding size mower but with diesel engine,.... of course the sub compacts are a full operable tractor with 3 pnt and pto etc, isn't this what the discussions about
in fact a person who own a sub compact has the best of both worlds, can live in a subdivision neighborhood and still own a tractor while his neighbor thinks its simply a ridding mower, can be stow-a-way in a basement or small shed, can overlooked as a tractor when paying taxes, if I lived in such a community you bet this is the kind of tractor I would own,:thumbsup:

 

[tsteahr]

Kubota describes the BX line as "sub compact" while John Deere just lists "compact", so who knows; sometimes the line seems blurred at least to me.

Likewise Massey describes their GC series as sub compact as well as NH describes their 1020 and 1025 Boomer tractors as sub compact.

 

[bp fick]

I suppose at a dealership, surrounded by larger tractors, the subs might look at little like a riding lawnmower to the untrained eye.
However, Since I own both a larger riding lawn mower and the smallest of the Kubota subcompacts, the BX1860 I can compare the size. The BX dwarfs the riding lawn mower and outweighs it more than 2 to 1.

That said, yes, it is garageable and very nimble. But the FEL and ROPS sort of gives it away, though, when the BX is trying to pass. It keeps trying to sneak into the theatre at the 1/2 price the riding mowers get, but that darn BX keeps getting caught.

 

[bp fick]

Roy's point is well taken, though. The OEMs use the phrase Sub Compact, but the term subcompact utility is used less frequently, except here at TBN.

Still, there is a step, by step niche product for every conceivable size, it seems.

 

[deepNdirt]

I suppose at a dealership, surrounded by larger tractors, the subs might look at little like a riding lawnmower to the untrained eye.
However, Since I own both a larger riding lawn mower and the smallest of the Kubota subcompacts, the BX1860 I can compare the size. The BX dwarfs the riding lawn mower and outweighs it more than 2 to 1.

That said, yes, it is garageable and very nimble. But the FEL and ROPS sort of gives it away, though, when the BX is trying to pass.

these were not quite the comparisons I was making when referring to lawn Mowers and sub compact tractors.... I'm thinking more in terms of these comparisons, now if you were to remove the FEL and 3 PH from the one you would think of it nothing more then a ridding mower at first glance, although I'm sure it is OEM labled as ( Subcompact tractor)

 

[TripleR]

Roy's point is well taken, though. The OEMs use the phrase Sub Compact, but the term subcompact utility is used less frequently, except here at TBN.

Still, there is a step, by step niche product for every conceivable size, it seems.

Agreed as in the end it makes little difference that under the web site's listings of "utility tractors" they list "sub compacts" thus the acronym SCUT or CUT as all you can or should really rely on are the specs to decide what will work best for your needs regardless of what it's called.

 

[SPYDERLK]

I think that you might want to rethink that. Most wheel barrows hold from 4-6 cubic feet. I have yet to see any SCUT that will hold 12 cubic feet let alone 18 CF. I always thought that a SCUT loader bucket was about the same size or just a little bigger than a wheel barrow, but never 2-3 times the size. :confused3:

I can key in on this one..... as i have for many years mixed cement in a wheelbarrow and usually without spilling can only do 2x 80 lb bags is the max, just a few days ago I decide to give my 4 ft. FEL a try with mixing some cement, it would hold 2 x that amount ..4- 80 lb bags than that of a wheelbarrow, plus dumping the FEL was much easier on my back , If ever owning a tractor without a FEL you might not know what you'd be missing as I did with My cut Kubota for many years, then after getting the Yanmar and rigging it with a FEL I could never see myself having any size tractor without one, Yes the smaller SCUTS are limited although still would be much better driving with 3 bags of mulch in the FEL then pushing a wheelbarrow up hill with the same amount, No brainer!:thumbsup: IMO a good size tractor to have for between 2-10 acres would be a tractor 18-25 hp, if you have more land than that buy a few goats, they'll take care of the rest,

The issue you addressed with this is size, I believe. Yes the small FEL platform has many advantages over a wheelbarrow. Size and weight carrying advantage are not a high multiple however. Two max is a good realistic number. In mixing of concrete and moving it, the fel bucket has an advantage due to shape and attitude ajustability that is out of proportion to its somewhat greater size. You cant mix or carry much fluid in a wheelbarrow without it sloshing up the highly sloped sides and over the rim.
larry

 

[sld]

I would think the line between CUT and SCUT might have to do with the CAT 1 vs. CAT 0 three pt hookup size?

 

[bp fick]

I would think the line between CUT and SCUT might have to do with the CAT 1 vs. CAT 0 three pt hookup size?

At least with Kubota, the SCUT is CAT 1.

CAT 0 is the old garden tractor territory. I don't believe any of the major OEMs send out SCUTs with CAT 0.

 

[deepNdirt]

I can't seem to post this link, But If you go to this web site it might some way explain the difference in the Scut & Cut tractors,
go to ---> www compact tractor review dot com
this site shows a list of tractors they consider Sub compact.

 

[jenkinsph]

My dog was riding with me the other day and a lady was out walking her Corgy, I told my dog "Gee that dog looks alot like you just smaller" . My dog pointed out the keyword was "miniature".:laughing:

All kidding aside I consider the subcompacts as miniature tractors. It takes an inordinate amount of time to get anything done with them but they have their place if you have serious space confines.

 

[TripleR]

My dog was riding with me the other day and a lady was out walking her Corgy, I told my dog "Gee that dog looks alot like you just smaller" . My dog pointed out the keyword was "miniature".:laughing:

All kidding aside I consider the subcompacts as miniature tractors. It takes an inordinate amount of time to get anything done with them but they have their place if you have serious space confines.

Well, yes and no. No problem with "miniature tractors" as I have two plus bigger machines and they all have their place and I have hundreds of acres with plenty of space. I don't used a sledge hammer to drive nails or claw hammer to drive spikes; just depends on what you need to do.

 

[scoutcub]

At least with Kubota, the SCUT is CAT 1.

CAT 0 is the old garden tractor territory. I don't believe any of the major OEMs send out SCUTs with CAT 0.

I agree...had a "super garden tractor" a few years back, with a cat "0" 3-pt. Actually worked pretty good, but to find implements was an issue, and $$ pricey.....
I've also seen the "limited" class 1 for the scuts.....
I've got the scut, which is 23 HP.....and then the "middle" machine, 28HP....and largest, 32 HP. I use my SCUT for mowing, blowing and blading, the other 2 for loader/BH/3-pt work. Seems to work very well for me.....
I believe the "smaller than a CUT, with a little less capacity but more maneuverability" might be a fitting description...

 

[American Carpenter]

Looking at a JD 755, used with a belly mower; same price as a new nice JD lawn tractor gas model. For the number of hours per year I'll be mowing (70), the 755 would give me plenty of years of service. I hope. And use a lot less fuel, take a FEL when I get rich and famous. Only issue is mowing under trees; have to think about that.

How would a 755 do on a 20 degree slope??

Have my MF35 to bushhog with, but a little BIG to be mowing the lawn with.