5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
My M9000HDCC3
- Thread starter 5030
- Start date
- Views: 4249
OP
5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
CT_Tree_Guy
Platinum Member
Daryl, now THAT is a proper tractor! I love what 50 HP can do, so I can only imagine how nice it it to have 90 HP when you need it. You could drag my tractor around with that thing and not even know it was there! Very impressive.
I saw an M9000 in person when I went up to New Hampshire to check out a grapple for my chipper. I visited these two guys who did light land clearing using a pretty big JD skidsteer with a Dynax shear on it, and a big Bandit chipper that they fed with a Farmi 3861 grapple mounted on a Unimog. They had an Implemax grapple on the back of their 9000, and there's a picture of one of them on that tractor in one of the "Americans on Kubota" catalogs. I'll scan it and post in when I get back to my shop.
They told me that price, quality and the locking front differential were the things that sold them on orange vs. green. (I think the intercooler helped too.) How did Richard (one of the land clearers) put it? .... something like, "I never thought I'd be sitting on anything orange, except maybe to mow my lawn". How wrong we can be. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Enjoy that beast - I just wish I could hear that turbo sing!
Take care, John
I saw an M9000 in person when I went up to New Hampshire to check out a grapple for my chipper. I visited these two guys who did light land clearing using a pretty big JD skidsteer with a Dynax shear on it, and a big Bandit chipper that they fed with a Farmi 3861 grapple mounted on a Unimog. They had an Implemax grapple on the back of their 9000, and there's a picture of one of them on that tractor in one of the "Americans on Kubota" catalogs. I'll scan it and post in when I get back to my shop.
They told me that price, quality and the locking front differential were the things that sold them on orange vs. green. (I think the intercooler helped too.) How did Richard (one of the land clearers) put it? .... something like, "I never thought I'd be sitting on anything orange, except maybe to mow my lawn". How wrong we can be. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Enjoy that beast - I just wish I could hear that turbo sing!
Take care, John
OP
5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
John:
I'll still have a raffle for the payment book if it's okay with everyone. After I took the pictures, I gave it a bath.
One drawback to the M9 and the same thing on the 5030 and Kubota fixed that problem on the new M's is the front light placement. They are too low and the FEL gets in the way at night. I think I am going to mount another set up top so I have 4 facing forward plus the two on the grill and 2 more in the back.
The exhaust system is stainless. I was going to put a straight pipe on it but I can't bear the fact of destroying the underhood muffler. Turbo's sound sweet with a straight pipe, in chrome of course. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
The loader is awsome. I picked up my neighbors Chevy one ton and lifted it off a rock his kid had high centered it on. Just slid the forks under the front and told him to sit tight. Never even felt light in the back though I did have the FWA engaged.
I'm getting used to the size of it. The only time I really notice the size is when I park next to a car and look way down.
No getting this tractor in the shop or garage...too high.
I'll still have a raffle for the payment book if it's okay with everyone. After I took the pictures, I gave it a bath.
One drawback to the M9 and the same thing on the 5030 and Kubota fixed that problem on the new M's is the front light placement. They are too low and the FEL gets in the way at night. I think I am going to mount another set up top so I have 4 facing forward plus the two on the grill and 2 more in the back.
The exhaust system is stainless. I was going to put a straight pipe on it but I can't bear the fact of destroying the underhood muffler. Turbo's sound sweet with a straight pipe, in chrome of course. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
The loader is awsome. I picked up my neighbors Chevy one ton and lifted it off a rock his kid had high centered it on. Just slid the forks under the front and told him to sit tight. Never even felt light in the back though I did have the FWA engaged.
I'm getting used to the size of it. The only time I really notice the size is when I park next to a car and look way down.
No getting this tractor in the shop or garage...too high.
RobJ
Elite Member
No toy tractor there...Nice!
L
LarryRB
Guest
yes sir'
that is a real tractor!!!
that is a real tractor!!!
GeneD14
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2003
- Messages
- 1,458
- Location
- Tennessee
- Tractor
- Kubota B26 TLB, Allis Chalmers D17 series IV, Kubota ZG-23 Mower, Kubota ZD 1211, Kawasaki Mule 610, Stihl 361, Stihl 045 AV Super, and a Stihl 660 Ported and tuned
Nice looking M9000! I drove one at my dealer last summer and fell in love. My L4330 seemed really small after tooling around in the big M9000. It sounds like you are havig some fun picking up trucks. Enjoy!
jazzdaddy
Member
I'm getting an M105X in early March. I'll be using it for land clearing, road building, brush hogging and eventually, hay making.
I've got an L3830 which has been an excellent tractor. But it's not up to the heavy duty tasks I have coming up. I'm keeping the L3830 because it's great for tight spaces and excavation that requires lots of back and forth.
Implements I'm getting with the M105 are:
LA1301 loader, 84" HD bucket, HD forks
ATI 75" rock and brush grapple (Solenoid controls on loader joystick)
Landpride RBT-4096 Read blade with power angle, tilt and offest
Landpride 84" brush hog
York rake with power angle
Landpride 84" lift disc
I'm hoping to clear 20 acres over the next year.
I thought about the new M9640 but some of the implements I may have to use will require 90 PTO HP and 18 GPM of hydraulics. I'm also a little leery of getting the first model year of a new design.
I've got an L3830 which has been an excellent tractor. But it's not up to the heavy duty tasks I have coming up. I'm keeping the L3830 because it's great for tight spaces and excavation that requires lots of back and forth.
Implements I'm getting with the M105 are:
LA1301 loader, 84" HD bucket, HD forks
ATI 75" rock and brush grapple (Solenoid controls on loader joystick)
Landpride RBT-4096 Read blade with power angle, tilt and offest
Landpride 84" brush hog
York rake with power angle
Landpride 84" lift disc
I'm hoping to clear 20 acres over the next year.
I thought about the new M9640 but some of the implements I may have to use will require 90 PTO HP and 18 GPM of hydraulics. I'm also a little leery of getting the first model year of a new design.
CT_Tree_Guy
Platinum Member
Hello jazzdaddy, welcome to TBN -
Man oh man, that 105 is going to be a lot of tractor - what I couldn't do with a 1301 loader for moving logs! Very nice setup.
Hey, I was just wondering how you were going to be controlling those rear attachments. I see you're using a solenoid on the front (as I do); have you given any thought to doing the same for the rear? I have 3 electric hydraulic solenoids and a joystick to control my rear grapple, and I think it's a better way to go than conventional remotes. Naturally, many here disagree. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts, because to be honest about it, I'd like to see a lot more people go with solenoids for 3PH attachments.
Again, welcome to TBN,
John
Man oh man, that 105 is going to be a lot of tractor - what I couldn't do with a 1301 loader for moving logs! Very nice setup.
Hey, I was just wondering how you were going to be controlling those rear attachments. I see you're using a solenoid on the front (as I do); have you given any thought to doing the same for the rear? I have 3 electric hydraulic solenoids and a joystick to control my rear grapple, and I think it's a better way to go than conventional remotes. Naturally, many here disagree. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts, because to be honest about it, I'd like to see a lot more people go with solenoids for 3PH attachments.
Again, welcome to TBN,
John
jazzdaddy
Member
I also considered the M125 but for the extra 20 hp they use an engine that has 50% greater displacement than the 105 and I was worried about fuel usage. The 125 uses three gallons/hour at full implement speed. Yikes. I'm hoping the M105 is a little better on fuel.
For remotes, I'm going with the standard two rear remotes. I don't envision using a setup that requires continuous manipulation on the rear. If I do, I'll add it as an aftermarket item.
On the loader, the solenoid valve arrangement uses the loader hydraulics. It is a Kubota supplied system and installed at the dealer.
The Landpride RBT-4096 rear blade has three cylinders but they are connected to a single control provided by Landpride. I don't expect that I'll need to be manipulating the rear blade in three dimensions continuously. I also haven't seen the Landpride controls so I'm just going to go with it and see how it works.
For land clearing, I'm hoping I can use the rear blade to dig up small roots and rocks and use the grapple to pile them. Larger stumps will either be excavated with a hired excavator or left to rot in the ground.
For remotes, I'm going with the standard two rear remotes. I don't envision using a setup that requires continuous manipulation on the rear. If I do, I'll add it as an aftermarket item.
On the loader, the solenoid valve arrangement uses the loader hydraulics. It is a Kubota supplied system and installed at the dealer.
The Landpride RBT-4096 rear blade has three cylinders but they are connected to a single control provided by Landpride. I don't expect that I'll need to be manipulating the rear blade in three dimensions continuously. I also haven't seen the Landpride controls so I'm just going to go with it and see how it works.
For land clearing, I'm hoping I can use the rear blade to dig up small roots and rocks and use the grapple to pile them. Larger stumps will either be excavated with a hired excavator or left to rot in the ground.
OP
5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
Jazzdaddy:
I hate to burst your bubble but the 105 is right around 3 gallons per hour too. My partner has one. My M9 is better at 2.2. Fuel usage is at rated rpm and rated load. You should do better, but then again, maybe not.
My partner looked at the X but couldn't justify the extra cost and got an S instead. The M9 interior wise is the same as the S and X with the exception of the armrest mounted controls which I don't care for anyway. I can get in his tractor and then go to mine and everything is the same and that's important for us as we switch off depending on what implement is out behind.
I hate to burst your bubble but the 105 is right around 3 gallons per hour too. My partner has one. My M9 is better at 2.2. Fuel usage is at rated rpm and rated load. You should do better, but then again, maybe not.
My partner looked at the X but couldn't justify the extra cost and got an S instead. The M9 interior wise is the same as the S and X with the exception of the armrest mounted controls which I don't care for anyway. I can get in his tractor and then go to mine and everything is the same and that's important for us as we switch off depending on what implement is out behind.
jazzdaddy
Member
5030,
I've been following your posts as I know that you have experience with both models. I really need the PTO hp at >90 and hydraulic gpm at >18 or else I would have considered the M9.
Also, on the M105, the LA-1301 loader has considerably more breakout force (4980lbs) vs. 3750 lbs. on the LA1251 on the M9. The M9 loader looks like it's faster than the M105 but I need to stack 1 ton pallets and break rocks out of the ground and I feel better with the extra power.
If the M105 really uses 3 gallons/hr, I'll be annoyed for not going with the M125. Kubota says the M125 uses 3 gal/hr, maybe it's more in practice.
I've been following your posts as I know that you have experience with both models. I really need the PTO hp at >90 and hydraulic gpm at >18 or else I would have considered the M9.
Also, on the M105, the LA-1301 loader has considerably more breakout force (4980lbs) vs. 3750 lbs. on the LA1251 on the M9. The M9 loader looks like it's faster than the M105 but I need to stack 1 ton pallets and break rocks out of the ground and I feel better with the extra power.
If the M105 really uses 3 gallons/hr, I'll be annoyed for not going with the M125. Kubota says the M125 uses 3 gal/hr, maybe it's more in practice.
OP
5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
Jazzdaddy:
I have no problem at all moving one ton pallets with the 1251/M9, matter of fact, just got in from setting a ton pallet of wood pellets next to the deck for my wife. Cycle time wise, the 1251 seems a bit faster than the loader that I had on the 5030. The 105/125 have the self leveling loader which the M9 don't have but I run the 105 and either loader works fine for me. Spec wise, I'm not concerned with breakout force, thats a relative term anyway. Leverage on the bucket lip against an immovable object can be multiplied many times just by a slight movement of the tractor itself. Again, I'd like to have had the corner post mounted exhaust, but all the tractors I have run had a centered pipe so it's no problem, I just ignore it.
I might add that the ton pallet was moved and placed next to the deck in 2WD. I have only used FWA 2 times, once for the Chevy and once dragging a 40 yard roll-off container to the road (I do fabrication work on roll-off's on the side).
If I can pick up a 3/4 ton Chevy and lift it off a rock, that's pretty impressive to me.
Be sure whatever model you get to specify cast wheel centers on the back that way, the loader won't lift the back of the tractor as Kubota's loaders in general will float the tractor that they are on if that unit has stamped centers on the rear.
The 125X as far as my opinion is, way too much glitz without the glitter. That is, it's set up as a row crop tractor but it lacks the electronic controls that JD has on their tractors in that class like headland monitors. I don't row crop anyway so the X is too frivilous anyway.
The M9 has been around for quite a few years. It's proven itself and it's reliable. Kubota's foray into the middleweight market is spearheaded by the 105-125 and that's a hard market to get into.
I have no problem at all moving one ton pallets with the 1251/M9, matter of fact, just got in from setting a ton pallet of wood pellets next to the deck for my wife. Cycle time wise, the 1251 seems a bit faster than the loader that I had on the 5030. The 105/125 have the self leveling loader which the M9 don't have but I run the 105 and either loader works fine for me. Spec wise, I'm not concerned with breakout force, thats a relative term anyway. Leverage on the bucket lip against an immovable object can be multiplied many times just by a slight movement of the tractor itself. Again, I'd like to have had the corner post mounted exhaust, but all the tractors I have run had a centered pipe so it's no problem, I just ignore it.
I might add that the ton pallet was moved and placed next to the deck in 2WD. I have only used FWA 2 times, once for the Chevy and once dragging a 40 yard roll-off container to the road (I do fabrication work on roll-off's on the side).
If I can pick up a 3/4 ton Chevy and lift it off a rock, that's pretty impressive to me.
Be sure whatever model you get to specify cast wheel centers on the back that way, the loader won't lift the back of the tractor as Kubota's loaders in general will float the tractor that they are on if that unit has stamped centers on the rear.
The 125X as far as my opinion is, way too much glitz without the glitter. That is, it's set up as a row crop tractor but it lacks the electronic controls that JD has on their tractors in that class like headland monitors. I don't row crop anyway so the X is too frivilous anyway.
The M9 has been around for quite a few years. It's proven itself and it's reliable. Kubota's foray into the middleweight market is spearheaded by the 105-125 and that's a hard market to get into.
jazzdaddy
Member
I ordered it with the cast wheel centers and filled rear tires for a weight that will over 10000 lb. not including rear attachments.
I don't row crop either, though I hope to make hay in a year or two. We have some serious hills and I wanted the power to pull a silage baler over these hills. I also need to pull a 3 ton lime spreader. I'm thinking that the Intellishift will help with this terrain as well.
I don't row crop either, though I hope to make hay in a year or two. We have some serious hills and I wanted the power to pull a silage baler over these hills. I also need to pull a 3 ton lime spreader. I'm thinking that the Intellishift will help with this terrain as well.
OP
5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
Jazzdaddy:
I have been through this discussion before. My partner and I are commercial forage growers and I don't advocate filled tires for the simple reason that the heavier the tractor is, the more weight is imparted to the ground and the more weight on the footprint of the tire, the more damage you do to the hay crop. We pull everything from a NH 700 series auto tie round bailer, a tandem axle New Idea manure spreader, Kuhn side slinger, lime spreaders, MoCo, crimpers and tandem axle hay wagons with the square bailer attached and the only time we use FWA is on one field that has a hill in it. Between the two of us we have 7 tractors and none have loaded tires. The other problem with loaded tires especially CaCl is that if you rupture a tire in the field, wherever the CaCl or the antifreeze leaks on the hay, it will never grow again and we plant and grow hybrid alfalfa which is expensive in itself.
With cast centers, the filled tires are frivilous.
I have been through this discussion before. My partner and I are commercial forage growers and I don't advocate filled tires for the simple reason that the heavier the tractor is, the more weight is imparted to the ground and the more weight on the footprint of the tire, the more damage you do to the hay crop. We pull everything from a NH 700 series auto tie round bailer, a tandem axle New Idea manure spreader, Kuhn side slinger, lime spreaders, MoCo, crimpers and tandem axle hay wagons with the square bailer attached and the only time we use FWA is on one field that has a hill in it. Between the two of us we have 7 tractors and none have loaded tires. The other problem with loaded tires especially CaCl is that if you rupture a tire in the field, wherever the CaCl or the antifreeze leaks on the hay, it will never grow again and we plant and grow hybrid alfalfa which is expensive in itself.
With cast centers, the filled tires are frivilous.
jazzdaddy
Member
I am concerned about the weight, especially going through some of the wetter areas of my fields. The filled tires are something that the dealer recommends. I think they do this because they do a lot of compact tractors that really need this.
I think they are also a little sensitive to the market perception that Kubotas are lighter than other utility tractors from Massey and Deere. That may have been true in the past, but that's not the case with the latest models.
I think I'll consider ordering the unit without the tires filled and see how it works. If I need the weight, I can always add fluid later.
My dealer hasn't used CaCl2 in years due to concerns such as yours. They use some environmentally neutral formula that I'm not familiar with.
I think they are also a little sensitive to the market perception that Kubotas are lighter than other utility tractors from Massey and Deere. That may have been true in the past, but that's not the case with the latest models.
I think I'll consider ordering the unit without the tires filled and see how it works. If I need the weight, I can always add fluid later.
My dealer hasn't used CaCl2 in years due to concerns such as yours. They use some environmentally neutral formula that I'm not familiar with.
OP
5030
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 28,967
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
I believe the filled tires are superfluous. Spend the money on something else like another set of high mounted cab lights.
If you are too heavy in a wet area, you may become a monument and an expensive removal job. Everything can get stuck, dozer's, tractors, tanks, whatever. Just depends on how bottomless your mud is and your willingness to test it.
If you are too heavy in a wet area, you may become a monument and an expensive removal job. Everything can get stuck, dozer's, tractors, tanks, whatever. Just depends on how bottomless your mud is and your willingness to test it.
40Kchicks
Gold Member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2003
- Messages
- 489
- Location
- Western Oregon
- Tractor
- 2003 Kubota M9000DTL 2001 JD 2252 Orchard Tractor Cat 216 Skidsteer 1999 JD 450H Dozer 1994 JD 644G wheel loader
Jazzdaddy
I haven’t had any trouble pulling anything yet with my M9000 with the exception of a 30 ton feed truck that got stuck on my hill. Of course I don’t use it to plow yet but I figured that extra weight just uses extra fuel. I use the tractor in all sorts of mud at times and do take advantage of the FWD often. I would also recommend not filling the tires until there comes a day that your uses require it.
Eric
I haven’t had any trouble pulling anything yet with my M9000 with the exception of a 30 ton feed truck that got stuck on my hill. Of course I don’t use it to plow yet but I figured that extra weight just uses extra fuel. I use the tractor in all sorts of mud at times and do take advantage of the FWD often. I would also recommend not filling the tires until there comes a day that your uses require it.
Eric
jazzdaddy
Member
I've been all over my place in my L3830 and did manage to get stuck up the axles once. That was due primarily to inexperience and thanks to that I'm a lot more careful. It took a wrecker and $500 to pull my tractor and truck out of the mud at the far end of the field.
For wet season work, I'll probably use the L3830 in the wet areas now that I know where they are. That way if I get stuck, I can use the M105 to pull it out.
With the rain we have had this winter, spring is likely to be treacherous here. I've got 22 acres that need fertilzer and lime before the cattle go out grazing. If it doesn't dry out, it's going to be interesting.
For wet season work, I'll probably use the L3830 in the wet areas now that I know where they are. That way if I get stuck, I can use the M105 to pull it out.
With the rain we have had this winter, spring is likely to be treacherous here. I've got 22 acres that need fertilzer and lime before the cattle go out grazing. If it doesn't dry out, it's going to be interesting.
