qed-cat225
Gold Member
I've seen them at a local dealer as well, has anyone found out what these cost with the usual loader, mid mower options?
New Yanmar-Cub CUTs
- Thread starter MajMac392
- Start date
- Views: 29852
newt92
Gold Member
Snapped these last evening. The place was closed so no prices. They look well built but was dissappointed with the overall size of the loader bucket, thought it was small. Anyway here is the pics.
2900
3200
2900
3200
OP
MajMac392
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2002
- Messages
- 411
- Location
- Southern Maine
- Tractor
- Cub Cadet 7234, John Deere X300 Riding Lawn Mower
Nice looking machine, real beefy looking Back Hoe as well. I had not seen the 2900 yet. I still don't understand what seems why such like a light lift of the 3 PT Hitch, 24" back, only 1100 pounds on both the 2900 and 3200. My old 7234, Mitsubishi model had 1653 at the same point, and the tractors are similar in weight. These are actually a little bit heavier overall. Does anyone know when the rest of the lineup will be rolled out?
ramnar said:Well its almost here! There is a dealer show today in Nashville. These tractors are sweet. It is mostly a Yanmar. It will have a Yanmar engine and a Yanmar hydraulic system which is unmatched! And to the member ICE It is YANMAR not Yahama!
Yea, I misread the post but cannot find out how to delete it. Sorry.
MajMac392 said:Wow, lots of good info I had not found yet. Thanks Ducati996 for that link. I guess August 1 is the date to touch and feel them. Did "ice" finally get straight on the Cub Cadet - Yanmar or does he think this is a motorcycle forum!!
Ha Ha
sugarloafguy
Silver Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2006
- Messages
- 117
- Location
- New Gloucester, Me
- Tractor
- New Holland TC29DA/14LA Loader and Tc24DA/12LA Loader
Hey Guys,
Anxious to check out the new 2900 and 3200 machines. Anyone wanna tell me why Cub and Yanmar felt compelled to re-hash the Deere 790? It would seem as though a little work on ergonomics and hyd capacity would have been a great place to start with an already excellent machine. I remember an early poster talking about cutting edge technology with the Yanmar intro. I was actually expecting a baby Fendt lol. Nice Job none the less just a little curious why they would dump a more advanced tractor like the Mitsi 7530 and 7532 and head in this direction. Does Cub/Yanmar have anything like the Boomer or Deere 33/35/3720 coming down the road? That black hood is disgusting.
Brian
Anxious to check out the new 2900 and 3200 machines. Anyone wanna tell me why Cub and Yanmar felt compelled to re-hash the Deere 790? It would seem as though a little work on ergonomics and hyd capacity would have been a great place to start with an already excellent machine. I remember an early poster talking about cutting edge technology with the Yanmar intro. I was actually expecting a baby Fendt lol. Nice Job none the less just a little curious why they would dump a more advanced tractor like the Mitsi 7530 and 7532 and head in this direction. Does Cub/Yanmar have anything like the Boomer or Deere 33/35/3720 coming down the road? That black hood is disgusting.
Brian
megotatractor
Veteran Member
yanmar Cub. As a JD owner I can say Yanmar is a great engine. Too bad JD is so arrogant. I don't like arrogant SOB's so am thinkiing if I ever buy again it may not be JD.
Bob_Bainbridge
Platinum Member
Saw a Yanmar at the dealer today. It was $10,800 with 60 inch mower deck.
Bob B.
Bob B.
NassauEquipment
New member
Wait until you guys drive one of these............the first product of this JOINT venture.
Built in the Yanmar plant in Georgia.
Built in the Yanmar plant in Georgia.
lorus1966
New member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 24
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Tractor
- 2008 Cub Cadet Yanmar SC2400 and one very tired JD 318.
I've got one of the 24 hp units and have put about 10 hours on it so far. I really (REALLY) like the layout of the machine and the overall quality. I considered getting the 32 hp machine, but with my knees I would have been really hurting climbing up and down all the time. The SC2400 is very easy to get on and off.
The loader design seems to be well thought out and so far has moved some nicely sized boulders around the property. I've filled the rear wheels with Rim Guard and have a 300# cement ballast for the 3 point. It seems very steady on the rolling ground around here.
Not terribly impressed with the traction of the R4s in the mud though, and will be picking up a set of chains for the rear wheels this week.
What would I change? Coming from a JD 318, everything is taking some getting used to. So far I find that I very much miss having split brakes. My JD 318 had them, and there have been a number of times that I've already needed them, most noticeably when back-dragging with the loader. Even a slight lift on the front end does away with steering ability, and being able to lock one of the rears would be nice. Apparently it's common on the SCUTs to not have the split brakes, but it would be nice. The other thing that's apparent is the lack of a toolbox. They should have found a place to store all the necessary pins, clips, etc. My solution so far is to use a soft-sided toolbag shoved under the seat.
I've added a rear-facing work light and a beacon for the top of the ROPS so the cars don't smack into me when I work along the road frontage.
I'll post some pictures as soon as I figure out how.
The loader design seems to be well thought out and so far has moved some nicely sized boulders around the property. I've filled the rear wheels with Rim Guard and have a 300# cement ballast for the 3 point. It seems very steady on the rolling ground around here.
Not terribly impressed with the traction of the R4s in the mud though, and will be picking up a set of chains for the rear wheels this week.
What would I change? Coming from a JD 318, everything is taking some getting used to. So far I find that I very much miss having split brakes. My JD 318 had them, and there have been a number of times that I've already needed them, most noticeably when back-dragging with the loader. Even a slight lift on the front end does away with steering ability, and being able to lock one of the rears would be nice. Apparently it's common on the SCUTs to not have the split brakes, but it would be nice. The other thing that's apparent is the lack of a toolbox. They should have found a place to store all the necessary pins, clips, etc. My solution so far is to use a soft-sided toolbag shoved under the seat.
I've added a rear-facing work light and a beacon for the top of the ROPS so the cars don't smack into me when I work along the road frontage.
I'll post some pictures as soon as I figure out how.
EmerichSales
Silver Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2000
- Messages
- 192
EmerichSales
Silver Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2000
- Messages
- 192
Comparison between the Kubota BX2350V and the SC2400 Cub Cadet Yanmar Sub-Compact Tractors
Kubota is 54.8 Cu In engine
Yanmar is 55.1 Cu In engine
Kubota is 1322 lbs
Cub Cadet Yanmar is 1280 lbs
Kubota 3pt lift 24" behind pin is 670lbs
Cub Cadet Yanmar 24" behind pin is 661lbs
Kubota Fuel Tank is 6.6Gal
Cub Yanmar Tank is 5.8Gal
Kubota LA243 is 1st numbers and Cub Yanmar CL100 is 2nd set of numbers
Max lift height at bucket pin 71.3 in - 71 in
Dump clearance 52.4 - 54
Reach @ Max Height 28.9 - 28.5
Dump Angle 45 degrees - 45
Digging depth 4.7in - 6 in
Bucket width 48in - 48in
Raising time to full height w/o load 3.5sec - 3.5
lowering time w/o load 2.7sec - 2.5sec
bucket rollback 2.4 - 2 sec
bucket dump 1.7 - 1.5 sec
Rated Flow 3.7 gpm - 3.5 gpm
Relief valve PSI 1778 - 1780 PSI
Lift Capacity 500mm fwd max height 518lbs - 550lbs
Lift Capacity pivot pin max height 745lbs - 700lbs
Kubota Breakout Force 500mm fwd 992lbs - Cub is measured at pins 1350lbs
Kevin
Emerich Sales & Service inc
Kubota is 54.8 Cu In engine
Yanmar is 55.1 Cu In engine
Kubota is 1322 lbs
Cub Cadet Yanmar is 1280 lbs
Kubota 3pt lift 24" behind pin is 670lbs
Cub Cadet Yanmar 24" behind pin is 661lbs
Kubota Fuel Tank is 6.6Gal
Cub Yanmar Tank is 5.8Gal
Kubota LA243 is 1st numbers and Cub Yanmar CL100 is 2nd set of numbers
Max lift height at bucket pin 71.3 in - 71 in
Dump clearance 52.4 - 54
Reach @ Max Height 28.9 - 28.5
Dump Angle 45 degrees - 45
Digging depth 4.7in - 6 in
Bucket width 48in - 48in
Raising time to full height w/o load 3.5sec - 3.5
lowering time w/o load 2.7sec - 2.5sec
bucket rollback 2.4 - 2 sec
bucket dump 1.7 - 1.5 sec
Rated Flow 3.7 gpm - 3.5 gpm
Relief valve PSI 1778 - 1780 PSI
Lift Capacity 500mm fwd max height 518lbs - 550lbs
Lift Capacity pivot pin max height 745lbs - 700lbs
Kubota Breakout Force 500mm fwd 992lbs - Cub is measured at pins 1350lbs
Kevin
Emerich Sales & Service inc
bsinhc50
Member
I've had a SC2400 for about a month now and I'm very pleased with the machine. It has enough hp to do what I need done, is very manueverable in tight spaces, and the ergonomics for the driver's area was well thought out, especially for a guy my size (I'm 6'3", 245lbs). The only thing I'm having problems with is the top link of the 3ph. As it sits now, I must have the top link totally wound in to hook up to the blade but in doing so, that allows no more than 4 inches of ground clearance for the bottom of the blade. I've brought this to the attention of the dealer were I purchased the machine and he contacted Cub Cadet about it. In the research I've done, on another forum and on other brand machines, it appears to me that the top link should be mounted lower on the rear of the tractor which would allow it to be opened up when it's hooked up to a 3pt implement. If anyone has any ideas, Please don't hesitate to pass them on. All ideas and/or thoughts are appreciated.
Bill
Bill
GreenWannabe
Platinum Member
See if you can find a shorter top link, maybe TSC, local Co-op, etc., or search on the internet. Maybe your dealer can provide one.
lorus1966
New member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 24
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Tractor
- 2008 Cub Cadet Yanmar SC2400 and one very tired JD 318.
I've noticed the same thing on my SC2400, not much ground clearance under some implements when they are raised. I decided against a shorter top link though after using the box blade. When doing the final passes with the box blade I had the top link all the way out. A shorter top link wouldn't have worked for this.
I think that the problem has nothing to do with the top link. I think that the problem is that the machine is a SUB compact and sits low to the ground. I have noticed a huge difference when using implements designed specifically for sub compacts machines, like the XB line from King Kutter. If your blade is meant for a CUT and not a SCUT, there's not really much that will help.
Of course, even with the XB implements there are still limitations. Take the middle buster for example. In order to have any usable depth to the cut, there is a limit to the height it will raise up. We have a lot of hills, and the only way to transport the middle buster without scraping the ground is to either take off the blade in for transit or just carry the whole works in the FEL until I get to the garden.
I've got an XB 5' blade, and it sits plenty high for transport in the center position. If I angle it all the way though, the bottom corner catches on even a slight incline.
All that being said, I love how low the machine sits for two main reasons. 1) My knees would scream constantly climbing into anything larger, and 2) The lower height means more stability on all of our hills and slopes.
I think that the problem has nothing to do with the top link. I think that the problem is that the machine is a SUB compact and sits low to the ground. I have noticed a huge difference when using implements designed specifically for sub compacts machines, like the XB line from King Kutter. If your blade is meant for a CUT and not a SCUT, there's not really much that will help.
Of course, even with the XB implements there are still limitations. Take the middle buster for example. In order to have any usable depth to the cut, there is a limit to the height it will raise up. We have a lot of hills, and the only way to transport the middle buster without scraping the ground is to either take off the blade in for transit or just carry the whole works in the FEL until I get to the garden.
I've got an XB 5' blade, and it sits plenty high for transport in the center position. If I angle it all the way though, the bottom corner catches on even a slight incline.
All that being said, I love how low the machine sits for two main reasons. 1) My knees would scream constantly climbing into anything larger, and 2) The lower height means more stability on all of our hills and slopes.
