Power-Tracs are not cheaper in my opinion

[IslandTractor]

I still don't believe that those who haven't lived with a PT for a while can't really understand their value...

I don't think anyone has challenged the utility or "value" of the PT. If I had a PT I'd have few hours on my tractor too. The discussion has been on cost compared to CUTs. I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from buying a PT but it is good to understand the costs as well as the value of owning one.

 

[KentT]

I don't think anyone has challenged the utility or "value" of the PT. If I had a PT I'd have few hours on my tractor too. The discussion has been on cost compared to CUTs. I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from buying a PT but it is good to understand the costs as well as the value of owning one.

Uh, somehow I think cost is directly related to value... or perhaps I should say usefulness should be directly a factor in evaluating cost. I don't want a "garage queen" regardless of how much it or how little it costs... Except for "bragging rights" what value do impressive specifications or capabilities have if they're sitting in the garage or barn and not being used?

If I use something 3 times as much as something else -- comparing what they cost against each other doesn't really make a lot ot sense, does it?

I keep coming back to the point that you (we) are comparing apples and oranges...

 

[Rivco]

OK, so once in awhile someone sales one. Get much for it...that's what this thread is about

Well...let me put it this way. I had the 180 advertised for over 2 months. I received a lot of calls from people wondering what a Power-Trac is. I also showed it to several people.

The biggest complaints were:
1- no dealer support
2- Limited lift ht ( 50" on the 180 )
3- Resale marketable
4- useless owners manual / parts manual

I ended up selling it for less than I wanted.

 

[MossRoad]

My PT's wheel motors won't be 12.5ci as soon as I can get the 22.7ci ones installed...

We are waiting to see it, too. A mountain goat comes to mind.

 

[Rivco]

My PT's wheel motors won't be 12.5ci as soon as I can get the 22.7ci ones installed...

I think it is your civic duty to all former and present PT owners to get those new wheel motors installed ASAP with lots of pictures and a write up so we can all read about the performance results.

 

[J_J]

My PT's wheel motors won't be 12.5ci as soon as I can get the 22.7ci ones installed...

I would expect to see more torque, and less speed. How will you measure the torque? Do you have a steep hill that you could not climb with the old wheel motors?

I do have a question. If you have not changed out the tram pump, then you are pumping the same volume of fluid, have you really gained anything? I am thinking that the new motors will not be able to reach their maximum potential, based on the stock pump limits. In essence, the pump is pumping like crazy, and the wheel motors are just loafing along. In order to get maximum potential from the new wheel motors, a new pump would have to be matched to the new wheel motors.

 

[IslandTractor]

Uh, somehow I think cost is directly related to value... or perhaps I should say usefulness should be directly a factor in evaluating cost.

I don't want to beat a dead horse here but I do think there are differences between cost and value. Moss sees great value in his PT because it saves him time doing chores so he can spend time with his family. If he values spending time with his family he may be willing to pay a significant premium "cost" in order to achieve that goal. Someone else might be more focused on saving money either initially or as a function of total ownership costs as a prime consideration in choosing a tractor. They might not put as much emphasis on the convenience and Swiss Army Knife characteristics of the PT and might focus more on the total amount of money involved in owning one for 5 years for example. Defining the comparative costs of owning a PT vs CUT is the main theme of this thread. No one has challenged the personal value of a PT and I think virtually every poster has identified to some extent that they see value in PT ownership.

 

[SnowRidge]

I would expect to see more torque, and less speed. How will you measure the torque? Do you have a steep hill that you could not climb with the old wheel motors?

I do have a question. If you have not changed out the tram pump, then you are pumping the same volume of fluid, have you really gained anything? I am thinking that the new motors will not be able to reach their maximum potential, based on the stock pump limits. In essence, the pump is pumping like crazy, and the wheel motors are just loafing along. In order to get maximum potential from the new wheel motors, a new pump would have to be matched to the new wheel motors.

And maybe a new engine to maintain the same top speed combined with better climbing ability. There isn't any free lunch.

When they went from the old wheel motors to the "high torque" wheel motors, top speed dropped, and the machines now roll on even a slight grade, which I understand did not use to be the case. Whether or not there was a pump make, model, or calibration change is known only to the gnomes in the Department Of Mystical Engineering at the University of North Tazewell.

 

[MossRoad]

... known only to the gnomes in the Department Of Mystical Engineering at the University of North Tazewell.

I like that... gnomes in the D.O.M.E.

 

[KentT]

I don't want to beat a dead horse here but I do think there are differences between cost and value. Moss sees great value in his PT because it saves him time doing chores so he can spend time with his family. If he values spending time with his family he may be willing to pay a significant premium "cost" in order to achieve that goal. Someone else might be more focused on saving money either initially or as a function of total ownership costs as a prime consideration in choosing a tractor. They might not put as much emphasis on the convenience and Swiss Army Knife characteristics of the PT and might focus more on the total amount of money involved in owning one for 5 years for example. Defining the comparative costs of owning a PT vs CUT is the main theme of this thread. No one has challenged the personal value of a PT and I think virtually every poster has identified to some extent that they see value in PT ownership.

I agree that there is a difference between cost and value... just like in general, I think you get what you pay for....

The lowest cost is not always (I'd venture to say, most often) the best value... Usefulness is a factor in value, and not in cost. I can buy junk that I don't need or can't use, and it has no value, regardless of its cost...

IMO, PT's are high-value for the typical small-property owner, regardless of their cost...

I define small-property owner as someone who has something larger than a large suburban lawn to maintain, and something less than a working farm where he needs an ag-tractor -- the same market that SCUTs, especially, are targeted at...

 

[KentT]

I would expect to see more torque, and less speed. How will you measure the torque? Do you have a steep hill that you could not climb with the old wheel motors?

I do have a question. If you have not changed out the tram pump, then you are pumping the same volume of fluid, have you really gained anything? I am thinking that the new motors will not be able to reach their maximum potential, based on the stock pump limits. In essence, the pump is pumping like crazy, and the wheel motors are just loafing along. In order to get maximum potential from the new wheel motors, a new pump would have to be matched to the new wheel motors.

JJ, I have several hills I can't climb, under load, when the hydraulic oil is warm. Though the engine is rated to 25 degrees, I think the wheel motors "poop out" at somewhere between 15-20 degrees, especially when operating the front PTO...

I anticipate roughly twice the torque and half the speed, using the same tram pump. What I see is the tram pump being able to pump its max volume (now based on wear, etc.) rather than perhaps being limited by pressure in the circuit due to the resistance of the wheelmotors. I see the end of bypassing in the wheelmotor circuit. I expect the ability to climb my slopes under load, regardless of oil temp, and likely even at less than full throttle. I'm "old school," even with air-cooled motors, and prefer to operate them at the peak of their power/torque curve, not full throttle. On my Kohler, the "sweet spot" seems to be somewhere around 75-80% (just guessing) throttle, with the engine probably running 2800-3000 RPM, not 3600 RPM at full throttle. I use full throttle only when running the front PTO (and need max output there) or when I need to try climbing those hills. I try not to lug the engine down, regardless of throttle setting -- that's what really makes them overheat fast (or at least that's my experience with air-cooled, high-performance VWs.

IMO, the current engine would not drive a larger tram pump to its full capacity, so that would be a waste...

Though I'll be doing it hydraulically, I anticipate the equivalent of putting a 2:1 reduction gearbox in a mechanical drivetrain.

We'll see...

 

[MossRoad]

I don't want to beat a dead horse here but I do think there are differences between cost and value. Moss sees great value in his PT because it saves him time doing chores so he can spend time with his family. If he values spending time with his family he may be willing to pay a significant premium "cost" in order to achieve that goal. Someone else might be more focused on saving money either initially or as a function of total ownership costs as a prime consideration in choosing a tractor. They might not put as much emphasis on the convenience and Swiss Army Knife characteristics of the PT and might focus more on the total amount of money involved in owning one for 5 years for example. Defining the comparative costs of owning a PT vs CUT is the main theme of this thread. No one has challenged the personal value of a PT and I think virtually every poster has identified to some extent that they see value in PT ownership.

The tractor cost less than anything else I was looking at so that saved me money up front 5 years ago.

The tractor does the jobs I need to do faster than anything else I was looking at so that saves me money each time I use it because it doesn't need to operate as long to get the job done.

The tractor costs per hour are more for fuel, but less for oil changes, so that is close to a wash at the only 50 hours per year that I am averaging.

The tractor costs less to repair because I am suppying the labor, although my time is worth money, just not as much as the shop rates that I would be charged at a dealer. Let's face it, once anyone's warranty is up, they are going to pay dearly for labor. And most folks will not tackle some of the repairs that would be needed on a CUT while the PT is quite simple. With that said, I see lots of old pre-CUT tractors out there that never needed major repair. They run and run and run. Check out some of Soundguy's posts. Old iron lasts a long time and there is no doubt the new iron should last long, too. Heck, my late 70's IH2500b was about as beat as a tractor could be but it was still running. I've said it before that a nice diesel engine will probably last 3 or more times longer than my gas engine Kohler. At 50 hours per year, I'm looking at a 1500 hour overhaul in 2031. I'll be 70. I hope I can get parts for the Kohler. By then, I'll probably swap it out for a fuel cell.

 

[IrTxRx]

Moss,
I did get a quote for a hydrostatic CUT that was as close to a 1430 in specs that I could find...FWIW:

Mahindra w/ loader Power-trac + LM bucket
32HP 4 X 4 30 HP 4 X 4
2566 lbs 2560 lbs
1400lbs lift 1200 lbs lift
8ft+ lift 6 ft lift

=$17,700 =$16,650
+$ 1,000 shred/BB +$ 1,840 Shred/BB
+$ 0 Shipping +$3,500 shipping to Texas

Mahindra is 3cyl Mitsubishi turbo diesel and has 1yr bumper to bumper and 3 yr engine/tranny warranty

=$18,700 total cost =$21,990 total cost

 

[Barryh]

Since this thread already had a debate on PT verses other tractors. I thought I would just show two small tractors that ( did ) catch my eye. I'll still be getting another Power Trac... I'm now leaning tword a new 425.... but, if I were to buy another brand one of these would be the only two I would consider.

I was very impressed / amazed at the power to size ratio of the TYM and Montana, more than a lot of large compacts out there including the CK-20 Kioti. They are the same rebranded tractor just different colors different prices.

I really like the green Montana. I got a quote from one dealer for kicks below. These tractors blow the Kubota BX- series out of the water, same size. Both have two models to choose from one 23 hp, one in 27 hp diesel, hydro.

TYM - Spec's 23 Hp... 4x4... $12,400.00 with loader. Front bucket lift capacity is 1349 lbs. The breakout force is 1723 lbs.

2007 MONTANA T2734 Less than 40 HP For Sale At TractorHouse.com

2007 TYM T233 Less than 40 HP For Sale At TractorHouse.com

 

[MossRoad]

Moss,
I did get a quote for a hydrostatic CUT that was as close to a 1430 in specs that I could find...FWIW:

Mahindra w/ loader Power-trac + LM bucket
32HP 4 X 4 30 HP 4 X 4
2566 lbs 2560 lbs
1400lbs lift 1200 lbs lift
8ft+ lift 6 ft lift

=$17,700 =$16,650
+$ 1,000 shred/BB +$ 1,840 Shred/BB
+$ 0 Shipping +$3,500 shipping to Texas

Mahindra is 3cyl Mitsubishi turbo diesel and has 1yr bumper to bumper and 3 yr engine/tranny warranty

=$18,700 total cost =$21,990 total cost

Thank you for the actual numbers.

 

[woodlandfarms]

I was very impressed / amazed at the power to size ratio of the TYM and Montana, more than a lot of large compacts out there including the CK-20 Kioti. They are the same rebranded tractor just different colors different prices.

If Ken had not sold me one of his 1850's I would have bought the TYM 350 and slapped dualies on it. One heck of a tractor for the price....

There are very few complaints at the TYM site... Basically a bad design on the exhaust seems to get the most gripes.

But, love my PT although I won't see it again until Thanksgiving...

Bummer

Carl

 

[Barryh]

If Ken had not sold me one of his 1850's I would have bought the TYM 350 and slapped dualies on it. One heck of a tractor for the price....

There are very few complaints at the TYM site... Basically a bad design on the exhaust seems to get the most gripes.

But, love my PT although I won't see it again until Thanksgiving...

Bummer

Carl

I know they have a T330 do they also have a T350? Also a very nice tractor.

If were not the fact that the PT has so many attachment options, mainly I like the front mini hoe option. I might be inclined to buy the 2007 TYM T273 version or the equivalent in a Montana 27 hp in green. There defiantly a tough and powerful little tractor.

Don't feel bad I won't be seeing a PT until sometime this summer. Mines sold and riding around next door which feels a little wierd.

 

[woodlandfarms]

I meant the 330... Sorry and glad to hear about your sale. You make any future decisions yet or waiting to see what springtime brings you?

Frankly, I would have rolled the 330 with dualies by now. too many chuckholes on my slopes... And I have a 3pt adapter so I can use some old farm implements.. Just getting it to hook to my box blade turned me completely off of having a "normal" tractor.

Carl

 

[Barryh]

I meant the 330... Sorry and glad to hear about your sale. You make any future decisions yet or waiting to see what springtime brings you?

Frankly, I would have rolled the 330 with dualies by now. too many chuckholes on my slopes... And I have a 3pt adapter so I can use some old farm implements.. Just getting it to hook to my box blade turned me completely off of having a "normal" tractor.

Carl

Just waiting until spring / summer I'm in no big hurry at the moment. I'm still deciding between a 422 or 425 not sure just yet. Still asking myself why I would need a 425 when the 422 seems to be able to do almost anything the 425 can do.

For my situation I really don't need the extra wheel torque or lift height. I don't have a lot of steep hills and I don't use it to mow or bush hog. The only sticking point in my mind might be the single ram versas the double ram and the durability. Other than that I'm sure either machine would be just fine.

You made the right choice, better to be safe on those hills no tractors worth getting hurt over. It's just a shame you had to go through all of head aches with the leaks and other problems. That's why I won't buy used, at least not in a Power Trac. I figure they come with enough little flaws / bugs when there brand new. In the end you still have a fine capable looking machine there.

 

[toy]

Just waiting until spring / summer I'm in no big hurry at the moment. I'm still deciding between a 422 or 425 not sure just yet. Still asking myself why I would need a 425 when the 422 seems to be able to do almost anything the 425 can do.

For my situation I really don't need the extra wheel torque or lift height. I don't have a lot of steep hills and I don't use it to mow or bush hog. The only sticking point in my mind might be the single ram versas the double ram and the durability. Other than that I'm sure either machine would be just fine.

You made the right choice, better to be safe on those hills no tractors worth getting hurt over. It's just a shame you had to go through all of head aches with the leaks and other problems. That's why I won't buy used, at least not in a Power Trac. I figure they come with enough little flaws / bugs when there brand new. In the end you still have a fine capable looking machine there.

Barry I was just wondering did you go through the same decision making when you got the pt418? Now with that in mind watch out pt1430 here comes Barry ,just joking about that. Another question though didn't you say that you were thinking about starting a landscape business ? If you are still considering this maybe a little overkill for your personal needs might be a good idea since your customers might need a job done that would require a little extra umph.