Which PT for a solo landscaper?

[rivulet]

Was talking to someone about using a PT machine.

His needs are landscaping, not mowing. Too much low wage/illegal competition for the mowing side. Though might do pastures and brush cutting. Has ZTR if client can afford it.

PT1430 was my first choice.
PT1460 if doing much hardscaping or loader work. 2400# lift (more if needed) for pallets of brick/pavers.
PT425 if budget requires it and can live with 800# lift.
PT2460 if want to add backhoe work (and digging insurance).
Any of these may require the occasional rental/sub for major dirt work.

Attachments - 4 in 1, large bucket (mulch), mini hoe, forks, rough cut mower, tiller, box blade, core aerator, power rake, PHD/augers.

Suggestions/comments?

 

[FOURTEEN]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( PT425 if budget requires it and can live with 800# lift.
)</font>


<font color="red"> The PT-425 is the 'sweet spot' in the PT lineup!

Commercial Grade.
Lighter and easier to transport.
Good lifting. (Need more, make more trips.)
More maneuverable.
Handy size for residential work.
Less damage to sod.
Good price.
MiniHoe will do most landscaper digging.
Less expensive attachments.
FUN!

</font>

 

[egb6550]

I would agree. Often I squeeze thru with my 422 and if I didn't know where the next job was going to be the ability to maneuver in small places would be high on the list. Unless the jobs tend to be on the large heavy side. I'm doing typical landscape stuff on my 1 acre... post hole digging, rototilling, rock carrying.. trenching.. and if there was a smaller stronger version, I would be interested. But as it is I enjoy my PT immensely!

 

[rivulet]

Thanks for comments. Adding it all up, the PT425 is the preferred option now. Especially with readily available rentals around for the occasional heavy digging.

He has been looking at a Kubota B7800. ---- Which PT would do equivalent work?

The B7800 is 5x9, 1750#, 30hp, 22hp PTO.
FEL has 760# capacity at bucket center, 1060# at pivot pin, and can clear 65" in the dumped position.

The B7800 can lift higher than the PT425. As to other landscaping chores, can the PT425 do as much work as a B7800 at the end of the day for a solo landscaper?

 

[Carpenter]

The B7800 seems to be more in line with the PT 1430 than the 425. They have similar hp, lift height and price. I think that in many of the everyday landscaper duties that the PT would run circles around the Kubota. I once went head to head with a similar sized Kubota and my 425. We were hauling and spreading volcanic rock in a long section of divider strips. I did roughly twice the work in the same amount of time. The PT's quickness and manuverability really made a difference in that situation but had we been tilling a yard the results might have been quite different. Horses for courses.

 

[rivulet]

RE: Kubota B7800 vs. PT425

Thank you for the comparison. It is interesting to me that by keeping everything out front and using an articulated tractor one can get the same amount of work done with a lighter unit and smaller gas engine.

The Kubota B7800 is a light, powerful, and considered a great bang for buck machine. It sells for about $15K with the FEL.

Stepping up from the PT425, the PT1430 has a diesel engine like the B7800, but 50% more lift capacity, and weighs 45% more.

For $2500 more ($12K) than the PT425, one could get the PT2425 and two feet more lift. This would match the Kubota specs. But it looks like you would be sitting over a hot engine and be more top heavy. Have to wonder if the 6-7' lift is really required.

The PT425 can fit through a 48" gate, the B7800 can not.

Any more comparisons, thoughts? Thanks.

 

[bbabineau]

I am going through the same dilemma trying to decide between a PT (425 or 1430) and a CUT which includes the B7800. Some of the things I want to be able to do would include the mini hoe, mower, loader, post hole digger, forks and perhaps concrete mixer. I try to configure a CUT to be able to do similar things and I always seem to be compromising in some way to get to my objective. For example, I am being told that for the area I want to mow I should use a rear brush mower with wheel weights. In doing this I would need to keep the FEL on for ballast or add weights to the front in addition to filled tires. Think of the length of the machine with FEL and rear mower - close to 17 feet. The PT would be about 12. Post holes also require front ballast thus the FEL; FEL work requires rear ballast in the form of ballast box or some other rear weights, again adding length that I don't need, particularly in tight spots.

Every time I think I want a tractor with a local dealer for service I go through the same scenarios of what I need to get the job done and I find that the PT can probably do it with less attachments needed at one time and with less weight adding up to better manueverability. Althouugh I sure do like having a dealer nearby.

 

[Carpenter]

I have to admit that the limited lift height of the 425 (I have the older version with even less than the new ones) has been a problem at times. The ability to fit through a 4' gate has been a real plus. PT just needs to build a 425 with telescoping loader arms that reach up to about 10'. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Both of the guys I talked to about PT's before purchasing were pro landscapers. They both found their PT's (425 & 1430) to be especially suited to the trade.

I haven't tried a B7800 but have owned a Kubota in the past and it was a first rate machine.

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

I have both a PT 1845 and conventional tractors.
For loader work, the PT will outwork any conventional tractor because it is easier to maneuver. It does have less lift height, but that is seldom a problem.
For mowing, I far prefer the mower out front where I can see what I'm doing.
For post hole auger, the PT is far far better. You can locate the auger precisely and watch what you're doing, and you have downforce built in. 3-point augers are fairly hard to position. Absent a down-pressure kit, people are tempted to try to put down pressure on them in ways that are sometimes horribly dangerous.
The mini hoe is simply not available for a CUT. A full backhoe may be more capable, but a lot more expensive.
Observations about weights and counterweights are correct. CUTs sometimes need them, PTs do not.
Make a large list of PT attachments. In one busy day, you can use each of them more than once, because you can change from one to the other in less than a minute. Changing a 3-point attachment requires specialized tools, specialized language, and time off for bandaids and beverages.
/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

[Phils]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that by having the mower out front, stripes of unmowed grass aren't leftover where the CUT tires pushed the grass down immediately prior to the mower cutting. I've been very impressed by the PT mowed areas after a few days: NO tire stripes. A rear mounted mower would even be worse than a center mounted mower in that regard.

Phil