Why FWD

[MChalkley]

TresCrows - Maybe it's a soil type kinda thing, but I agree with you: 4WD on a compact is like adding quite a bit of weight and horsepower. I've repeatedly said that the second Kubota I had, an L3-something GST, would work a forty-something-hp MF I had at the time into the ground. The MF was in excellent condition and had about 10 more hp and quite a bit more weight, but it was way outgunned by the Kubota. The only thing I could attribute the difference to was 4WD.

Personallly, having had lots of different sizes, makes, and types, I think a 2WD tractor with a FEL is absolutely worthless. Unless, of course, one with 4WD isn't available, in which case, hey, it's great! But, to try to compare one against the other, in my opinion, no contest.

 

[TresCrows]

Mark, dont make me the sole defender of FWD /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif . My old farmer friend has some kinda Ford 2WD with an FEL, it hardly is working it seems when he pushes it into my dirt pile. It is a much larger--much larger tractor. I have a friend also with a 8N with a loader, it does reasonably well.
I may have my history incorrect but wasn't it Kubota or some other small Japanese tractor that established the worth of 4WD. It seems that the story goes that the domestics took one look at the tiny orange tractors and dissmissed them out of hand--then it was discovered they could produce more work than much larger, cosatlier, less manuverable machines that then dominated the market. This was told me by a guy who did heavy construction type work when he found I had a Kubota which is what they replaced all their big, heavy, aging tractors with. Maybe this is urban legend--probably is. I know I want 4WD, it makes sense with smaller machines--at some size point though it is reasonalbe to expect the advantages may begin to decrease.
J

 

[ric]

Bird,
Most of the B7100's, not all, had big turf tires front and back. Did yours? Big tires are easy to steer in 2wd or 4wd, no ground resistance. Kind of like the picture that started this thread which has been my point the entire time. Tractors with R3 and R4 tires definitely benefit from 4wd when driven on terrain the tires are really not intended for, frozen mud for example. My L245DT is slightly larger and heavier than a B7100. With Ag tires in front and back on the 245 the steering tends to be somewhat less responsive than my brother in laws B7100 4wd with turf tires, without a loader. My tractor has a loader. I am not familiar enough with B2710's but I would suspect the use or need for 4wd applies to your B2710 if it has R3 or R4 tires, turf or commercial tread tires. ric

 

[Bird]

Ric, both my tractors (B7100 & B2710) have had nothing but R1 (ag) tires.

 

[ric]

Threecrows,
Probably urban legend. But you are right, Kubota started this by responding primarily to the Japanese goverments initiative back in the 60's to promote family farming as a food source as opposed to importing everything one reason why rice tires are R2. The government went as far as creating a tax deduction that incents everybody in Japan who uses a tractor to produce their own food to purchase a new compact tractor each year. Used tractors then and today don't have any value in Japan, nobody there buys used tractors, they buy new. Didn't take long for someone from this country to come across all these used 4wd tractors and poof the grey market here appears. The rest is history. Interestingly, nobody around here uses a Kubota for general construction. Too light weight and too expensive. Almost everything around here on the backs of construction trailers are Case or Ford. Most of the landscapers use JD and occassionally New Holland. The state uses Case and Ford/New Holland. Alot of 2wd and 4wd units with R1 or R4's. More than one post here has thrown around the virtue of cost savings of having 4wd. What exactly is the cost savings, time? fuel? effort? I doubt there's really any cost savings. If there's any for no more than compact tractors are used by this group and by design it's minimal. Which takes us back to the real issue is it needed or not. Well I don't need it and I bet I'm not alone, but it's there. As I stated in another post if you think it's needed that's what you should buy that's all that matters. ric

 

[MChalkley]

ric - <font color=blue>More than one post here has thrown around the virtue of cost savings of having 4wd. What exactly is the cost savings, time? fuel? effort?</font color=blue>

I think the answer to that is the same as "What is the cost savings to owning the tractor in the first place?" Whatever that answer is, there's more of it there with a 4WD, at least for my money. The problem with dealing with the issue this way, of course, is that if you can't justify ownership of the CUT monetarily to begin with, you certainly can't decide whether certain options are "justifiable" on that basis or not. Unless you just don't have the money to buy the option - but then there's no discussion, is there? So, for most of the CUTs "used by this group", assuming they're not used for commercial work, the whole issue of cost justification is another form of musical chairs. I'm not saying at all that only people who buy CUTs for commercial purposes should have them, just that the means of justifying the purchase is entirely different. No sense barking up the wrong tree here - might as well apply the same rationale to the decision to buy or not buy a FEL as you do to the rest of the purchase, whatever that is.

Incidentally, around here, in the sizes and types of equipment Kubota offers, you'll find more Kubotas on construction sites than everything else put together. Even the highway department owns a bunch of them, and I've seen several independent contractors that do work for VDOT who also use Kubotas. I'm trying to convert them all to EarthForce machines, though. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

 

[MossRoad]

It seems around here, most landscapers have JD 4WD, Kubota 4WD and Bobcats. The construction contractors seem to have CASE 580s and Bobcats, although the 580s seem to be getting replaced with small, rubber tracked excavators. Maybe the backhoe has seen its day. The lawn maintenance people seem to mostly have Dixie Choppers. Just my observation.

 

[TresCrows]

Most private contractors and light construction outfits everywhere I have lived have Kubotas as much or more so than anything else becasue of their durability, stength, reliability--don't know where you live. Lightweight?--in the size ranges Kubota offers products their equipment is at least the equal of the others. I sense you may be peeved at some of us for not agreeing with the original statement/question, did you really expect everyone to agree? /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif . Not likely. Obviously if it was thought 4WD was unneeded we would not have bought them--I do know that 4WD is not useful in some situations and especially with the large tractors you use. When I had but a BX it was called a "lawnmower", now I have a 2410 and it is a light weight/not strong enough, if I bought the biggest tractor I could find someone would find a more "manly" machine to top me. To me the right size tractor is the tractor that fits in my garage and can do my work and if the local landsapers drive something else that is their misfortune /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif . To me having 4WD allows a smaller tractor to accomplish the work of a larger machine and still remain manuverable enough, small enough to zip in and out of tight spaces. The farmer who leases the 40 behind me has several huge Deers and a Kubota TLB, none of his tractors fit in my garage, can mow under my deck or around my lagoon or trim next to my flower bed but they can till the hades out of a field with a gang disc. Why FWD? because it increases the power transfer to the ground for a given weight and available traction--is it useful--yes--is it mandatory for all tractors in all situations--no. Is FWD always cost effective--maybe, maybe not. Is it more efficient--yes--because again a smaller machine can accomplish the work of a larger 2WD unit. Just my thoughts on the questions posed.
J

 

[ric]

WOW ! 4wd and whether it's needed or not. Who would have thought this was such an emotional topic. I thought we were just talking about tractors and tractor features but we have covered way more ground than that here. Sure know alot more than when I started. It has been fun, ric.

 

[CSAW]

Sorry if I am repeating something that someone else has already said. I read many, but not all of the posts on this topic. I use my 4wd on wet or soft grass to keep from loosing traction and digging up the yard. Also, the loader would be useless without it.

 

[skipper]

The way I see it- The same reasons people buy 4wd vehicles goes for tractors. I always prefer 4wd for the comfort of knowing I can more things I probably couldn't do without it, but I sure don't like to pay for it. Comparing a basic tractor to a tractor with a FEL isn't apples to apples. I have seen the difference in a 2wd vs 4wd pushing snow-it can't compete. I have seen almost everything stuck from tractors, big dozers, backhoes (although he did eventually get himself out) to 6wd military trucks. It all boils down to what you need, what you want, and what your wife will pay for.

 

[CSAW]

One more advantage of fwd is that it in effect gives you four wheel brakes in slippery conditions. (Maybe only three under some conditions because of the differential.)

 

[GlueGuy]

There is no doubt at all that 4WD is required; maybe just not all the time.

There is no question that I can pull more and push more with all wheels doing some of the work. I see it all the time with <font color=orange>Lucy!</font color=orange>

Probably one of the reasons that I see it all the time is that I am putting her into 4WD and taking her out of 4WD, depending on the operation. Others have stated that steering is "sluggish" when in 4WD. I wouldn't quite describe it that way, but it is certainly less nimble. There is no question that I can turn a tighter, and quicker corner in 2WD versus 4WD. I do it all the time.

When I'm working on the road, I will have her in 4WD when I'm pulling a load with the boxblade. Have to do it that way, I don't have enough traction in 2WD. I've tried it, and when the box gets above 50% full, the rear wheels start to slip.

However, when I get to the end of a run, and I want to spin around and go back the other way, I put her in 2WD because I can make the turn in one quick go. If I keep her in 4WD, I often as not have to back up, and make a "Y" turn instead of a "U" turn.

Simple physics.