Go Bottom Go Bottom

What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-06          44668

Here are some excerpts from recent posts that sort of define the question.


From Mark H.
Ben, you are right of course about the Kioti DK series, but that begs another question that has been nagging at me. The DK’s, in size and weight, start where the Deere 4700 leaves off and the biggest DK hits the deck at 6000 lbs. Is this a compact tractor?

From slowrev:
Good question Mark, Where does a compact tractor end and a standard utility tractor begin? The smaller Dk's are probably CUT's but the 50 HP and up I am not sure about. Is there a definition out there somewhere, or is this just a loose advertising concept.


From Dave’s tractor:
CUT cutoff? Not sure. I have a 50HP Yanmar, that is very compact, about 4000lbs with loader. I would say it is a CUT. It hauls nicely on a 7000GVW car trailer (load capacity of 5500lbs). I have an older 424 International with a loader that is about 30ish HP and must weigh 6000lbs or more. It is not a CUT. Not sure where the line is, but probably in the low to mid 40HP range would fit most people's idea. Certainly if you can't haul it on a car trailer with a regular pickup, it is too big for my idea of a CUT

.

Ok folks, what is a compact utility tractor? And what is a sub-compact?
What makes my BX22 a “sub-compact” when it has more horsepower and weight than several “compacts”? Smaller wheels? I guarantee the BX would kick my JD 4100’s butt in a tug of war. So it can’t be a measure of ability to work. Or is it?

What is the cut off between utility tractors and compact utilities? Do you agree with Dave, if it can be easily transported on a trailer, then it is a compact?


Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
BillMullens
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 649 Central West Virginia
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-06          44669

I've sometimes wondered about this topic, too. My TC29 is about the same weight, size, and hp as an 8N, but seldom do you hear the old Ford referred to as a "compact". The 9/2/8N series, Oliver Super 55, Fergy 20 & 35, etc. were classed as utility tractors when they were made, distinct from the agricultural or row crop tractors of the same age. Perhaps the term "compact" has come to replace "utility" when descibing these tractors. The older tractors were sometimes described by pulling power also, such as one plow, two plow, etc.

In autos, I think the distinction is made simply by interior room. Perhaps with tractors some sort of benchmark would be handy, taking into account weight, hp, physical size, and perhaps intended usage.

Bill ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
JackIL
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 18 Illinois
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44670

Well there is an "official" definition from the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards. It is included as a subheading under Section 39 Agricultural Tractors in the SAE Handbook.

3.1.1.1 Compact Utility Tractor - A small agricultural tractor equipped with a 540 rpm rear PTO and a three-point hitch designed for Category I immplements only. These tractors generally weigh less than 1800 kg (3968 pounds), have less than 30 PTO kW (40 PTO Hp), and are primarily designed and advertised for use with mowers and light-duty material handling equipment.

Material handling equipment implies Loaders, Blades, Scrapers, etc. in contrast to Tillage Equipment.

This definition was last reviewed by the Committee in July 1997. Obviously today there are several tractors that are regarded as compacts but have more that 40 PTO hp so the upper limit has crept up a bit. Most people in the industry today would probably say that 50 PTO hp is the approximate border between a compact utility tractor and a utility tractor.

The definition has obviously changed over time. For example, in the 40s and 50s, tractors like the Ford 8N, NAA, and others of similar size (around 25-30 PTO HP)were regarded just as small agricultural tractors without the word utility being needed. Over time, horsepower has constantly crept upward and the usages of each tractor size has changed. What was once a real agricultural tractor later came to be regarded as a utility tractor. Then even later the notion of a utility tractor had to be subdivided into regular and "compact" versions. A farmer in North America today could not take care of many acres with a 25 HP tractor, but in other parts of the world some farmers would be thankful to have a tractor of any kind or power level.

Jack ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
slowrev
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 231 Winchester , KY
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44672

So I guess anytractor with a 540 rear PTO and 1 Category 1 3-point hitch is a CUT. These 2 items seem to be the only consistant items indicating a CUT. If the tractor has a Category 2 hitch or larger it is a Utility tractor I suppose. So I guess if you have a 9000 lb tractor with a 540 rear PTO and a Category 1 hitch it is a CUT ?

Ben
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
slowrev
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 231 Winchester , KY
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44673

Also Jack Many of us here are thankful to get a tractors of any power level:) Or of many power levels, different tractors for different jobs. Some of us cannot get too many tractors. unless or wives tell us differently.

Ben
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
BillMullens
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 649 Central West Virginia
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-06          44675

Jack, that is very useful info. Thanks for the post; but I tend to disagree about the use of the word "utility" regarding the smaller tractors. From what I remember of my reading concerning the history of tractors in the US and England, the 8N was described as a utility tractor at the time it was produced (48-52); certainly, the Ollie Super 55 was considered a utility tractor when it was introduced, if I'm not mistaken, about 1952, when Ford made the jump to the Jubilee. For somebody interested in tractor history (I am) it will make for some interesting research. You may be right; perhaps only later did it come to pass that these size/style tractors were called "utility".

Slowrev, another interesting point is that the distinction between cat 1 and cat 2 3ph usually comes in the 50 hp range (aside from the pin size differences); I guess your tractor is in the upper end of "compact" range.
Bill ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
JackIL
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 18 Illinois
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44677

Ben,

No not all tractors with a 540 PTO and a Cat I hitch are compact utility tractors according to the SAE definition. The second sentence of the definition says they generally weigh less than 3968 pounds (1800 kg) and have less than 40 PTO hp.

Jack
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
slowrev
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 231 Winchester , KY
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44678

Jack, I agree, however the definition is a bit vague though. As are the 3-point hitch specs. According to Yesterdays Tractors site, a category 1 hitch is used on a 20-45 hp tractor. However by the same table a cat 2 hitch is used on 55-95 hp tractors. What about a 50 hp tractor ? Oh well... I guess if one manufacturer (Kubota) had success early on with compact tractors then all of the companies said we can sell lots of "compact tractors" too.
Ben
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-06          44681

Does SAE define a sub-compact? ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
slowrev
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 231 Winchester , KY
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44682

I don't know about SAE, but It would appear that the sub-compacts have a category 0 hitch. I read somewhere that the cat-0 hitch was added for the under 20 hp ones like the Gravely riders. The Category 0 hitch typically has a 1000 rpm PTO. The PTO shaft is usually smaller than the standard size too.
Ben
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
JackIL
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 18 Illinois
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-11-06          44685

The term "sub-compact" seems to have come into usage with the introduction of the Kubota 1800 and 2200. It is not in the SAE Handbook (at least not yet). These tractors and others now coming one the market like them do fit the SAE definition of Compact Utility Tractor in that they had Cat I (Not Cat 0) hitches and 540 RPM PTO as STANDARD equipment. These hitches use Cat I pin diameters, but the rest of the geometry (distance center to center of draft link ball joints, mast height, height of draft link balls in parked or working position, etc.) is typically smaller than larger compact utility tractors. Some people say they are closer to Cat 0 dimensions, but with Cat I pins and holes. Many Cat I implements don't quite fit the subcompacts without some (or a lot) of blacksmithing. As a consequence of the growing sub-compact market, several implement manufacturers including King Kutter, First Choice (Midwest), Woods, and John Deere are introducing small-sized implements for them. Usually the specifications listed with these very small implements state that they are sized for sub-compact tractors. About all we can say this means is that the pins and holes are standard Cat I and they will mount and work without modification on a Kubota 2200 tractor.

Although some early Japanese tractors that most people would regard as compacts were equipped with Category 0 hitches, almost all tractors using it are lawn and garden tractors and the hitch is an ACCESSORY--not a standard part of the base tractor. There are now many lawn and garden tractors advertised as having 20 to 25 hp. However, this is not PTO horsepower. It is usually the raw engine horsepower obtained in a SAE test that does not account for the power consumption of "engine accessories." PTO horsepower is usually about 85% of raw engine power and about 83% if the tractor is hydrostatic. PTO horsepower is the most meaningful number for comparing one tractor to another.

Jack ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
jeff r
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 428 burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-07          44723

The Ford 8n/9n/2n and like do NOT qualify as compact tractors because they are NOT 4 wheel drive. In my opinion, a compact tractor is less than 3500 pounds, has Cat 1 three point/540 PTO,less tha 40 hp and 4 wheel drive, and is is no older than ,,,,say...1975. Sorry, folks who meet the requirements but have no 4 wheel drive. LMAO....Maybe we could create a category for 2 wheel drive tractors without diesel and power steering and made after 1975. Basterd Tractors????? ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-07          44725

Although the Ford's and the Olivers may have been in the HP range etc to fit into the compact utility classification and were utility tractors they were not compact dimensions.
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
BillMullens
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 649 Central West Virginia
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-08          44751

Jeff, I don't agree. I could have purchased a TC29 without 4wd, and sure believe that it would be considered a compact tractor.
As for the 8N et al dimensions being compact, I'd say they were compact compared to, say, a Farmall M or Oliver 77. Not sure about the Super 55, but you'd know better, you had one, didn't you Peters? Anyway, the 8N has less HP, is 7 inches longer in wheelbase, same width, and weighs less than my TC29. I'd call it a draw.
Bill ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
Art White
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 6898 Waterville New York
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-11-09          44774

I think you would do better to look at the fact that the word "compact" didn't come into play till the late 60's early 70's. When some of the tractors mentioned earlier in this discussion were built they were some of the big tractors. Yes they were called utility tractors as they were used for many of the smaller jobs on big farms but they also were the big tractors on the 30 cow dairy farm or the 100 acre cash crop farm. After the intro of the compacts which were considered under 40 horsepower there has since been some new terms as you have discussed or mentioned such as the compact utility which seems to be the compact tractor growing in to the utility segment. This is much the same as a sub-compact with compact tractor features in a small size. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
Pacesetter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 178 Maine
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2003-02-10          49013

I would say the term gets redefined every so often. Presently I would include any tractor with 50 HP or less that weighs under 4500 lbs. At the top of the compact tractor chain is the JD 4710, NH TC45, Kubota L5030, Mahindra 4110, Century 3045, Kioti DK50 and others. Only a short time ago the Ford/NH 2120 was pretty much king of the compacts, how things change.
I just gave my daughter our '97 LHS Chrysler to go to college with. She complained how big it was. It is a full size car by todays standards. Yet, parked next to my '63 Chrysler it looks like a sub-compact to me. Next thing you know, we'll have GTO Kubotas, 442 Deeres and New Holland GT's with pony option. When they get too expensive you'll see a Road Runner Mahindra at a bargain price. After that the government will get involved and their will be CAFE standards for tractors (liters/acre of grass) and then they'll go to h___ like our cars have!
Pacesetter ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
ryan
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 15 western, pa
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2003-02-10          49020

Sub compact vrs. compact

Someone made the referance to a BX22 kicking the crap out of a JD4100. Answer: No, it wouldn't. You really cannot compare the two, yeah the Kubota BX22 has more HP, but that is about it. I have actully had these two units side by side doing demonstrations, several times. I also had the TC21D in there. Kubota BX series has a limited category 1 hitch. Very few implements other than Kubota will fit on this unit. Not so with the JD4100 and NHTC21D. Sub compacts actually are becoming a nightmare for me. The publics expectations on them are unreal. And this goes for JD and Kubota both, even though I don't sale them. I know a lot of people who purchased them and here in Western, PA with the hills, they just do not and can not always do what is expected out of them. It's ashame. I know a lot of people who went out and bought the bx and are really unsatisfied, and not to pick on Kubota, because the same will happen with the JD2210. These are called marketing machines. Lets say 80% of the people who purchase these sub compacts like the machine but lack hp. Back in the begining, that $15000 ticket looked high so they bought the sub compact, but now, you can sort of see why the unit cost $15000 and people can justify spending that extra $4-$5000 dollars that they just couldnt depart with in the begining. So what do they do? They trade in and buy bigger. This was a genius philosophy that Kubota presented us with.

Thank,
Ryan ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2003-02-11          49050

Tug of war. I said the BX22 will beat the 4100 in a tug of war. And it will win hands down, especially if the 4100 is wearing the crappy R1's Deere put on at the factory.

You have had them parked side by side?
Me too, right now, out in the driveway. I own one of each and have for several months.

All of my Cat1 three point implements, purchased for the 4100, fit and function just fine on the BX. These include a Gearmore 48 inch box scraper, a Gearmore 60 inch rear blade, a Gearmore post hole digger and several assorted carryall forks, boom poles, drawbars and the like.

In fact, it is not uncommon for me to work a half day on one tractor and swap to the other after lunch to see how they compare with the same implement.

In fact, my experience with the BX is just the opposite of the prevailing myth. I had to cut two inches off of the factory center link to get it to fit and function with standard Cat1 implements because it was TOO LONG.

OK. The defining parameter that somehow makes the BX a "sub-compact" is NOT the size the three point hitch.

Must be the hydraulics..... nope, I lifted a 1500 pound load with the three point and a set of forks.

Well it's the weight. It is too light.... except the list of tractors it outweighs or equals is as long as your arm and include the JD 4100, a flock of TC's and Kubota's own 7400, 7500 and 2410.

How about the wheelbase? Yeah, that's it. That stubby little 55 inch wheel base makes it a sub-compact.
Ok maybe... but that is the exact same wheelbase as the Kioti 1914 and the TC 18 and 21. Those guys get upset if you call their tractors a sub-compact.

The engine? Nope. 22 horses. Loader capacity? Same size bucket as the 7400/7500 and it will lift it heaped with wet soil.

That leaves the tires. But you can't base it on small tires because if I put bigger tires on the BX or smaller tires on the 4100, do they swap titles?

What I am trying to say is this: if it meets all the criteria then it is what it is: a compact tractor. Granted, it is on the small end of the window, but it fits in the window.

Are there sub-compacts out there? Yes. I think any tractor (of any size) with a Cat0 hitch would probably fall into that range.
The new BX 1500 with a wheel base of 54 inches or less and 15 horse engine might be a candidate.
And there is a whole line of Deere heavy duty 4wd lawn tractors with scaled down loaders and hitches that fit nicely into the "sub" category because they can't compete with a compact utility and are not designed to do so.

We had a similar discussion a while back on pick-up trucks and it came down to this: If it has an 8 foot bed in which a sheet of plywood will lay flat, if it sits three across on the bench seat and comes with a V-8 engine, then it is a full size pick-up no matter what else you can say about it or what name badge is stuck to the sheet metal.

I think we can establish a similar criteria for compact tractors.


....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
JackHerr
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 46 SE PA
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2003-02-11          49086

Mark,

Defining the categories of tractor is difficult when the lines get blurred by the manufacturers. The equipment industry almost always has parallels to the automotive industry.

Let's take sport utility vehicles. Roll back to 1984. The Chevy S10 Blazers, Ford Bronco IIs, Jeep Cherokees and Isuzu Troopers created the need for a new word to describe what they were. They weren't the first SUVs, just ask IH Scout or Jeep owners. But, they did not fit into the classifications of a car, pickup, station wagon, or much else.

Do the Subaru Forrester, Porche Cayenne/VW Toureg, Honda CRV, and the Ford Excursion all fit neatly into the SUV category? No, not neatly.

The lines are getting blurred again with the Chrysler Pacifica and the like. They are now called "crossover" vehicles. New types of vehicles will demand new names.

Back to tractors. The Kubota BX concept was brilliant. It gave people a small tractor with big tractor features. Do not forget that the BX was created to deliver these big tractor features in a less-intimidating package. This means that suburbanites could feel comfortable jumping out of the Accord and onto the BX.

Just look at the competition that has followed: Massey Ferguson GC2300 (MF self-describes this tractor as a "Garden Compact Tractor") and the Deere 2210 (Called the "Compact 2210" by Deere). All share a similar size with easy-to-use controls, similar to a riding lawn mower.

I'm afraid that we will have to wait for the SAE to churn out a proper category with a defining cut-off. By that point, the manufacturers will be segmenting another mature market to harvest new buyers.

I'm heading to Louisville to take in the National Farm Machinery Show. What mature markets will I witness being segmented right before my eyes? Many, I hope. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
jyoutz
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 48
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2003-02-11          49106

Mark, I really think you'd be happier with the performance of your 4100 if you removed those passenger car radial tires and installed some real R4 tractor tires. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
jeff r
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 428 burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2003-02-11          49107

A 50 hp tractor is NOT a compact utility tractor. Like I said in my previous post...if you haven't got 4 wheel drive, less than 35-40 hp and diesel power and have a tractor older than say 1975, you haven't got a CUT. Sorry guys. I am a member of SAE and those guys make too many decisions under the influence of alcohol. Just because some car engineers define a CUT doesnt meen squat to me. SAE means Society of Automotive Engineers. Half of those guys don't know an R4 from my sisters brassier. When only engineers from the tractor industry get to define what a CUT is or isn't, I will change my opinion, but until then as long as car engineers decide what is something out of their field of expertise, my opinion will remain as it is. The lines of demarcation are so clouded nowadays even they can't tell you what end is up.
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2003-02-12          49121

Jyoutz, R-4's would be nice but with Deere's proprietary rims and a $1300.00 price tag, I just couldn't go there.

The tires I have give very acceptable performance, certainly miles ahead of the R1's. In fact I get about zero wheel spin out of these tires (lots of ballast and 4wd); they are patterned after the tires on my truck which also have little or no spin in 4wd.

With a lot of ballast the 4100 and its present tires outperform the BX with turfs, mostly because the turfs cake up in damp soils and the radials on the 4100 will "self-clean".

My comments are more based on the 4100 having most of it's weight forward on the front axle. It requires the use of 4wd virtually anywhere off the pavement. The BX22 carries enough of its weight on the rear axle (with the backhoe removed) to go most places on my sandy, steep lot in 2wd.

I am aware that my ground conditions are not normal or usual, and only broad, flat square shouldered tires work well in this situation

The BX has really fat tires and you really cannot get as much rubber on the ground with the 4100 except maybe with turfs and I don't even want to go there pricewise!

The dream tires for the 4100 would be a set of radial R4's.

That would do everything well. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
plots1
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 563 mo
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2003-02-12          49123

COMPACT UTILTY TALK TURN INTO TIRE WAR, HAVENT HAD MY TRACTOR LONG BUT I CAN SAY THAT AS FAR AS TRACTION GOES R1:s are hard to beat! had to pull buddys tractor from being stuck twice as he has r4:s on a 4310. he did well when ground was froze but as temp rose R4:S were in in a spin. we were pushing brush along creek side.needless to say all the crap talk stopped about my little 790 with r1:s as i was retieving his 4310 with r4:s he he he! ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
jyoutz
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 48
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2003-02-12          49169

Mark, I can see what you're talking about. In most soil conditions, particularly rocky or clay soils, narrow, deep-lugged R1s absolutely provide the best traction (same applies to 4x4 trucks). But sandy soils are a whole different ball game. Then wider tires are the only answer. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



What the heck is a Compact Utility Tractor anyway

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2003-02-13          49180

One of these days I will find the Digital camera I want.

In the meanwhile the best description I can come up with is the tires I am currently running sort of split the difference between R4's and turfs.

The rears are a load range 'E' so it will certainly handle any load I throw at it. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo


  Go Top Go Top

Share This
Share This







Member Login