Green Tractor Talk banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Please share your opinion Few that i have/ had Deere 2210 23hp vs Deere x540 26hp The 2210 has much power than x540 Than i have a kubota b7100 16hp that i can plow fields with a bottom plow were deere 2210 will not Had a cut kubota b21 21hp that was way superior in power to all above
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,707 Posts
It's MUCH more than HP to me. Weight, ballast, tire type and size, gearing, and MFWD:greentractorride:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,708 Posts
In my opinion it's more about the gearing, weight distribution, and traction. Think about the Deere A model which has 34 horsepower and what you could do with that in the field.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,102 Posts
Anyone that relies strictly on HP is a fool. My Deere D160 riding mower is 25hp - the same as a 2025R. But that is where all comparisons between the two machines ends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
When a person:geek: buy a tractor will think that a 26 hp tractor will be more :think:powerfull than a 16hp but that is not true deere x540 vs kubota b7100
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
Even when compare in same class is not working Have 2 garden tractors deere x540 26 hp and Jacobsen 53500 19hp 60inch deck 2wd 3 point hitch Well with the jacobsen i can use a 5 ft grading box and pull logs same like deere 2210
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
Anyone that relies strictly on HP is a fool. My Deere D160 riding mower is 25hp - the same as a 2025R. But that is where all comparisons between the two machines ends.
Disregarding your calling people asking a question "fool", selecting a tractor for a specific application does require a combination of HP & HP at the drawbar, gear ratios, manual or hydrostatic tranny, weight to Hp ratio, tires & more specs & the intended main use of the machine. :spy:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,721 Posts
Have to remember comparing Diesel to Gas,,,, big difference when looking at the end results.

Like they say,, lets compare Apples to Apples ,,,,not Apples to Oranges.

Then have to compare as others have said ,ballast, gearing , transmission , tires.

With diesel you can do things at idle , that takes 3/4-full throttle on a gas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
Give me enough weight and gearing, and all I need is 30hp to pull an 8 bottom.
Granted, it will take a week to turn 40A, but it's still only 30hp.

Never, ever, take a bet that your new 2-3 series Deere can pull a 30hp antique...Never.



Come to think of it...don't make a bet that your 7 series will pull a 100hp Antique either...especially this one.:usa




Draw bar HP rating is to get an idea of what you have to work with, when everything else is considered.
Nothing more, nothing less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
Got to look at where the hp is measured from too. Older tractors were measured diffently than newer. And like others have said, weight, torque, gear ratio, etc. are factors. I don't see why a 2210 wouldn't plow a field unless the plow was not set up correctly. Garden tractors can pull a one bottom all day long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Older tractors used to also be rated on drawbar hp. I'm not sure why they ever did away with that.

Seems the older model cast iron engines even though had much less HP had way more torque. The older model Briggs, Kohler, Wisconson, Onans and etc used to have cast blocks and could be re-sleeved. I don't think they ran a higher compression so they must have just had heavier cranks and longer piston strokes to be getting the torque.

I'm glad I read this post about the B7100 having more power than being considerably less Hp. I been looking for a smaller tractor around and been toying around with a small compact size tractor being added.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
Don't get blinded by the numbers. Hp is force times time, that's all. Torque is the force that does the work, Hp is the speed at which you can accomplish it. Give me the highest power to weight ratio in a certain segment, and I'm good. You guys can keep your heavy low hp tractors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Got to look at where the hp is measured from too. Older tractors were measured diffently than newer. And like others have said, weight, torque, gear ratio, etc. are factors. I don't see why a 2210 wouldn't plow a field unless the plow was not set up correctly. Garden tractors can pull a one bottom all day long.
When i plow:unknown: new soil hard clay rocky kubota b7100 gear drive 16hp 4x4 r1 tires it just works better than 2210
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
Don't get blinded by the numbers. Hp is force times time, that's all. Torque is the force that does the work, Hp is the speed at which you can accomplish it. Give me the highest power to weight ratio in a certain segment, and I'm good. You guys can keep your heavy low hp tractors.
:crazy:

Tractor= TRACTION POWER.

Weight increases traction. Weight forward of the rear axle= Leverage.
It's all about being able to overcome resistance.
If you cannot turn that HP into traction, it's meaningless, and why the older heavy flywheel monsters will eat the new generation lightweights alive with less HP, when pulling.


The lightweight Kubota Utility tractors are notorious for not having "Enough ass" compared to much lower powered older stuff.
Good for shuffling Hay and cleaning out the horse barn, but when putting steel into the ground, they get whooped on by Deere, and even some of the weird stuff coming in from East Europe.

Your angle on HP/Weight is inverse.

Which will do more work. A 22hp Craftsman lawn mower or a Ford 9N?;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
754 Posts
Give me enough weight and gearing, and all I need is 30hp to pull an 8 bottom.
Granted, it will take a week to turn 40A, but it's still only 30hp.

Never, ever, take a bet that your new 2-3 series Deere can pull a 30hp antique...Never.



Come to think of it...don't make a bet that your 7 series will pull a 100hp Antique either...especially this one.:usa




Draw bar HP rating is to get an idea of what you have to work with, when everything else is considered.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Older tractors used to also be rated on drawbar hp. I'm not sure why they ever did away with that.

Seems the older model cast iron engines even though had much less HP had way more torque. The older model Briggs, Kohler, Wisconson, Onans and etc used to have cast blocks and could be re-sleeved. I don't think they ran a higher compression so they must have just had heavier cranks and longer piston strokes to be getting the torque.

I'm glad I read this post about the B7100 having more power than being considerably less Hp. I been looking for a smaller tractor around and been toying around with a small compact size tractor being added.

My first thought on why the new small tractors are not tested for drawbar HP anymore is because most of them have hydrostatic drives which suck up LOTS of HP. Publishing the test results would make them look very bad. They are a very user friendly transmission but that convenience comes at a terribly high price. And those drawbar tests were done in either two or ten hour durations. I'm not sure a SCUT could pull at maximum HP for two hours let alone ten.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,626 Posts
:crazy:

Tractor= TRACTION POWER.

Weight increases traction. Weight forward of the rear axle= Leverage.
It's all about being able to overcome resistance.
If you cannot turn that HP into traction, it's meaningless, and why the older heavy flywheel monsters will eat the new generation lightweights alive with less HP, when pulling.


The lightweight Kubota Utility tractors are notorious for not having "Enough ass" compared to much lower powered older stuff.
Good for shuffling Hay and cleaning out the horse barn, but when putting steel into the ground, they get whooped on by Deere, and even some of the weird stuff coming in from East Europe.

Your angle on HP/Weight is inverse.

Which will do more work. A 22hp Craftsman lawn mower or a Ford 9N?;)
I think he meant he wanted the heaviest and most powerful unit in it's framesize. Say 2032 over the 2025... Not the most powerful and the lightest. I thought that at first because my brain is in car/atv/motorcycle mode most of the time. Tractors put a smile on your face in a different way than the previously mentioned items.

Me personally I'd have the overpowered for it's frame size unit as the extra power is put to good use with any PTO powered implement. Mowing and tilling need way more power than they do machine size. I agree when it comes to putting steel in the ground, power is only as good as the tires transferring it to the dirt. Spinning ain't winning. :lol:

-636
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
My first thought on why the new small tractors are not tested for drawbar HP anymore is because most of them have hydrostatic drives which suck up LOTS of HP. Publishing the test results would make them look very bad. They are a very user friendly transmission but that convenience comes at a terribly high price. And those drawbar tests were done in either two or ten hour durations. I'm not sure a SCUT could pull at maximum HP for two hours let alone ten.
Absolutely agreed!!

Op has a Kubota gear tractor, that is out pulling his Hydrostat Deer with a higher hp rating.
Gear tractors will always get a LOT more power to the tires.

LOL!! Yeah, I don't think ANY manufacturer really wants their SCUT/CUT drawbar numbers, out there in the wild.
Folks would be snapping up old Cubs and rehabbing wind row Iron left and right.:lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
I agree and that's why I really like my 3005. It's right at 27hp and would pull my 25hp ZTrak in two.

Neighbor had a 60hp skid steer and was surprised when he couldn't shove a snow pile I had just pushed. He has me with weight but not with torque to wheel or traction.

Jim


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top