Compact Tractor

[Ronald Blue]

I will say I had never heard of a "ratchet rake" and had to look it up. I might have to get one although I have already removed a lot of the crap trees etc just with the loader. I did get a landscape rake and that had been very handy. It also does a decent job grading the driveway. I still have a box blade and post hole digger. The handiness of a compact utility with fwa is amazing. Once you have one you wonder how you got along without it. It's big enough to do actual work and small enough to be very maneuverable.

[Alex Zeller]

Not sure if they still do but Tractor supply use to sell the Ratchet rake.

A tractor is like a Shopsmith. It's an engine on wheels that produces power (pulling, PTO, and hydraulic). Personally I wouldn't get a 25hp tractor unless I could confirm it would meet my needs. Far too many people see the low price tag and think, I can afford that. Once they get it home the realize that they can use it to do more than they expected and within a very short period of time are now trading it in to get what they really needed. Secondly if you do go with a 25hp tractor try it out. Most likely it'll be a hydrostatic tractor with a 2 or 3 speed transmission. However that transmission may have been designed for the 35hp version of that same tractor. That could mean gearing that's too tall for a 25hp engine which forces you to always use low gear (which is fine for some types of work but not so much other times). Don't think of a tractor like a car. Think of it as a lifetime purchase so spending a few bucks now really isn't too much when you figure you could own it for 20, 30, or 40 years. Besides, life is too shirt to buy a tool that's helpful but not as helpful as it can be because you didn't spend a few extra bucks.

BTW I started looking for a 30ish HP tractor I could put a snow blower. I ended up with 45hp and even then I find I'm going slower than I would like.

[Ronald Blue]

Not sure if they still do but Tractor supply use to sell the Ratchet rake.

A tractor is like a Shopsmith. It's an engine on wheels that produces power (pulling, PTO, and hydraulic). Personally I wouldn't get a 25hp tractor unless I could confirm it would meet my needs. Far too many people see the low price tag and think, I can afford that. Once they get it home the realize that they can use it to do more than they expected and within a very short period of time are now trading it in to get what they really needed. Secondly if you do go with a 25hp tractor try it out. Most likely it'll be a hydrostatic tractor with a 2 or 3 speed transmission. However that transmission may have been designed for the 35hp version of that same tractor. That could mean gearing that's too tall for a 25hp engine which forces you to always use low gear (which is fine for some types of work but not so much other times). Don't think of a tractor like a car. Think of it as a lifetime purchase so spending a few bucks now really isn't too much when you figure you could own it for 20, 30, or 40 years. Besides, life is too shirt to buy a tool that's helpful but not as helpful as it can be because you didn't spend a few extra bucks.

BTW I started looking for a 30ish HP tractor I could put a snow blower. I ended up with 45hp and even then I find I'm going slower than I would like.

Having had experience with tractor mounted snow blowers I know from experience that 45 HP would be leaving a lot to be desired. Even on 5' it would struggle. As you say you have to go very slowly. Easy to bog it down if you aren't careful.

[Edward Weber]

Without getting into too much granularity about compact tractors.
Engine HP and PTO HP are not the same, you need to know what the attachments requires and what your tractor is actually capable of.
This goes for some of the other common measurements as well. like the lifting arms, the hydraulic pump and so on. One manufacturer can list measurements one way and someone else another. It's not always for trying to "get one over" on the customer but it does make comparing brands of similar size and features difficult.
It's sometimes hard to tell if you're really comparing apples to apples.

[Alex Zeller]

Having had experience with tractor mounted snow blowers I know from experience that 45 HP would be leaving a lot to be desired. Even on 5' it would struggle. As you say you have to go very slowly. Easy to bog it down if you aren't careful.

I'm at the top of the hill so it's not too bad. The blower is 6' wide so when I make that first pass there's only a few feet left to remove. With hydro it's real easy to speed up and slow down depending on how deep the snow is.

[Zachary Hoyt]

I clear our snow with a 6 foot blower on a 1955 Farmall 300, with about 35-40 HP new, and presumably less now. We get a lot of snow here sometimes, so it's been very handy, and I could afford it. I paid $1000 for mine at an auction and had to put about as much into parts to get it running, as one piston and sleeve had to be replaced due to rust and the IPTO drive splines were stripped which involved a double split and several other new or used parts. I have had it for 9 years and it's been very handy. I'll miss it when I move next summer but there's not much room or need for a tractor this size on a 1/4 acre lot in a town.

[Tom M King]

I would like that Ratchet Rake better if it was changeable with a bolt on bucket cutting edge. They only make them up to 72". I think my 8' Pulverizer will do as much, and more, but that's probably a good, cheap option, better than nothing but the bucket edge.

[Ronald Blue]

Without getting into too much granularity about compact tractors.
Engine HP and PTO HP are not the same, you need to know what the attachments requires and what your tractor is actually capable of.
This goes for some of the other common measurements as well. like the lifting arms, the hydraulic pump and so on. One manufacturer can list measurements one way and someone else another. It's not always for trying to "get one over" on the customer but it does make comparing brands of similar size and features difficult.
It's sometimes hard to tell if you're really comparing apples to apples.

You left out draw bar horsepower. The reputable companies numbers are reliable in my experience. They have been around to long to misrepresent their product and with today's sue happy life style someone would be there to drag them into court. Larger tractors are easily verified by the Nebraska tractor tests. They go way way back too. For anyone that doesn't know about them google them. I linked Zachary's International (McCormick Farmall) 300 for his enjoyment.

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/v...actormuseumlit

[Jim Becker]

I've never felt a reason to question Kubota's specifications nor any of their name-brand peers. That includes both engine HP as well as things like PTO horsepower.

[Edward Weber]

You left out draw bar horsepower. The reputable companies numbers are reliable in my experience. They have been around to long to misrepresent their product and with today's sue happy life style someone would be there to drag them into court. Larger tractors are easily verified by the Nebraska tractor tests. They go way way back too. For anyone that doesn't know about them google them. I linked Zachary's International (McCormick Farmall) 300 for his enjoyment.

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/v...actormuseumlit

I wasn't saying the numbers aren't reliable or accurate, rather different companies use different ways to describe them. With the large number of compact and subcompact tractors it can be difficult to sort out the differences. Many people shopping for these sized units do not know what to look for in the first place or if there are differences in the way things are described.
Simple example of what I was getting at.
My tractor, a MF 1635 is on the same level as a Kubota L3901 These units are similar in many ways, apples to apples.
Lifting points weight for the MF at 24" beyond ball end is 2535lbs, while the lifting weight for the Kubota is 1985 at the ball end. This doesn't seem right but it's what the specs say. It's even worse when you see "equal" specs.
If people don't know what to look for (or even when they do) they can come accross something that doesn't seem to make much sense.
I was only suggesting people need to do their homework so that they get the machine they need/want.

[Ronald Blue]

I wasn't saying the numbers aren't reliable or accurate, rather different companies use different ways to describe them. With the large number of compact and subcompact tractors it can be difficult to sort out the differences. Many people shopping for these sized units do not know what to look for in the first place or if there are differences in the way things are described.
Simple example of what I was getting at.
My tractor, a MF 1635 is on the same level as a Kubota L3901 These units are similar in many ways, apples to apples.
Lifting points weight for the MF at 24" beyond ball end is 2535lbs, while the lifting weight for the Kubota is 1985 at the ball end. This doesn't seem right but it's what the specs say. It's even worse when you see "equal" specs.
If people don't know what to look for (or even when they do) they can come accross something that doesn't seem to make much sense.
I was only suggesting people need to do their homework so that they get the machine they need/want.

When I compare those 2 models there is significant differences. The main difference being the weight. Your MF is between roughly 500 to 700 lbs heavier. The wheelbase is about 7" longer as well which would aid in 3 pt hitch lift capacity. I have no reason to doubt the specs either company puts out. So while horsepower is pretty comparable your tractor has more mass. Most people would probably not ever notice the difference for what they are doing. I actually work my tractor and have had the rear end in the air lifting and digging and the front end in the air via the loader either hydraulicly or buy pushing and it cantilevering up as the loader bites in. Actually upon comparing my Cub Cadet/Yanmar has nearly identical specs to the Kubota. Weight and wheelbase are tit for tat. Anyway research is valuable but if someone doesn't know what they are looking at they might not get the best bang for their buck. Which is what you were saying so we agree. They should ask here for "expert" advice. We can thoroughly confuse them.

[Edward Weber]

I know they're a little different, I just picked a similar size and HP Kubota since most people are more familiar with them. I don't know wht would be a direct comparison these days as my tractor is 10 years old. Might be interesting to see what's comparable today.
Expert advise, you're funny

The other thing is the size of the platform, you can get a 25HP sub-compact or a 25HP compact. There will be a world of difference in what the machine can handle.
The good thing is you can probably find a unit tailored to your specific needs, the hard part can be finding it. It seems like every brand slightly excels in one area or another, whether it's power, weight, dealer, etc.

[Ronald Blue]

I know they're a little different, I just picked a similar size and HP Kubota since most people are more familiar with them. I don't know wht would be a direct comparison these days as my tractor is 10 years old. Might be interesting to see what's comparable today.
Expert advise, you're funny

The other thing is the size of the platform, you can get a 25HP sub-compact or a 25HP compact. There will be a world of difference in what the machine can handle.
The good thing is you can probably find a unit tailored to your specific needs, the hard part can be finding it. It seems like every brand slightly excels in one area or another, whether it's power, weight, dealer, etc.

When I ended up with mine I was actually after a larger unit but things work out for a reason. I talked to one person and the other owner sold it. I wasn't pleased but decided on the one I got. In the end I have no regrets. The other one was a shuttle shift with clutch. I love the hydro. It's never given me a moments trouble. I agree subcompacts are okay if that's all you want/need. Compacts are much more capable though. Ironically locally besides JD dealer the MF and Kubota dealer are the same. They are real labor savers. In fact I look for ways to use it on projects but I'm running out of those. One thing I intended to do and didn't before I retired was weld a couple hooks on the loader bucket. I even purchased them. No welder now so I guess I'll take it to the welding shop. For anyone that might be interested I got this style hook.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...0?ie=UTF8&th=1

[Edward Weber]

Sounds like we have had very similar experiences.
When I was looking, one salesman was trying hard to sell me on a NewHolland Boomer with the shuttle shift. I told him no and he said I'd be sorry if I went for a hydro. Needless to say after 8 years with the hydro, I couldn't be happier. The main advantage that was pointed out to me with a subcompact was the weight. Mine has water filled tires and is quite heavy, which isn't ideal for certain delicate projects where a sub compact could easily go without damaging pavers or turf.
I also added grab hooks when I bought mine although I went bolt on.
https://www.boltonhooks.com/
img_3877.jpgimg_3882.jpg

[John K Jordan]

Sounds like we have had very similar experiences.
When I was looking, one salesman was trying hard to sell me on a NewHolland Boomer with the shuttle shift. I told him no and he said I'd be sorry if I went for a hydro. Needless to say after 8 years with the hydro, I couldn't be happier. ...

I love tractor talk!

IMO what little power you lose to the hydrostatic drive is well worth it for the speed and flexibility in operation, especially when moving dirt, loading, spreading gravel, raking, operating forks, even tilling (especially in tight spaces). I used mine for a couple of hours today grading the driveways after the rain, moving leaves, smoothing dirt and gravel and did a lot of back and forth made easy with the HST. I have a friend whose tractor doesn't and he is always shifting, shifting, shifting. I think the standard transmission/shift is great for working in big fields where once you start moving you keep moving: mowing and baling hay, spraying, spreading, plowing, seeding. But when picking up the hay with a grapple and loading on trailers the hydrostatic is the thing. Come to think of it, all of my farm and dirt equipment have hydrostatic drives, even the little diesel utility truck.

My tractor is not a subcompact but I still had the rear tires filled part way with liquid for stability (alcohol mixture). The extra weight is also nice when compacting soil. (For even better compacting I fill the FEL with gravel and take advantage of the extra weight on the narrower front tires.)

I welded both grab hooks on the top ends of the bucket and a slip hook in the center - gives lots of flexibility. I also bolted grab hooks on the bottom of the boom behind the bucket for those rare times when I need just a bit more lifting power. A grab hook on either end of the bucket and a couple of big skidding tongs on short lengths of chain makes lifting and moving short logs easy, especially at the sawmill. (For skidding long logs I use one skidding tong on one end of the log, lift that end a couple of inches off the ground with the bucket so it doesn't get caught on rocks and roots, then drive backwards to snake it around trees.)

The thing I'd most hate to NOT have on the tractor are the top and tilt cylinders I had added years ago for the 3-point hitch. No more getting off the tractor to make adjustments. The valves and cylinders weren't cheap but the combo is so, so useful for things like grading with the yard box and raking, clearing ditches with the long grading blade, lining up vertically to drive a fence post with the hydraulic post driver on a slope, boring holes with the auger, cutting/smoothing trails in the woods, even when bush hogging. About the only time I don't use it with 3pt attachments is when plowing or pulling the land plane. The top&tilt is the best investment I've made for the tractor.

For those thinking about getting a tractor (or just got one) I recommend researching the ways you can get hurt or killed. Here are a few:
* One of the most gruesome I read about was driving through the woods, driving over and pushing over saplings/small trees along the way, then turning around and returning by the same path. A bent over and stripped sapling can catch and feed itself up into seat area and impale the driver. Unfortunate operators have been found where the tractor finally came to rest when it ran out of fuel.
* Another thing is stability sideways on a hill - everything may feel just fine and quite stable UNTIL a wheel on the low side suddenly drops into a shallow hole or low spot or a wheel on the high side runs over a rock.
* Since the 3pt hitch does not have down pressure, people have been wrapped around the shaft of an auger when they slipped while jumping on the top trying to add a little extra weight to get through a hard spot in the dirt. Ack.
* I always wear a hard hat when working around trees - I once accidentally bumped a tree which knocked loose a dead widowmaker limb which gave my hard hat a good smack. Fortunately it wasn't big enough to break my neck.
* If clearing even small trees with the bucket be real careful not to catch a still-rooted one with the back edge of the bucket low to the ground when backing up - even moving slowly the leverage can swing the tree down at a high speed. People have been knocked out and faces have been stitched.
* The nephew of a neighbor got too close to a shaft driving a portable tractor-driven sawmill.
* One more: the grandfather of another neighbor was killed when he disturbed a hornet's or yellowjacket nest. When he jumped off the tractor to run away he tripped and his foot got caught under the rear tire (evidently not a hydrostatic drive) and the tractor ran over him. When working around brush in summer and early fall I often wear a netting over my head, the type used by bow hunters for camouflage, long sleeves, and gloves. I also carry a can of hornet spray and I've had to use it a time or two.

JKJ