I farm in a high desert area from May to Oct. I have two properties to maintain with one as a business. Lots of construction/demo chores and upkeep to do when not farming the small family farm. I like the hydraulic shuttle shift transmission and am leaning toward a M6060. I like the MX6000 too but not sold completely on the hydrostatic transmission. Any recommendations?
MX6000 or M6060
- Thread starter Yellowfeet204*
- Start date
I have both of those models, and if it's one or the other, the M6060 every time. The MX6000 is a very capable tractor but there isn't much crossover in terms of tasks, at least not for me. I like, use and enjoy both tractors and the fact that they're so different is part of the enjoyment, but if there can be only one, then it's the M6060. It's so much bigger than an MX, and offers way more capability at both ends, and in the middle, and is a torque monster compared to the MX. Don't be fooled by the engine and pto hp numbers. They're only close on paper.
Many here will favor the HST and I get that, but they'll tell you that you can't move dirt or pick up logs or do any precise work with a gear drive tractor. I don't agree at all, and if you've grown up driving and preferring manual transmission vehicles or tractors it's not much of a learning curve. If you're looking at a cab model, the M6060 cab is way bigger and more comfortable and with a much better layout of the important controls. Don't get me wrong, the MX cab is still a nice place to be, and that tractor is the bee's knees for me for snow removal, running the flail or rortary cutter, pallelt forks, etc., and being smaller feels very nimble. That said, the M6060 has an incredibly tight turning radius and is easy to use. There are more than a few tasks that I can do with the M that I simply can't do with the MX, but not the other way around.
If you're serious about an M6060 you might want to look at the M7060 too. You can get some really nice and meaningful upgrades with the 7060 that simply aren't available on the 6060.
Good luck with your decision. It's a nice choice to have to make and ultimately I doubt you'd be disappointed with either.
That's just my opinion based on having the MX6000HSTC for 3-1/2 years (plus one year with an MX6000HST) and the M6060HDC for 3 years, but ideally you'd get to try both, sit on/in both, look around and under both tractors to get a much better idea of the differences. As I said, the M is a much bigger tractor, but my needs and uses are different to yours although we might find some common ground, so take my comments above for what they are.
I use the M to pull a 12ft folding rotary cutter around in the warmer months. The RC3712 weighs 4,000lb and it pulls it all over my hilly property with ease. The MX would really struggle with that task based on the experience I've had with the MX using the flail and RCR1884 on my property. It handles those just fine, but I'm confident that the folding cutter would be too much for it, even though Kubota lists the MX as being "Kubota Matched" to that implement.
The other day I was tinkering on the new driveway and pulling dirt uphill with the M6060 and Buhler/Farm King rear blade with the engine running at 1,650 rpm, mid range and 1st gear. At one point the blade bit in too deep which stopped all forward motion. I was in 2WD and the rear tires kept on spinning turning the dirt into dust and digging tire sized holes! There's a lot of available torque with the M6060.
Last edited:
I have a little experience with an M7040, the 7060's pre-DPF predecessor, at a horse rescue. We used it with a 7' rotary cutter, bale spear, forks, and rear blade. With that much engine, the torque range is wide enough you can vary ground speed with throttle, instead of needing to keep the engine speed up with a smaller engine.
I think the main option available on the 7060 vs 6060 that McMxi was referring to was the 12 speed transmission vs 8, and I agree. The 7040 I've used had 8 but the 12 is a nominal cost option.
I'm not sure of your exact tasks, but the hydraulic shuttle is nice, and there have been few problems reported here. I suspect the fuel savings over a hydrostat would be substantial, McMxi could probably report.
The M6060/M7060 has a 23.8 gallon fuel tank vs. 11.9 for the MX (cab model), so the MX is getting refilled way more often which can give the impression that it's not as fuel efficient, but overall, based on my experience I'd say that the bigger tractor is more fuel efficient regardless of the refilling schedule. The next sentence might help to shed some light on that.
Another thing to think about is the engine rpm required to turn the PTO at 540 rpm. For the MX it's 2,660 whereas it's only 2,160 for 540, and even less at a mere 1,828 for 540E, which is an option on the M6060/M7060. And then there's rpm management that's not available on the MX but standard on the M6060/M7060. I use that feature a lot at my place due to the hills. With rpm management turned on, the engine speed is maintained as the load on the engine changes.
If looking at the cabbed models, the M6060 cab is a lot quieter than the MX6000 cab. The difference is significant. Also, the M6060 has both power and height positions for the loader whereas the MX6000 does not.
The OP hasn't asked about the M7060, but it's worth looking at the differences between both models. There are quite a few differences between the M6060 and M7060 that make the latter model worth the extra cost ... to me at least. I've mentioned this a number of times, but had I ordered an M it would have been the M7060. The M6060 was sitting on a lot in Sheridan, WY and was priced around $10k under current pricing at the time because it was ordered before the big price increases. Had I ordered an M7060 I would have been looking at having to pay at least $15k more over what I bought. Saying all that, I have zero regrets re the M6060. It is an excellent tractor.
When you consider the differences listed below, the $3,600 added cost for the M7060 seems like an excellent value, but it's the difference in the transmission i.e. closer gear ratios, that appeals to me, even if just in theory. The other features although nice, aren't a big deal. For example, the 4WD lever in the cab of the M6060 is way, way, way nicer and easier to use than that awful lever at your feet in the MX6000. There's no messing with the accelator, rocking the tractor back and forth to engage 4WD, and there's a 4WD light in the dash panel but none on the MX. Would a switch on the dash be nicer, sure, but the lever works, and works well.
M6060 vs. M7060
Net engine hp: 63.5 vs. 71.0 (easily remedied with a programmer ... it's the same engine after all)
Torque lb-ft: 169 vs. 191 (both at 1,400 rpm but see above)
PTO hp: 56.0 vs. 64.0 (see above)
Transmission: F12/R12 vs. F18/R18
Over Drive: None vs. 6th gear (limits rpm to 1,960)
Parking brake: Foot pedal lock vs. transmission lock
Hydraulic pump: 11.0 gpm vs. 16.2 gpm
Brakes: Mechanical wet disc vs. hydraulic wet disc
Differential: No limited slip vs. limited slip on front differential
4WD: Mechanical lever vs. electric over hydraulic switch
Last edited: