Well, my research told me it was not heavy enough... Anyone want a Grand L5740HST

[jeffb]

Just got a new to me 2010 Grand L5740HST with 100 hours and had a LA854 loader put on a few weeks ago. Story here http://www.orangetractortalks.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16810&highlight=L5740

I bought a big tractor (60HP 4X4) to handle round bales with the loader. First bales I bought (5x5) I unloaded fine. Also note, I had the rear tires fluid filled for added weight.

This last weekend I bought 20 bales (5x6) and went to my friends house to get them. He loaded the first four on my trailer with a 2001 John Deere 2 wheel drive 5220 (I think 50HP). He had no rear ballast, Fluid filled tires, he had no issues, set them on just fine.

I get home and proudly grab my L5740HST and put on the front forks and proceed to unload. FIRST FREAKING BALE I snatch up pulls the rear tires off the ground and scare the hell out of me. Figuring I must be in a hole I went to the other side of the trailer, nice and flat, square centered and same damn thing, pulls tires off the ground. I end up dragging a bale off the trailer, putting on rear spike and stabbing bale as ballast to unload the rest.

I originally was considering the Mahindra when I saw them at the farm show and the dealer told me the comparable Kubota weighed 40% less and was not a good choice for lifting round bales. He told me to search youtube for the video which I did and I still bought Kubota thinking that was 2600 pounds in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz9bGdaRbnk.

I suspect these bales weight between 1500-1800 pounds and I am more than upset I have to worry about ballast every time I feed.

I am upset with the amount of money I spent/financed to do a job and first thing out of my wife's mouth was, "I thought you researched this and the tractor was big enough to do the job?"

Anyone want a freshly serviced 2010 Grand L5740HST with 120 Hours brand new LA854 loader, fluid filled R1 tires and brand new rear remotes for $29,000? Pissed me off once and I am ready to ditch it.

 

[BAP]

First off, you changed bale size considerably going from 5x5 to 5x6. Fairly large weight increase and could be even more if the new bales have wetter hay in them. Secondly, if you are going to handle heavy bales, you need more than loaded tires. You need to put on some extra weight either by adding wheel weights, or better yet something on the 3pt hitch. Having enough weight on the back of any tractor any brand is a MUST to lift heavy weights hanging way out in front of the loader.

 

[jeffb]

My points were a 50 hp JD handled the load fine and I didn't heed my own research that Kubota's are lightly built compared to comparable JD and Mahindra. I don't want to deal with hooking up ballast every time I feed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[North Idaho Wolfman]

The HP is not the issue, weight is!
Kubota's are light on purpose, it gives them more flexibility to be configured in different ways.
The tractor is fine for your needed use and is the right one, It just need tweaked a little, a good dealer should have set you up right, and right from the start.
Wheel weights will help, also something as simple as a Quick hitch on the rear that never has to be removed will help and be useful when hooking up equipment.

 

[85Hokie]

Just got a new to me 2010 Grand L5740HST with 100 hours and had a LA854 loader put on a few weeks ago. Story here http://www.orangetractortalks.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16810&highlight=L5740

I bought a big tractor (60HP 4X4) to handle round bales with the loader. First bales I bought (5x5) I unloaded fine. Also note, I had the rear tires fluid filled for added weight.

This last weekend I bought 20 bales (5x6) and went to my friends house to get them. He loaded the first four on my trailer with a 2001 John Deere 2 wheel drive 5220 (I think 50HP). He had no rear ballast, Fluid filled tires, he had no issues, set them on just fine.

I get home and proudly grab my L5740HST and put on the front forks and proceed to unload. FIRST FREAKING BALE I snatch up pulls the rear tires off the ground and scare the hell out of me. Figuring I must be in a hole I went to the other side of the trailer, nice and flat, square centered and same damn thing, pulls tires off the ground. I end up dragging a bale off the trailer, putting on rear spike and stabbing bale as ballast to unload the rest.

I originally was considering the Mahindra when I saw them at the farm show and the dealer told me the comparable Kubota weighed 40% less and was not a good choice for lifting round bales. He told me to search youtube for the video which I did and I still bought Kubota thinking that was 2600 pounds in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz9bGdaRbnk.

I suspect these bales weight between 1500-1800 pounds and I am more than upset I have to worry about ballast every time I feed.

I am upset with the amount of money I spent/financed to do a job and first thing out of my wife's mouth was, "I thought you researched this and the tractor was big enough to do the job?"

Anyone want a freshly serviced 2010 Grand L5740HST with 120 Hours brand new LA854 loader, fluid filled R1 tires and brand new rear remotes for $29,000? Pissed me off once and I am ready to ditch it.

also another factor that is not mentioned .....what is the wheel base ?? A longer tractor will have more weight behind the pivot point, so if the deere is a bit longer, it will have more leverage too.

I would add a ballast box - build it yourself or buy one, the cost will be small compared to your piece of mind!

 

[chknscratch]

It's really basic physics, but you seem to be basing the fault on Kubota for building an efficiently sized tractor. With large weight like that, you are asking for an accident without a proper counter weight on the rear. Please be careful and wear your seat belt when lifting heavy loads.

 

[84cj]

No matter what size tractor you get, you will always want bigger.

 

[ShaunRH]

I'm not following the logic.

You want a heavier tractor just to deal with bales, something that isn't 100% of your workload for the tractor?

A heavier tractor is a curse, not a blessing most of the time, at least to me. Roll that JD or Mahindra out into a muddy field or road and see the difference between them and the lighter Kubota. You will always be struggling with the heavier unit whenever you need a lighter one. You can make the Kubota heavier, you cannot make the JD or Mahindra lighter.

As others have stated, ballast boxes, bars, rails, etc. are common and easy to come by or make yourself. You can make it quick attach so it goes on in less than 5 minutes, dump it off even faster. Gives you something to do while warming up the tractor.

If you are feeding live stock, put a 3pt water tank mount on the back and fill up the troughs at the same time. Put a weighted utility box on the back and haul some workers to help you. Just a few pounds on that 3 point will offset more weight on the loader since the pivot point is the front tires and that 3 point is further away from the pivot than your bales are.

It certainly is a better option than losing thousands on replacing tractor types or brands.

I feel you bought the right tractor, just not working it effectively yet.

Some past experience:
Heavier weight is a negative to me and I did a bunch of dirt work. I've been on a 9,000lb tractor in soft worked soil or mud and had to have REALLY heavy equipment to pull it out, and I couldn't use it until it got compacted some. Same soil, a 3,000lb tractor rolled over it like it was nothing and kept working the soil and did the compacting so the slightly larger tractor could go back to work. This is why the tracked units are so popular now, it can be heavy and yet not sink like the wheeled units but it takes more power to move that weight, so fuel economy suffers as well.

 

[jeffb]

It's really basic physics, but you seem to be basing the fault on Kubota for building an efficiently sized tractor. With large weight like that, you are asking for an accident without a proper counter weight on the rear. Please be careful and wear your seat belt when lifting heavy loads.

Let's try again... I said I blame myself that I didn't heed my own research that Kubota's are lightly built compared to comparable JD and Mahindra's that will handle the same load safely without ballast. I think the Kubota is a fine machine. And yes it is physics, the other two are are heavier machines.

Just spoke to farmer buddy that has chicken houses and he liked the Kubota egonomics and price better than the JD BUT when demo'ing the tractors at his chicken houses the Kubota had to be ballast'ed to do exact same job the JD did just fine so he chose the new JD.

 

[TripleR]

Agreed, nothing to do with HP and it's easier to add weight to a tractor than remove it.

I too researched before buying my L5740 and from that knew I would need added weight in the rear to use it to its full effectiveness, so I filled the tires and added wheel weights then even with that put an additional minimum 1000 pounds on the three point. It is a relatively light, short wheel base tractor great for some things as is and others with modification.

Even with the modifications, there are times I just need a bigger, heavier tractor, so if I had to have only one, it would not be the L5740. Not that it's a bad tractor.

 

[skeets]

Hell I ll give ya a hundred bucks for it and wont even charge to haul it away

 

[MtnViewRanch]

I'm not following the logic.

You want a heavier tractor just to deal with bales, something that isn't 100% of your workload for the tractor?

A heavier tractor is a curse, not a blessing most of the time, at least to me. Roll that JD or Mahindra out into a muddy field or road and see the difference between them and the lighter Kubota. You will always be struggling with the heavier unit whenever you need a lighter one. You can make the Kubota heavier, you cannot make the JD or Mahindra lighter.

As others have stated, ballast boxes, bars, rails, etc. are common and easy to come by or make yourself. You can make it quick attach so it goes on in less than 5 minutes, dump it off even faster. Gives you something to do while warming up the tractor.

If you are feeding live stock, put a 3pt water tank mount on the back and fill up the troughs at the same time. Put a weighted utility box on the back and haul some workers to help you. Just a few pounds on that 3 point will offset more weight on the loader since the pivot point is the front tires and that 3 point is further away from the pivot than your bales are.

It certainly is a better option than losing thousands on replacing tractor types or brands.

I feel you bought the right tractor, just not working it effectively yet.

Some past experience:
Heavier weight is a negative to me and I did a bunch of dirt work. I've been on a 9,000lb tractor in soft worked soil or mud and had to have REALLY heavy equipment to pull it out, and I couldn't use it until it got compacted some. Same soil, a 3,000lb tractor rolled over it like it was nothing and kept working the soil and did the compacting so the slightly larger tractor could go back to work. This is why the tracked units are so popular now, it can be heavy and yet not sink like the wheeled units but it takes more power to move that weight, so fuel economy suffers as well.

Would you mind clarifying what type of tractor it was that you had stuck?

From the comment that you made about tracked units, it sounds like it was a wheeled skid steer?

 

[olthumpa]

What does a round bail weigh?

According to the University of Georgia, depending on density:

5 x 5 = 880 to 1180 lbs
5 x 6 = 1270 to 1700 lbs

So, the lightest a 5 x 6 weighs more than the heaviest 5 x 5

Wheel weights are about a dollar a pound. How much is it going to cost you to trade?

 

[jeffb]

What does a round bail weigh?

According to the University of Georgia, depending on density:

5 x 5 = 880 to 1180 lbs
5 x 6 = 1270 to 1700 lbs

So, the lightest a 5 x 6 weighs more than the heaviest 5 x 5

Wheel weights are about a dollar a pound. How much is it going to cost you to trade?

So my buddy was close, he guessed them at 1800# because some are closer to 5.5'

The 2014 50hp HST Mahindra with 5 year warranty was same price and had same features for most part as I paid for the used L5740 Kubota with no warranty. Catch was, closest Mahindra dealer is almost an hour away so I opted for 10 extra HP and used Kubota because Kubota dealer is here in town. John Deere (also here in town) was same price for 50Hp but it is a power shuttle and basically a stripped model far from Grand L or Mahindra comforts.

 

[jeffb]

No matter what size tractor you get, you will always want bigger.

My favorite saying is "There is always, bigger, better, faster, longer, blonder."

Yes I am whining (I'll man up and admit it) because I spent $30,000 to do a specific task and now I have to modify, add, do more work on and/or spend more money on a tool I thought should be more than capable of "safely" doing a job.

Yes, I know I can add a quick hitch ($200), and homemade ballast box ($200 or more) and or stab another bale on the rear every time I move one on the front. BUT all of this is a band-aide to fix a problem that I sold my 28hp JD 4x4 for because it was too small for the job.

I don't need more posts, I was blowing off steam but serious I'd sell it in a heartbeat to pay off the loan and get another tractor that will do the task at hand.

 

[ShaunRH]

Would you mind clarifying what type of tractor it was that you had stuck?

From the comment that you made about tracked units, it sounds like it was a wheeled skid steer?

1958 2WD Allis-Chalmers D-17 6cyl Diesel w/ Heavy Duty FEL and Backhoe. She's about 9000# filled, weighted, fueled and oiled. (Picture at bottom)

Pushed it into the soft stuff thinking 'no problem, I've had her in sand with no issues' HA! the second the rears rolled in to the soil she started pushing down into it so fast I had her up to the axles before I could clutch.
Had almost the same problem with a neighbors backhoe, it weighs about the same, but it was in mud.

A much lighter Oliver 3 cyl diesel with FEL and box blade ran over the same soil with no issues. Learned that weight was not always an advantage that day.

Now to the OP's original point, the AC D-17 can lift about 4000# of rock/soil in it's FEL and not get tipsy, but then again, it has a 1500#+ Wagner IW backhoe on the back side of it.

Old iron = heavy and underpowered, but reliable and repairable with basic tools.

 

[Dave_eng]

Another factor to investigate would be the reach of the loader. i.e. how far from the front axle center is the lifting point of the bucket or spear. A friend bought a 70 hp New Holland and the dealer put on a loader for a larger tractor which put the bucket quite far from the front axle and he had a lot of problems with the rear end lifting until he added some serious ballast to the 3 pt.
I am with those who would have you add ballast rather than buy bigger iron. You can add the weight where you need it rather than carrying it all the time making transport more trouble and increasing fuel costs moving it.
Dave M7040

 

[TripleR]

Another factor to investigate would be the reach of the loader. i.e. how far from the front axle center is the lifting point of the bucket or spear. A friend bought a 70 hp New Holland and the dealer put on a loader for a larger tractor which put the bucket quite far from the front axle and he had a lot of problems with the rear end lifting until he added some serious ballast to the 3 pt.
I am with those who would have you add ballast rather than buy bigger iron. You can add the weight where you need it rather than carrying it all the time making transport more trouble and increasing fuel costs moving it.
Dave M7040

See post #15, he's made up his mind and "I don't need more posts", so it seems we are wasting our time.

 

[jeffb]

Another factor to investigate would be the reach of the loader. i.e. how far from the front axle center is the lifting point of the bucket or spear. A friend bought a 70 hp New Holland and the dealer put on a loader for a larger tractor which put the bucket quite far from the front axle and he had a lot of problems with the rear end lifting until he added some serious ballast to the 3 pt.
I am with those who would have you add ballast rather than buy bigger iron. You can add the weight where you need it rather than carrying it all the time making transport more trouble and increasing fuel costs moving it.
Dave M7040

Thanks guys - the LA854 FEL is the correct loader for the L5740, I did tip the bales back in an attempt to bring the weight more to the rear and it did not help. I appreciate the insights and suggestions, I suspect there are many good points to all aspects of all suggestions.

It's a nice machine, I suspect it will do what I need most of the time. I'll repeat it is not doing without more work, money or modification it's intended purpose that I sold my other tractor for and spent $30,000 for this one to do.

 

[D2Cat]

jeffb, to know what your hay actually weight just take your next load by the scales at your Coop. They are probably not near 1800# unless the man has a new baler.

All the suggestion on forms of ballast are way out in left field compared to simply stabbing a bale on the back before picking up something on the front.

You then take two bales to the feeder. Put the front one where you want it then the second and head back for two more. Makes more sense anyways!

You can come on here venting about your bad decision, and don't want any feedback. You can sell/trade your tractor at a loss, or just go buy another one, or figure how to use this one. Only options.

Why don't you figure how many rounds of hay you feed each year and decide if you can live with that?

Owning things that eat hay are a pain in the A.., especially at haying time and feeding time!!!