Kubota M5 and M6 production

[jimr63]

they already do. Look at Kubota's gas engines. They ARE diesel engines, but with different internals and different cyl head. Quieter, MUCH smoother, makes more torque than the diesel counterpart in some cases. IMO convert them to high pressure DI or EFI (either one, with EFI being cheaper/easier to make and maintain) with no turbo and they'll be a serious contender. Or throw a turbo on it and your torque and horsepower potentially doubles. That in itself is not possible with current diesels. You can't take a n/a kubota diesel and toss a turbo on it and double it's output. Most, with a turbo might make 2-20hp more depending on the size of the engine.

The 1/2 ton pickup market has taken notice of the diesel engine. They built a bunch of them but they can't sell them so now they're ditching production of them and focusing on electric and gasoline. The cost to buy/own/maintain/operate a 1/2 ton diesel vs the lack of power with them is what is hurting that market. Just as I have been saying for the years that people keep saying "I want a 1/2 ton diesel". Those same "buyers" get sticker shocked. Then the few that do buy don't keep them very long and go back to gas in many cases. Those little 3.0L diesels look good on paper but they are TURDS. Nissan uses a larger 5.0L diesel but it is also a slug in comparison to a 3.5 even the little 2.7 turbo engine. My neighbor has one and I drive it somewhat often. He's losing his eyesight so I drive him occasionally to/from his lake house. 5.0L cummins. Turd. MPG isn't stellar either. The epa destroyed the diesel engine and carb has even more stringent standards coming. I believe that if carb actually goes through with it, the us epa "usually" follows suit at the federal level, and if that happens the nail will be driven into the coffin. it's already started.

Could be…in my personal experience with the smaller equipment I have owned, the diesels have always outperformed a similar hp gas motor in the torque produced, i.e. my Z725KH vs. my ZD1211. The larger vehicles and equipment I have owned and used the torque isn’t even close between gas and diesel. For example my 5.7L Tundra produces around 400hp and 400’lbs torque. My 6.7L Ram produces around the same 400hp but over 1000’lbs of torque. Those numbers are pretty typical when comparing gas vs diesel motors AFAIK. Yes, my Tundra will run circles around my Ram on a race track...but can’t come close to pulling a 30k lb trailer as easily.

 

[GeoHorn]

This is one of many reasons that I think it's time for Kubota to think about a GAS tractor. ….

They have been developing an electric tractor for some time now.

SDT, the problem is not the “federales”. The problem is diesel engines make people and the planet sick. It’s completely appropriate we seek a solution. The present ones don’t work very well however, and it makes absolutely NO SENSE to burn more diesel and produce more CO2 to burn harmless carbon out of a muffler. Doh.

 

[rScotty]

They have been developing an electric tractor for some time now.

SDT, the problem is not the “federales”. The problem is diesel engines make people and the planet sick. It’s completely appropriate we seek a solution. The present ones don’t work very well however, and it makes absolutely NO SENSE to burn more diesel and produce more CO2 to burn harmless carbon out of a muffler. Doh.

Our Mercedes Sprinter van has that small 5 cylinder diesel that Mercedes has made for 10 or 15 years now. Physically it's a tiny engine that has a DEF emissions system so good that after 5 years the tail pipe doesn't have a trace of soot. Not only does it not smell, it's hard to hear if it is running.

They sell a ton of those Sprinter vans all over the world because they are reliable, make lots of power, and get exceptional good mileage. It's rare to hear of one needing work on the engine or emissions. Oil change interval on the Sprinter engine is 4x as long as our Fords PU or JD & Kubota tractors.
So diesels can be done well; that one company proves it.
Couldn't other manufacturers could do it as well if they wanted to?

 

[eserv]

They have been developing an electric tractor for some time now.

SDT, the problem is not the “federales”. The problem is diesel engines make people and the planet sick. It’s completely appropriate we seek a solution. The present ones don’t work very well however, and it makes absolutely NO SENSE to burn more diesel and produce more CO2 to burn harmless carbon out of a muffler. Doh.

A dpf is a carbon capture device. They capture carbon then they burn more fuel to just let the carbon go into the atmosphere as CO2!

 

[Clementine]

GeoHorn, I am sorry but I don't share your belief that CO2 makes people or the planet sick. I also don't support turning this thread into a political discussions of climate change. Let's keep if about our tractors and not drag in personal beliefs which might start a battle.

 

[Porcupine]

$5600 for warranty repair.

Now imagine that after the 5 year emission warranty is up, you'd have had to eat that, and it would have been more than $5600.

This is one of many reasons that I think it's time for Kubota to think about a GAS tractor. The engines are already there just waiting to be used; at least for the smaller tractors. I am thinking a sub 40hp gas burning standard L series might sell pretty decent, possibly a 32hp B series gas as well since they already have a gas engine (ala ZG332/WG1005) which makes MORE torque and horsepower than the D1005 (diesel), with much quieter operation, less vibration (a LOT less) and less expensive. That's only one example....they have other engines available too and obviously the technology to make it happen. It's time, IMO. After all, UPS local delivery trucks are ALL gas burners now (at least in this area)--they are 6.0 GM engines. You'd think that if diesel was so awesome, they (UPS) would be running them, but the maintenance and repair costs involved make it cost prohibitive. The only downside to the gas UPS trucks is that I can't hear them pull up the driveway now.

Diesel is awesome, it’s the regulators that suck.

 

[GeoHorn]

GeoHorn, I am sorry but I don't share your belief that CO2 makes people or the planet sick. I also don't support turning this thread into a political discussions of climate change. Let's keep if about our tractors and not drag in personal beliefs which might start a battle.

It’s not me that makes it political….it’s politicians that do so. CO2 at high levels is hazardous to the environment whether particular people find it convenient to believe it or not.
Face scientific facts and you will be able to deal with it. Ignore them at some peoples short-term gain but at everyones’ peril.
There are better ways to deal with them than what we’re doing, IMO.

 

[Clementine]

It’s not me that makes it political….it’s politicians that do so. CO2 at high levels is hazardous to the environment whether particular people find it convenient to believe it or not.
Face scientific facts and you will be able to deal with it. Ignore them at some peoples short-term gain but at everyones’ peril.
There are better ways to deal with them than what we’re doing, IMO.

The earth is flat, lobotomies are proper treatment for mental illness, the earth is the center of the universe, Einstein's static universe theory --- are all examples of "Science" and people believed it until other explanations came forward (which could still change). If no one bothered to challenge the "science" then thought logic would be stagnant. I am not a scientist but I instead love tractors / diesels so therefore I know more about them than say, the lifecycle of a Uranium Isotope. I find tend to believe people who don't have an agenda attached with their opinions / "Science". Example: In response to CO2 I choose to trust this opinion - https://colemanscornerdotcomdotbr.wordpress.com . I am sure you might disagree but that's where we can save the kind people of this forum from yet another politically charged conversation and instead talk about our Kubota passions and share experiences.

On the DEF Header front - I did hear that the problem with existing ones P206 error is because Ammonia seeps past seals and affects the circuitry. The latest fix changes the part with one which has a must stronger seal than the previous material.

 

[Porcupine]

The earth is flat, lobotomies are proper treatment for mental illness, the earth is the center of the universe, Einstein's static universe theory --- are all examples of "Science" and people believed it until other explanations came forward (which could still change). If no one bothered to challenge the "science" then thought logic would be stagnant. I am not a scientist but I instead love tractors / diesels so therefore I know more about them than say, the lifecycle of a Uranium Isotope. I find tend to believe people who don't have an agenda attached with their opinions / "Science". Example: In response to CO2 I choose to trust this opinion - https://colemanscornerdotcomdotbr.wordpress.com . I am sure you might disagree but that's where we can save the kind people of this forum from yet another politically charged conversation and instead talk about our Kubota passions and share experiences.

On the DEF Header front - I did hear that the problem with existing ones P206 error is because Ammonia seeps past seals and affects the circuitry. The latest fix changes the part with one which has a must stronger seal than the previous material.

Clearly a “Science Denier”.

While I’m very young (in geological age) I am old enough to remember the same clown (Mann) that had us freezing to death in an ice age switched his prediction to burning us up due to global warming-now the all inclusive “Climate Change”.

Funny how climate is not weather-unless it’s convenient for the alarmists.

DEF/particulate filters create more cost, complication, and excess fuel consumption than they are worth.

CO2 is not a pollutant, and

 

[GeoHorn]

The earth is flat, lobotomies are proper treatment for mental illness, the earth is the center of the universe, Einstein's static universe theory --- are all examples of "Science" and people believed it until other explanations came forward (which could still change). If no one bothered to challenge the "science" then thought logic would be stagnant. I am not a scientist but I instead love tractors / diesels so therefore I know more about them than say, the lifecycle of a Uranium Isotope. I find tend to believe people who don't have an agenda attached with their opinions / "Science". Example: In response to CO2 I choose to trust this opinion - https://colemanscornerdotcomdotbr.wordpress.com . I am sure you might disagree but that's where we can save the kind people of this forum from yet another politically charged conversation and instead talk about our Kubota passions and share experiences.

On the DEF Header front - I did hear that the problem with existing ones P206 error is because Ammonia seeps past seals and affects the circuitry. The latest fix changes the part with one which has a must stronger seal than the previous material.

Those were THEORIES,which, in scientific -method explorations, are allowable postulates until disproved. Einstein himself abandoned his earlier “static universe THEORY” only a few years later…. (as you noted… it was a THEORY….NOT a “FACT”.
John Coleman is/was a “meterologist”… not a profession which had much credibility even in his specialty, (until science brought us satellites and world-wide-environmental-observation capabilities) …. As a fake scientologist He is much less capable in subjects much better studied by true scientists such as Dr. Robt Ballard (Oceanologist who found Titanic, Bismarck, Scorpion, etc etc). Dr. Ballard spoke extensively on climate change at UT/Arlington in which he supported and proved CO2 to be the great contributor to the problem.
It is a simple matter: The carbonaceous period resulted in the storing-away of great quantities of carbon reducing the earths’ temperature to that which is livable….. which brought us forward until we humans discovered how to dig and drill it up and return it to the atmosphere as CO2.
But the subject at-hand…Burning carbon out of exhaust particulate filters by burning still more fuel is a ridiculous, cosmetic cover-up of the problem.

 

[rScotty]

Those were THEORIES,which, in scientific -method explorations, are allowable postulates until disproved. Einstein himself abandoned his earlier “static universe THEORY” only a few years later…. (as you noted… it was a THEORY….NOT a “FACT”.
John Coleman is/was a “meterologist”… not a profession which had much credibility even in his specialty, (until science brought us satellites and world-wide-environmental-observation capabilities) …. As a fake scientologist He is much less capable in subjects much better studied by true scientists such as Dr. Robt Ballard (Oceanologist who found Titanic, Bismarck, Scorpion, etc etc). Dr. Ballard spoke extensively on climate change at UT/Arlington in which he supported and proved CO2 to be the great contributor to the problem.
It is a simple matter: The carbonaceous period resulted in the storing-away of great quantities of carbon reducing the earths’ temperature to that which is livable….. which brought us forward until we humans discovered how to dig and drill it up and return it to the atmosphere as CO2.
But the subject at-hand…Burning carbon out of exhaust particulate filters by burning still more fuel is a ridiculous, cosmetic cover-up of the problem.

Yes, I think a lot of people end up as denying science or believing conspiracies simply because they have an incomplete understanding of how science works.

Science is a pretty flexible philosophy. It allows for flat or round earth, climate change or not, CO2 or not, and just about anything you can come up with including flying saucers and vaccines with ID tags attached.

Science has no problem including those things as theories, but they remain as theories until they are proven or disproven by facts.

That's how science works: accepting theories and then proving/disproving them with facts backed up with repeatable experiments with repeatable results. Not with arguments, opnions, or more theories.

Scientific thinking is a pretty simple way to think & doesn't take a lot of study. It's not a religion, just a self-consistent philosophy that explains HOW the world works, but not WHY it works as it does,
rScotty

 

[bsekf]

This is a battle with no winner. I am not going to get exercised until China and India clean up their act and our enviro's re-discover nuclear power.