Traded L4060HSTC for MX6000 cab

[mcmxi]

I had a deposit on a M4 last week, 2 things occurred - 1. The cost of the wheels/tires came in considerably more than the estimate. 2. I had confused the height of the M4 with the MX, which would have required putting up another storage building for the M4 due to the additional height.

I found a new MX6000 about 900 miles away and am having it shipped.

It's good that you got it all figured out before you bought an M4. Personally I would skip the M4 and move up to an M5. For me the logical order is MX > M60 > M5. Had an M7060 been available when I bought the M6060 in Sheridan, WY I would have bought that instead, but as it is, I'm really pleased with the M6060 and don't see myself changing what I have. Two very different but very capable tractors.

I was moving dirt close to the house yesterday evening with the MX making space for a 16'x24' storage shed that I'm building and it's just a great "little" tractor. I know you've already owned an MX6000 but congratulations on your second.

 

[mcmxi]

That price for shipping is shockingly low. I figured $2500-$3k. I didn't know you wanted R14's. Those are in high demand - I'm not totally convinced they are the be-all-end-all of tires, but who knows. I like R4's because they tend to wear well and they have a wide tread patch compared to the more rounded R1 or even R14 tires. Buildings - yeah, you could buy yet another tractor for those prices. Makes sense.

I have R4s on both MX6000s (one sold) and R1s on the M6060 and am pleased with both. Some talk of the R1s tearing up the ground but that hasn't been my experience cutting 10 or more acres. If I ever manage to wear out the R4s on the MX I might try R14s, but there's no way I'm going to "upgrade" from what has proven to be a very good tire for me in more than 150 hours of use.

 

[troverman]

I ran R1's on my previous MX4800 and for the most part they were easy on the ground as well. Tight turns in 4x4...yeah, they would dig a bit more.

 

[troverman]

So I was able to take delivery on the MX6000 last Friday. I also used it quite extensively Friday evening (about 5 hours), just loader work. It takes some getting used to not having the linked HST pedal to the throttle, and on top of that the throttle lever in not on the armrest in the MX like it is in the Grand L. However, I much prefer the seat suspension on the MX and the power steering is in fact better. The LA1065 is certain a better loader than the LA805 I had, and the joystick control has a nice feel to it. I will post a new thread on my detailed observations between the Grand L 60 and MX6000 cab versions that somebody may benefit from.

 

[TomGT350]

So I was able to take delivery on the MX6000 last Friday. I also used it quite extensively Friday evening (about 5 hours), just loader work. It takes some getting used to not having the linked HST pedal to the throttle, and on top of that the throttle lever in not on the armrest in the MX like it is in the Grand L. However, I much prefer the seat suspension on the MX and the power steering is in fact better. The LA1065 is certain a better loader than the LA805 I had, and the joystick control has a nice feel to it. I will post a new thread on my detailed observations between the Grand L 60 and MX6000 cab versions that somebody may benefit from.
View attachment 81742

Looks great! Do you have the wheels moved out to the furthest position?

 

[troverman]

Looks great! Do you have the wheels moved out to the furthest position?

Wheels are set out to max width plus 2" Bro-Tek spacers on both sides. This is kind of a bad picture but it shows just how wide the rear track is.

 

[troverman]

So I mowed a customer's field last night with the MX6000. This was a pretty good comparison of the benefits of the horsepower (or not) as last year I mowed the same field, around the same time with the L4060 HSTC. I'd say if anything the grass was higher this year. I used the same 78" flail mower and coincidentally started mowing at the same time of day (7PM). In both cases the loader was removed. Well, last spring my notes show I mowed form 7PM to midnight. Last night I finished at 10PM - a considerable time savings in my book. The MX6000 HSTC only bogged down a couple of times. I mowed in low range, pedal to the floor, using the cruise control and the cut quality was good even though I am still running last year's flail knives. The L4060 was also in low range for mowing, mostly in low-low with occasional low-high where possible. Stall Guard engaging plenty of times, and the cruise set to a much slower speed.

Observations: I miss seeing the exact PTO speed and ground speed. I miss the automotive style cruise control, although the manual cruise control lever is very smooth in this MX and worked fine. Since this customer is only a couple of miles from my shop, I drove the tractor. I miss the self-canceling turn signals of the 4060. I miss the high beam indicator on the dash when those are on. And finally, although the L4060 seat would bottom out under my weight and this MX seat does not, the L4060 seat was a more comfortable seat aside from the bottoming out.

That said, the MX has some pluses over the Grand L: Number 1 is power. Driving it down the road in High range is much nicer. It has no trouble maintaining speed up moderate hills. It gets up to speed quicker. Also, after working the L4060 for awhile in the field with tight turns and backing up in the corner areas, it would temporarily lose power steering. This is a documented issues on the L60 series that is present in all versions of that tractor, unfortunately. The MX power steering worked flawlessly the whole time, no matter how hot the engine was or how fast you were twirling the wheel and changing direction. The larger front tires seemed to float better in the wet areas. The stereo is the same; the A/C seemed at least as good or better (course it was brand new, super clean condenser). The wiper oddly seemed better - faster? even though it appears to be the same. Anyway, great tractor, it shaved time, I'm happy. Fuel consumption is higher but you get done sooner. In the end, same amount of fuel used.

 

[majorwager]

I traded my L4060 cab for an MX6000 cab yesterday. I’ve had the L4060 about 3 years. It’s an awesome tractor. I needed more PTO horsepower. I didn’t want to spend for an L6060. The Grand L60 has a number of luxury features I’ll miss, especially the HDS, electronic cruise control, linked throttle, nice multifunctional LCD display and the throttle up button on the loader. However, the MX has the same cab just the plain HST and dash. You get the high horsepower engine and a slightly heavier duty tractor for less money. The MX has better power steering and a better loader, better front tires, and slightly more weight. We’ll see how I like it…if it turns my flail mower better through the heavy grass, I’ll be a happy camper.

Very nice tractor you have there. You mentioned the seat, must have improved them since my purchase. The suspension was very rigid w/ minimal travel. Replaced right away w/ combo shock absorber/spring unit providing significant resilience. As for Prolonged mowing, my hydraulic temp. gets rather hot, noted your evening time frame. Found that gear tractors just operate cooler for sustained tasks. Howver, can't beat a hydro for loader work . As an aside, was mowing in hot weather recently w/ my 484, old girl, no emissions, coolant temp 160 degrees. Again, your MX is a nice looking outfit.

 

[Sharpie]

Very nice tractor you have there. You mentioned the seat, must have improved them since my purchase. The suspension was very rigid w/ minimal travel. Replaced right away w/ combo shock absorber/spring unit providing significant resilience. As for Prolonged mowing, my hydraulic temp. gets rather hot, noted your evening time frame. Found that gear tractors just operate cooler for sustained tasks. Howver, can't beat a hydro for loader work . As an aside, was mowing in hot weather recently w/ my 484, old girl, no emissions, coolant temp 160 degrees. Again, your MX is a nice looking outfit.

So is a HST not good for prolonged heavy work of brush hogging? Would a Geared tractor be better? I'm looking at a new MX6000 but can also get a MX5400 in a geared version.

 

[troverman]

So is a HST not good for prolonged heavy work of brush hogging? Would a Geared tractor be better? I'm looking at a new MX6000 but can also get a MX5400 in a geared version.

In my opinion experience the HST transmission works just fine for heavy mowing. Plowing sod? That’s probably a bit much for HST

 

[majorwager]

So is a HST not good for prolonged heavy work of brush hogging? Would a Geared tractor be better? I'm looking at a new MX6000 but can also get a MX5400 in a geared version.

My experience is that HST Transmissions run HOT when operated under PTO load for extended periods during summer temperatures. Have owned HST models since 1992. If you perform any extensive loader work, the HST is more productive. The compact tractors have limited oil reservoir capacity. They are open center systems (Review open center). Look @ the pump (constant) GPM capacity. The coolers are undersized & share air flow w/ the radiator. Place an A/C condenser in the mix & air flow is a greater restriction. Research any hydraulic oil design parameter between the pump flow relationship to reservoir capacity. These are ASTM. & SAE principles for hydraulic operation.
Anyone is free to offer advice, but omit the foundation for same. What is the operating temp of the hyd oil . & the coolant temp under hot weather mowing conditions.? They have no clue & are now scrambling to find & post appropriate levels.
I choose to perform sustained heavy mowing w/ a gear tractor. I further have the luxury to park the HST tractors in hot weather. If you elect a HST tractor, you might consider mowing during the cooler portions of the day, (ability dependent) & limit long term durations . Again, this forum has become quite combative, & I have little interest in a war. This is simply a summation of my opinion & experience.
Each viewer is entitled to their own, & should evaluate advice based upon their own research .

 

[troverman]

I'm not devaluing your opinion, but surely you must take the manufacturer into account. For example, do you suppose reputable companies like Kubota and Deere do not extensively test their HST systems in a variety of climate conditions with a variety of loads? Furthermore, in a model series, why do you suppose the manufacturer offers higher and lower horsepower versions? Added horsepower does not equal more lift; usually the loaders are all the same model. Rather, the higher horsepower models are intended to do more PTO work.

Regarding the coolers, even massive 200+ HP ag tractors all run them in a cooling "stack." There's not a problem with prioritizing coolers in the stack....typically it will be AC condenser first, then hydraulic side coolers, then the radiator. So long as the coolant gauge in the cluster is showing in the normal zone, all is well with engine coolant. As I've said, I've mowed up and down steep hillsides during summer heat of 90+ degrees. Repeated backing up dams to mow down, with a 6.5' flail mower operating on the back in thick grass. The only thing that causes an overheat is chaff plugging up the radiator screens, and this can be easily rectified. As for the hydraulic side, be it power steering, loader, or transmission - you would know if the fluid temps went too high as there is a vent in the system, usually at the rear. The fluid would expand out the vent. I've never had that occur. Also, if the fluid temp became too high, it would influence the radiator's ability to cool the engine coolant, and you would see the temp gauge running hotter than normal. This doesn't occur for me. Maybe in the old days of HST this was a problem, but I really don't think it is for the vast majority of users.

 

[hedgerow]

So is a HST not good for prolonged heavy work of brush hogging? Would a Geared tractor be better? I'm looking at a new MX6000 but can also get a MX5400 in a geared version.

I will throw out my thoughts. I probably ran close to 100 hours last summer with a seven foot bush hog on my MX6000. Only heat issue I had was with the radiator screen plugging. You don't see any SP windrowers, SP sprayers, skid loaders or combines parking when it hot out. I have owned and ran these types of machines for well over thirty years HST are built to take the heat. Buy the MX6000 you will like it.

 

[majorwager]

I'm not devaluing your opinion, but surely you must take the manufacturer into account. For example, do you suppose reputable companies like Kubota and Deere do not extensively test their HST systems in a variety of climate conditions with a variety of loads? Furthermore, in a model series, why do you suppose the manufacturer offers higher and lower horsepower versions? Added horsepower does not equal more lift; usually the loaders are all the same model. Rather, the higher horsepower models are intended to do more PTO work.

Regarding the coolers, even massive 200+ HP ag tractors all run them in a cooling "stack." There's not a problem with prioritizing coolers in the stack....typically it will be AC condenser first, then hydraulic side coolers, then the radiator. So long as the coolant gauge in the cluster is showing in the normal zone, all is well with engine coolant. As I've said, I've mowed up and down steep hillsides during summer heat of 90+ degrees. Repeated backing up dams to mow down, with a 6.5' flail mower operating on the back in thick grass. The only thing that causes an overheat is chaff plugging up the radiator screens, and this can be easily rectified. As for the hydraulic side, be it power steering, loader, or transmission - you would know if the fluid temps went too high as there is a vent in the system, usually at the rear. The fluid would expand out the vent. I've never had that occur. Also, if the fluid temp became too high, it would influence the radiator's ability to cool the engine coolant, and you would see the temp gauge running hotter than normal. This doesn't occur for me. Maybe in the old days of HST this was a problem, but I really don't think it is for the vast majority of users.

I can not speak for the"Vast majority of users " As for Kubota engineering, the public seeks a compact chassis. In that configuration, the capabilities are limited. Further, the emissions systems inherently & substantially increase operating temps which exacerbate increased temps under load. The synthetic fluids are not as apt to foam & escape. The point is that excessive heat ruins mechanical & fluid drive systems. The degradation is More gradual than immediate. I do not know how to more clearly state that my posts are reflective of MY experience. YMMV. Yours obviously do differ.
I laugh right out loud, "you are not devaluing my post," but that is exactly what you did.. Know this, my equipment does not suffer from any operating methods employed by other members. They are responsible for their equipment, & I for mine. You are free validate your posts with the assertion, you speak for "The Vast Majority" I hesitate to allow my ego to compose my posts.
BTW, 200 hp is hardly, "massive", I operate a 540 case quadtrac, & the farm forage harvester is over 700 hp, & Claas builds an 1100 hp harvester , & the "massive" pinnacle has yet been reached.

 

[majorwager]

I will throw out my thoughts. I probably ran close to 100 hours last summer with a seven foot bush hog on my MX6000. Only heat issue I had was with the radiator screen plugging. You don't see any SP windrowers, SP sprayers, skid loaders or combines parking when it hot out. I have owned and ran these types of machines for well over thirty years HST are built to take the heat. Buy the MX6000 you will like it.

Ridiculous to compare farm power row crop units to the compact tractors. FYI, I go back to the International Hydro 70 & 80 series from the 1970's. You could not make your statement & work in Ag.
You obviously have little clue as to the hyd, oil reservoir & cooler capacities contained in the equipment you so freely reference. Kubota doesn't profess that these compacts will power any specific PTO implement. They cleverly market implements under a separate label They publish a 3 point lift capacity. The gear box rating on your mower almost certainly exceeds the hp of your tractor, indicating it will function on a much larger tractor. . Compare a compact to a row crop tractor is tantamount to a pick up equaling a semi.
Modern Hydro transmissions are an issue in large Ag equipment w/ PTO. They are almost all CVT or power shift. A combine transmission is separate from the hydraulic accessory drive, hydraulics are powered by the crankshaft.
New Holland learned a hard lesson recently. They produced the TV-140 & 145. It had a hydro transmission. They were popular in hay production, but also in potatoes harvesting due to the rotating operator platform. They failed miserably from overheating, as the process is very slow moving.
To close & reinterate, my experience has been compact tractor hydrostatics run hot when under heavy PTO load in hot weather. The heat factor wear to the drive is more gradual than immediate. Whatever choices a reader selects, That is Their Choice. There are many opinions & experiences on these forums & the objective seems to cancel anyone who disagrees. There are few absolutes & I attach no such claim to my posts.

 

[mcmxi]

I will throw out my thoughts. I probably ran close to 100 hours last summer with a seven foot bush hog on my MX6000. Only heat issue I had was with the radiator screen plugging. You don't see any SP windrowers, SP sprayers, skid loaders or combines parking when it hot out. I have owned and ran these types of machines for well over thirty years HST are built to take the heat. Buy the MX6000 you will like it.

I had a similar experience. My property is fairly hilly and I pulled an RCR1884 around 12 acres last year in 85F temps with the MX6000HST and only once had a heating issue that was due to the front grill being obstructed. I'm not cutting heavy, woody vegetation, just grass and weeds, so take that for what it is.

I've pulled that same 7ft cutter around my fields with three tractors now, the MX6000HST, MX6000HSTC and M6060HDC. My favorite combination is the M6060 and RCR1884, but if I only had the MX6000HSTC I would be happy enough with the performance.

I've settled on running the MX with the Del Morino flail, and the M with the RCR1884. I like those combinations.

 

[troverman]

I can not speak for the"Vast majority of users " As for Kubota engineering, the public seeks a compact chassis. In that configuration, the capabilities are limited. Further, the emissions systems inherently & substantially increase operating temps which exacerbate increased temps under load. The synthetic fluids are not as apt to foam & escape. The point is that excessive heat ruins mechanical & fluid drive systems. The degradation is More gradual than immediate. I do not know how to more clearly state that my posts are reflective of MY experience. YMMV. Yours obviously do differ.
I laugh right out loud, "you are not devaluing my post," but that is exactly what you did.. Know this, my equipment does not suffer from any operating methods employed by other members. They are responsible for their equipment, & I for mine. You are free validate your posts with the assertion, you speak for "The Vast Majority" I hesitate to allow my ego to compose my posts.
BTW, 200 hp is hardly, "massive", I operate a 540 case quadtrac, & the farm forage harvester is over 700 hp, & Claas builds an 1100 hp harvester , & the "massive" pinnacle has yet been reached.

I'm not devaluing your "opinion," as opposed to your post which I certainly disagree with. "Massive" 200 "+" HP tractors is what I said. Not that 200HP was massive, but more in regards to size, especially relative to the compact or utility class tractors we're speaking of here. Certainly a 200HP Kubota M8 is "massive" compared to an MX.

It seems now you are admitting the HST trans might be OK for awhile, with "gradual" wear due to pulling PTO powered equipment in hot weather. Well, how long would it take? 1,000 hours? 5,000 hours? Most property owners will never reach 5,000 hours. I use my machines commercially, and it will take quite a few years to reach those hours. I suspect you've never experienced a modern Kubota HST fail due to excessive wear from PTO applications in hot weather, but are rather speculating, perhaps to bolster your own decision that gear drive is somehow superior. HST is a very mature technology and Kubota probably builds more HST transmissions than anyone in the world, as opposed to other tractor makers who simply buy an "off the shelf" HST transmission and make it work.

 

[majorwager]

I'm not devaluing your "opinion," as opposed to your post which I certainly disagree with. "Massive" 200 "+" HP tractors is what I said. Not that 200HP was massive, but more in regards to size, especially relative to the compact or utility class tractors we're speaking of here. Certainly a 200HP Kubota M8 is "massive" compared to an MX.

It seems now you are admitting the HST trans might be OK for awhile, with "gradual" wear due to pulling PTO powered equipment in hot weather. Well, how long would it take? 1,000 hours? 5,000 hours? Most property owners will never reach 5,000 hours. I use my machines commercially, and it will take quite a few years to reach those hours. I suspect you've never experienced a modern Kubota HST fail due to excessive wear from PTO applications in hot weather, but are rather speculating, perhaps to bolster your own decision that gear drive is somehow superior. HST is a very mature technology and Kubota probably builds more HST transmissions than anyone in the world, as opposed to other tractor makers who simply buy an "off the shelf" HST transmission and make it work.

We are not going to agree & if I sent you case studies of 100 failures, your reply would be "YES BUT"
You choose to selectively read comments or don't believe in reading comprehension.
either way, does not matter. This is a petty insignificant thread in which you must cling to any phrase to bolster your point. Understand this, as clear!y stated, whatever path a viewer takes in operation of THEIR tractor, does not affect my sleep habits. I stand by the exact language in my posts. My experience is not dependent upon your acceptance. If your appointed position is the correction of a every post in which you disagree, the website would certainly bestow some type of chief engineering information authority moniker beside your name.

 

[jyoutz]

The basic facts are that there are many more compact tractors with HST than gear transmissions, and rotary cutting is the single most common use for these machines. Yet there are damn few HST failures. Ask any dealer service department what is the most common drivetrain repair; they will say clutch replacement. HST failures happen, but they are rare. This shouldn’t be a concern for purchasing decisions for compact or utility sized machines.

 

[mcmxi]

Kubota doesn't profess that these compacts will power any specific PTO implement. They cleverly market implements under a separate label They publish a 3 point lift capacity. The gear box rating on your mower almost certainly exceeds the hp of your tractor, indicating it will function on a much larger tractor.

Land Pride, which is owned by Kubota, has a "Kubota Matched" filter on their website which for example returns five single spindle rotary cutters for an MX tractor. Those cutters are suitable for tractors with engine hp ranging from 35hp to 130hp. For some reason the RCR1884 isn't on the list but it shows up as matched to the B, L and M series.

The MX owner's manual includes an Implement Weight List on page 29 in the Implement Limitations section. The maximum cutting width of a rotary cutter is 84" and the maximum weight is given as 1,000lb. The five models "matched" by Land Pride cover eleven models in all. Only one model is over 1,000lb at 1,070lb.

I don't see what the problem is here, and I don't see that Kubota is "cleverly" marketing implements. They and Land Pride are transparent in implement selection. That's how I see it at least.