Please ease my mind - Kubota L4802 vs Mahindra 5145 - Kubota $10k more, less functional?

[NCL4701]

When I bought my MX there was only $1200 difference in price between the L. And the MX had the telescoping lift arms that make attaching those heavy cat 2 (or cat 1) implements a breeze.

For $1200 price difference I’d go with the MX for the additional loader capacity even if I didn’t think I’d ever need it. For $4500 difference the OP quoted, I wouldn’t unless I really needed it.

Based on past similar threads, I’m kind of surprised the price difference for the OP is that much but if it is, it is.

 

[jyoutz]

The LX began life 3 years ago as purely rebadged B series. I was actiively shopping and saw them side by side on the lot. Clearly a marketing ploy that even the salesman acknowledged.

So where did the MX series come from? Not on my radar at the time so I did not look at them. Just lookimg at specs it looks very much like an upsell of the Grand L class machines.

JMO

Dan

IDK the answer, but the MX series has been around for quite a long time. The have been marketed as an economy M series utility tractor, not a compact. But admittedly, there isn’t much size difference between the MX and the largest L series. There are more robust features such as front axle, cat 2 hitch, and loader design/capacity that distinguish them from the L series. They are cheaper than the grand L series and aren’t as feature rich with electronics and other luxury items.

 

[Cranblue]

Thanks to everyone’s feedback and more research I’ve backed off the Mahindra for reliability/serviceability reasons, so now the decision is between the new L4802 and the MX5400.

While I agree with the sentiment about the L4802 being at the top end of the range and the MX5400 being on the bottom end of the range, I don’t actually see much differences in the specs I’ve been able to locate, aside from the obvious HP. I am content with 40-45hp given my experience with my dad’s 40hp tractor with similar land characteristics and use cases, and how his tractor handled them.

MX5400 vs L4802

• Hydro Pump: 9.5gal vs 7.8gal
• Weight: 3734lb vs 3549lb
• 3pt Lift: 2310lb vs 2320lb
• FEL Lift Height: 111” vs 105”
• FEL Lift Capacity: they are measured differently and I don’t know enough to compare accurately:
  • MX5400 lift cap @ pin: 2275lb
  • MX5400 lift cap 500mm forward: 1691
  • L4802 lift cap @pin max height: 1675lb
  • L4802 lift cap @ pin @ 1.5m: 2147lb

With most of the other specs being similar are the above differences worth the additional $4,500?

In 2019 I bought L4701 and looked at mx5200 at that time $1,800.00 dollar price differnce .Ive been very happy loader and BH92 have done a lot of tree removal. Don’t have grapple used pallet forks which my opinion the must have

 

[PaulL]

IDK the answer, but the MX series has been around for quite a long time. The have been marketed as an economy M series utility tractor, not a compact. But admittedly, there isn’t much size difference between the MX and the largest L series. There are more robust features such as front axle, cat 2 hitch, and loader design/capacity that distinguish them from the L series. They are cheaper than the grand L series and aren’t as feature rich with electronics and other luxury items.

Every step up in the Kubota line is small. The LX is only slightly larger than the B. And the L is only slightly larger than the LX. And the MX is only slightly larger than the L, and in turn the M is only slightly larger than the MX. They have a large range, they make a lot of tractors, and they try to have something for everyone.

The LX used to be the "large B". That was understandably confusing for everyone - that there was a large B (the B-50 series) and a small B (the B-01 series). So the branding boffins decided to rename it to make things clearer. So yes, marketing, but yes, also helps people to understand.

I'd expect the Grand-L to get renamed sometime. Having two tractors that are both L-series is confusing, especially when they're in very different market niches.

 

[TheOldHokie]

Every step up in the Kubota line is small. The LX is only slightly larger than the B. And the L is only slightly larger than the LX. And the MX is only slightly larger than the L, and in turn the M is only slightly larger than the MX. They have a large range, they make a lot of tractors, and they try to have something for everyone.

The LX used to be the "large B". That was understandably confusing for everyone - that there was a large B (the B-50 series) and a small B (the B-01 series). So the branding boffins decided to rename it to make things clearer. So yes, marketing, but yes, also helps people to understand.

I'd expect the Grand-L to get renamed sometime. Having two tractors that are both L-series is confusing, especially when they're in very different market niches.

The LX is purely and simply a badging change. They took the old B and slapped new chrome on it.

The Standard L is a physically bigger tractor on taller rubber. The trim level is bare bones compared to both the smaller B/LX and the larger Grand L

The Grand L is a physically bigger tractor with a higher trim level and most sugnificantly a much more advanced engine and powertrain management system. Its clearly a different class.

It seems the MX is more of a stripped down M positioned between the Grand L and M series. My knowledge of the MX/M series is very limited and the distinction is a lot more blurred than the Standard L versus Grand L which is quite clear.

Dan

 

[drumminj]

Dan, you speak of a smaller footprint of the L4701 compared to the MX line. I made that comparison before buying and determined the MX is only a few inches larger in width.

That was me, not Dan. And yes, it's only "a few inches", but those inches add up and one needs to draw the line somewhere.

L4701: 119.5in long x 62.4in wide x 15.2in ground clearance
MX5400: 125.9in long x 69.7in wide x 15.2in ground clearance

So 6" longer and 7" wider. In my usage that's not a negligable amount

 

[drumminj]

Based on past similar threads, I’m kind of surprised the price difference for the OP is that much but if it is, it is.

I believe Neil mentioned this in one of the Messick's videos a while back -- that the price gap increased between the two. I don't recall if he gave a reason though.

 

[fried1765]

I know nothingvabout RK but I doubt they will stay commited to those machines. About 20 years ago TSC tried it and it only lasted a few years. IIRC they were Jinma and some parts for them are still available.

I had to look Montanas history up. They were LG (now LS) imports and Montana went under when LS decided to enter the US market under their own name and pulled the supply rug out from under J B Hunt. Montana could not find a new OEM but still supplies service parts.

Heres one for you. Who supplies parts for Ford tractors? Lets see - they sold out to Fiat in 1990. Fiat also bought Case and New Holland so now we have CNH. How is parts availability on those 40 year old machines? About the same as 40 year old Kubotas - pretty damn spotty.

Dan

I really can't respond to the "who supplies parts for Fords" ("40 year old machines").
I can respond with my personal experience for a Ford 35 year old machine though!
I have a very sweet little 32HP Ford 1920 FEL (35 years old), and Messicks has been able able to support my needs to date.
Including......... clutch assembly, and instrument cluster wiring harness.

 

[TheOldHokie]

I really can't respond to the "who supplies parts for Fords" ("40 year old machines").
I can respond with my personal experience for a Ford 35 year old machine though!
I have a very sweet little 32HP Ford 1920 FEL (35 years old), and Messicks has been able able to support my needs to date.
Including......... clutch assembly, and instrument cluster wiring harness.

Thats a nice little rebadged Shibaura In fact I almost bought a 1920 but wound up with a lightly used B7200.

There are plenty of 1910 parts you cannot get from CNH or anywhere else. Take real good care of the cylinder head. If it overheats and cracks you will be up the proverbial creek. Same for just about every hard part in the transmission and rear end.

Dan

 

[fried1765]

Thats a nice little rebadged Shibaura In fact I almost bought a 1920 but wound up with a lightly used B7200.

There are plenty of 1910 parts you cannot get from CNH or anywhere else. Take real good care of the cylinder head. If it overheats and cracks you will be up the proverbial creek. Same for just about every hard part in the transmission and rear end.

Dan

I am not very concerned, about parts.
My nearly pristine 1920 has 1100 hours, and gets only a few more hours each year.
She sleeps comfortably in a barn.
....... and I am 83 years old.

You reference the Ford 1910.
The Ford 1910 was built from 1983-87, a total of 8,192 were built.
The Ford 1920 was built from 1987- 2000, a total of 33,846 were built.
IMHO the parts availability comparison between the 1910 and the 1920 is not a valid one.

BTW: In all my 8+ decades, I have never had an engine cylinder head, on any engine - overheat and crack.

 

[mcmxi]

For $1200 price difference I’d go with the MX for the additional loader capacity even if I didn’t think I’d ever need it. For $4500 difference the OP quoted, I wouldn’t unless I really needed it.

Based on past similar threads, I’m kind of surprised the price difference for the OP is that much but if it is, it is.

The current price difference between similarly equipped L4802 and MX5400 models is around $3k based on Kubota's "build my Kubota"

With the increase in hp, the bigger wheels/tires and CAT 1/2 3-point and minimal change to the monthly payment over 5 years I'd have a hard time not choosing the MX5400 over the L4802. But then again, I'd look at the MX6000 which is around a $6k jump from the L4802 and call it good.

 

[GrassLakeRon]

Every step up in the Kubota line is small. The LX is only slightly larger than the B. And the L is only slightly larger than the LX. And the MX is only slightly larger than the L, and in turn the M is only slightly larger than the MX. They have a large range, they make a lot of tractors, and they try to have something for everyone.

The LX used to be the "large B". That was understandably confusing for everyone - that there was a large B (the B-50 series) and a small B (the B-01 series). So the branding boffins decided to rename it to make things clearer. So yes, marketing, but yes, also helps people to understand.

I'd expect the Grand-L to get renamed sometime. Having two tractors that are both L-series is confusing, especially when they're in very different market niches.

B2050
59.1 WB
107.5 Length
1598 lbs weight
9.4 Ground Clearance

B8200
60.4 WB
106.7 Length
1556 lbs weight
9.3 Ground Clearance

Amazing Kubota comes back to a certain size over 40 years....

 

[OntheRidge]

I'll just give my standard advice, perhaps a bit biased-just get the L47 TLB!!

 

[TheOldHokie]

I am not very concerned, about parts.
My nearly pristine 1920 has 1100 hours, and gets only a few more hours each year.
She sleeps comfortably in a barn.
....... and I am 83 years old.

You reference the Ford 1910.
The Ford 1910 was built from 1983-87, a total of 8,192 were built.
The Ford 1920 was built from 1987- 2000, a total of 33,846 were built.
IMHO the parts availability comparison between the 1910 and the 1920 is not a valid one.

BTW: In all my 8+ decades, I have never had an engine cylinder head, on any engine - overheat and crack.

You obviously did not bother to actuslly look. The part situation is the same for both models - "discontinued".

Go look. Heres a start - just one of many similar pages from the 1920 transmission parts book Its why the old Ford guys who typically promote anything blue and white warn people away from that whole family of machines.

https://www.messicks.com//catalogs/new-holland/137129?diagramId=1020864&sectionId=282461

Dan

 

[fried1765]

You obviously did not bother to actuslly look. The part situation is the same for both models - "discontinued".

Go look. Heres a start - just one of many similar pages from the 1920 transmission parts book Its why the old Ford guys who typically promote anything blue and white warn people away from that whole family of machines.

https://www.messicks.com//catalogs/new-holland/137129?diagramId=1020864&sectionId=282461

Dan

Simple facts!

I am not AFRAID of Covid!
I am not Afraid of what MIGHT, or MIGHT not, fail on my Ford 1920!
I was AFRAID in Vietnam!
I am AFRAID of tripping over my Labrador Retriever!

 

[PaulL]

The LX is purely and simply a badging change. They took the old B and slapped new chrome on it.

The Standard L is a physically bigger tractor on taller rubber. The trim level is bare bones compared to both the smaller B/LX and the larger Grand L

The Grand L is a physically bigger tractor with a higher trim level and most sugnificantly a much more advanced engine and powertrain management system. Its clearly a different class.

It seems the MX is more of a stripped down M positioned between the Grand L and M series. My knowledge of the MX/M series is very limited and the distinction is a lot more blurred than the Standard L versus Grand L which is quite clear.

Dan

The B had two sizes - small B and big B. They relabelled the big B to be the LX instead, because they thought it confusing to have two different sized machines both labelled B.

The MX is a gap filler model - it filled a perceived gap between the L and the M. The MX fits in the middle between the two, both in capability and price. It is smaller than an M and bigger than an L. Not a lot smaller / not a lot bigger - probably 10-15% of either. That seems to be about the gap between all the Kubota models - 10-15%. You see that going from the BX to the B to the LX to the L. https://www.orangetractortalks.com/forums/threads/bx-vs-b01-vs-b50.36719/

I think I read somewhere that the MX was basically the front end of an L grafted on to the back end of an M. I'm sure that's not really true though.

As for the L v's Grand-L, I believe they're quite different machines and therefore I'd expect over time they'll find a new designation for the Grand L to make it more clearly different from the basic L.

I also believe the L4701 is a different size to the other economy L tractors, and I wonder whether eventually that will also result in a naming change. And then ultimately the series will indicate frame size - so all Bs have the same frame size, all LXs have the same frame size, all Grand-Ls have the same frame size, I think all MXs have the same frame size. But the standard L has two frame sizes. Which was what led to the renaming of the big B into the LX.

 

[TheOldHokie]

Simple facts!

I am not AFRAID of Covid!
I am not Afraid of what MIGHT, or MIGHT not, fail on my Ford 1920!
I was AFRAID in Vietnam!
I am AFRAID of tripping over my Labrador Retriever!

I guess you missed my entire point.

I am not telling you to be afraid of anything. i was trying to point out to everyone here that parts start drying up around the 20 year mark for just about all OEMs big and small. That includes Kubota and in your case that little Ford rebranded Shibaura. I brought the Ford situation up pretty much at random because its a well known example involving a very.big name and it extends further than one particular product family.

it was a direct answer to your specific question to me about who supports Montana and RK goung forward. It was not an attack on Ford, it was not an attack on Shibaura, and it was certainly not an attack on you. Smooth your ruffled feathers and watch out for the dog.

Dan

 

[mikester]

Thanks to everyone’s feedback and more research I’ve backed off the Mahindra for reliability/serviceability reasons, so now the decision is between the new L4802 and the MX5400.

While I agree with the sentiment about the L4802 being at the top end of the range and the MX5400 being on the bottom end of the range, I don’t actually see much differences in the specs I’ve been able to locate, aside from the obvious HP. I am content with 40-45hp given my experience with my dad’s 40hp tractor with similar land characteristics and use cases, and how his tractor handled them.

MX5400 vs L4802

• Hydro Pump: 9.5gal vs 7.8gal
• Weight: 3734lb vs 3549lb
• 3pt Lift: 2310lb vs 2320lb
• FEL Lift Height: 111” vs 105”
• FEL Lift Capacity: they are measured differently and I don’t know enough to compare accurately:
  • MX5400 lift cap @ pin: 2275lb
  • MX5400 lift cap 500mm forward: 1691
  • L4802 lift cap @pin max height: 1675lb
  • L4802 lift cap @ pin @ 1.5m: 2147lb

With most of the other specs being similar are the above differences worth the additional $4,500?

With the money you save buy two machines! Now you always have a working machine AND spare parts.

 

[jimh406]

I think I read somewhere that the MX was basically the front end of an L grafted on to the back end of an M. I'm sure that's not really true though.

I don’t think what you read is true at all. Watch some Messick videos if you care. The MX front is huge compared to any L including the Grand Ls. Look at how much more powerful the loader is and how large the front tires are.

I think a more meaningful description is a larger more capable Grand L without the Grand L electronic and deluxe features.

 

[fried1765]

I'll just give my standard advice, perhaps a bit biased-just get the L47 TLB!!

L47 TLB
A great machine for sure!