Anyone try these (BX tractor upgrade)?

[RCW]

What a shocker that some manufacturers use smoke and mirrors to sell their products. I admire Kubota's conservative and understated approach. It seems that they consider the system in its entirety and have a sense of how the equipment "should" be used.

True - this fellow is no stranger to tractors but he was hung up on the loader rating.

I tried to explain to him that I was dubious about it and my rationale, but he was fixated on it.

I never saw the spec in writing; just his explanation. He’s a smart guy…very smart guy.

He did ask me to go look at it with him before he bought it.

He has been happy with it and recently bought another larger cab model Mahindra to probably spread manure and plow his long driveway. Seems pleased with it also.

I doubt I would ever follow suit, but it works for him.

 

[WI_Hedgehog]

I remember Good Works Tractors doing a video on Kioti and Mahindra out-lifting Kubota by a longshot, and eventually he switched to Kioti because of the additional features, greater capacity, and lower price of Kioti.

About a month later I think I remember reading a thread about how it became difficult to get Kioti parts--though I could be mistaken. It's probably good to look into these things first regardless....

 

[Bearcatrp]

My son in law bought a Mahindra a couple years ago. Getting parts is a bitch and real expensive. He tried to convince me to go Mahindra when I was looking. Glad I didn't.

 

[mcmxi]

I remember Good Works Tractors doing a video on Kioti and Mahindra out-lifting Kubota by a longshot, and eventually he switched to Kioti because of the additional features, greater capacity, and lower price of Kioti.

About a month later I think I remember reading a thread about how it became difficult to get Kioti parts--though I could be mistaken. It's probably good to look into these things first regardless....

Courtney switched to Kioti because it's easier to sell cheaper used tractors, and Kioti are most likely the closest product to Kubota in terms of quality. Courtney loves Kubota products and owns a couple that he uses, but he's an astute businessman and understands that most of his customers are more comfortable at the Kioti price point because Kioti tractors are cheaper overall, and don't hold their value as well as used Kubota tractors. Since he sells used Kioti products it's in his best interest to convince potential customers that they're a better choice than Kubota. I can't fault him for that.

Whether or not Kioti offers better value for money, or is a better choice in the real-world rather than on paper is very much dependent on a number of subjective factors. I came close to buying a Kioti RX7320 but the lack of dealer support gave me pause. I wasn't concerned about the build quality, the features, the reliability or longevity, just the fact that Kioti was an unkown entity for me and I didn't have easy access to a dealer that's on par with the local Kubota dealer.

I've owned four Kubota tractors over the past nine years without a single issue with any of them. That's impressive to me and it's one of the reasons why Kubota is my first choice for just about any piece of equipment for agricultural or contruction type tasks.

 

[WI_Hedgehog]

@mcmxi : This post is an aside from the main topic and related to your previous post:
I learned long ago no matter how good a machine or tool is, if it breaks and you can't get parts for it the whole thing is (usually) a write-off. If I buy a $30K Chinese machine instead of a $40K Japanese machine and 10 years from now a critical part is No Longer Available the whole $30K investment is now worth scrap value and at that point I'm faced with buying a now $80K machine (or no longer having that machine). If that machine is for business use and is expected to last 7 years and parts are available for 10 years that's well and fine, but if it's a buy-once/cry-once lifetime purchase that really sucks when it becomes a landscape feature you have to pay to get rid of.

This happens even with name brands when a standard changes. Say a mainstream flail mower manufacturer switches to a standardized flail and flails for your older mower are phased out, your whole mower is going to become less useful as flails break. Or as happened to me a major chainsaw manufacturer standardized on 3/8" chain and dropped 1/4" chain, the $1,000 saw powerheads no longer have a source of consumables. Or a major battery powered tools manufacturer changes from NiCd to Lithium and the NiCd batteries are NLA, the expensive multi-bay chargers are useless and the power tools require clunky plastic eBay adapters--not so handy now. The manufacturers could have made these things compatible, but didn't, and the consumer pays the price.

As attractive as Chinese brands are their governmental system doesn't lend itself to long-term company/brand stability, so all politics aside five to seven years from now a broken machine is likely and unfixable machine and for me that's not a good investment.

 

[Trimley]

@mcmxi : This post is an aside from the main topic and related to your previous post:
I learned long ago no matter how good a machine or tool is, if it breaks and you can't get parts for it the whole thing is (usually) a write-off. If I buy a $30K Chinese machine instead of a $40K Japanese machine and 10 years from now a critical part is No Longer Available the whole $30K investment is now worth scrap value and at that point I'm faced with buying a now $80K machine (or no longer having that machine). If that machine is for business use and is expected to last 7 years and parts are available for 10 years that's well and fine, but if it's a buy-once/cry-once lifetime purchase that really sucks when it becomes a landscape feature you have to pay to get rid of.

This happens even with name brands when a standard changes. Say a mainstream flail mower manufacturer switches to a standardized flail and flails for your older mower are phased out, your whole mower is going to become less useful as flails break. Or as happened to me a major chainsaw manufacturer standardized on 3/8" chain and dropped 1/4" chain, the $1,000 saw powerheads no longer have a source of consumables. Or a major battery powered tools manufacturer changes from NiCd to Lithium and the NiCd batteries are NLA, the expensive multi-bay chargers are useless and the power tools require clunky plastic eBay adapters--not so handy now. The manufacturers could have made these things compatible, but didn't, and the consumer pays the price.

As attractive as Chinese brands are their governmental system doesn't lend itself to long-term company/brand stability, so all politics aside five to seven years from now a broken machine is likely and unfixable machine and for me that's not a good investment.

Very true. In many ways. Now days even more so, everything is made to only last short term. The days of American Built/American Strong is long since in the past.

I've always had the mentality, Buy Once-Cry Once. The convenience of having that, that's also become "less" as a whole.

One of my friends had two Kiotis, both lemons. Given that, I bought a Kubota.

 

[Yotekiller]

I was the guy who was smoking the Korean tractor fluff as well. I researched all the different brands with open eyes but but really planning on a kioti. Definitely bang for your buck on the Korean tractors. I talked to a few independent tractor repair shops and heard horror stories about repairs and parts availability. That was enough for me. I chose the 2502 for a couple of reasons. There is no emissions, and Kubota sells a LOT of this model. That told me parts will be around for years and years.
I wanted to buy one tractor and be done with it. That played heavily in my decision. I struggled hard between the 2502, 3560, and the mx. wasn’t drastic enough $ to sway me either way. I had a cash budget $15k more than what I spent, the 2502 was what I thought I could get by with mostly problem free. That itself is worth a lot.

 

[John T]

These should fit without modification - $382 delivered to your door. You would get increased height and a 70% increase in lifting power and you would have to exercise good judgement when lifting heavy loads.

2 bore x 12 stroke hydraulic cylinder, welded cross tube double acting cylinder | Magister Hydraulics

2" bore x 12" stroke cross tube hydraulic cylinder 3500 PSI. Heavy-duty hydraulics, 2-year warranty, free ground Continental US shipping. Magister cylinders manufactured using steel piston and steel threaded gland with wear rings for long life. Welded cross tube ends, honed cold-drawn tubing...

www.magisterhyd.com

Has anyone tried these on a BX23 / LA340 replacement?
they are on sale right now...

 

[John T]

You all must have bigger n&@$$ than me I don't like having my bucket up as high as it goes, and certainly wouldn't want it to go higher.

Also if you do, be very mindful that something that high up coming off the back of the bucket will really hurt when it clocks you on the head!

I agree. I don't want the height...... but 37% more lifting capacity would be nice.

 

[TheOldHokie]

Do you have a link to a bigger bore cylinder that would work with the BX LA340 or LA344 loader?

I went through this exercise a while back. I dont remember what cylinders I found but its buried in one of the HydroPlus threads.

Dan

 

[John T]

These should fit without modification - $382 delivered to your door. You would get increased height and a 70% increase in lifting power and you would have to exercise good judgement when lifting heavy loads.

I went through this exercise a while back. I dont remember what cylinders I found but its buried in one of the HydroPlus threads.

Dan

yeah I just realized that and edited my post above...
thanks

 

[Bearcatrp]

Wouldn’t increased power to lift put more stress the loader more than it’s rated for? Would suck to lift a few hundred pounds more only to watch your loader fold. If I need more lifting power, I’ll just upgrade to a larger tractor. Have my eye on a B series If I do upgrade.

 

[GreensvilleJay]

yes AND more stress on the front tires,rims, axle, etc........

 

[torch]

Wouldn’t increased power to lift more stress the loader more than it’s rated for? Would suck to lift a few hundred pounds more only to watch your loader fold. If I need more lifting power, I’ll just upgrade to a larger tractor. Have my eye on a B series If I do upgrade.

^^^^^ ++++

I built mine with 2" diameter cylinders, thinking the correspondingly thicker pistons were a good idea, less likely to bend, etc.

But the FEL will now lift more than the axle etc. are rated for. And the larger cylinders take longer to fill, slowing down the lifting speed. To avoid overstressing the tractor, I turned down the relief valve. But that means the 3PH won't lift it's rated load. And I installed a higher capacity pump, which cost more money and is still not quite as fast as smaller cylinders.

Best to do the math and buy cylinders of an appropriate size to lift the rated load at the rated pressure.

 

[WI_Hedgehog]

I reckon if I put 1,000# out front in the FEL instead of 800#, that's another 300# I need out back to balance the load (because the weight bucket isn't as far from the front axle as the FEL bucket), and that additional 500# uses the front axle as a balance point, so that's an additional 500# the front end isn't made to carry.

I'd rather have a larger curl cylinder and twist the bucket into a pretzel while prying than have more lift where the axles get trashed, but since I already bent the FEL with the OEM hydraulics I don't really need a larger cylinder.

 

[Soopitup]

Has anyone tried these on a BX23 / LA340 replacement?
they are on sale right now...

I'd be too tempted to lift close to what the cylinders could handle. I don't know if the loader could safely lift that much without modification.
Kind of like having a 1000 hp car on the street. You know you're going to use it if you have it.
There's a guy running 2 1/2 inch cylinders on his BX loader; 1500 lb lift. But he's reinforced the loader quite a bit.

I agree. I don't want the height...... but 37% more lifting capacity would be nice.

The extra height is useful when adding to a pile. Or dumping/reaching into something.
You don't need to pay attention any less if you're at factory height; you can still drop something or flip the tractor.

I reckon if I put 1,000# out front in the FEL instead of 800#, that's another 300# I need out back to balance the load (because the weight bucket isn't as far from the front axle as the FEL bucket), and that additional 500# uses the front axle as a balance point, so that's an additional 500# the front end isn't made to carry.

I'd rather have a larger curl cylinder and twist the bucket while prying than have more lift where the axles get trashed, but since I already bent the FEL I don't really need a larger cylinder.

Another reason to have a backhoe. It has no problem balancing the loader maxed out with the hydros plus cylinders.

IMO lifting power is generally more useful than curling power. For example when I have 4 buckets stacked on my pallet forks the loader can't curl them, but it has no problem lifting them.
Which allows me to get them off the ground and move them.
If I could curl them but couldn't lift them I wouldn't be able to move them (without dragging).