MX6000 - Fuel savings running at 2,220 rpm vs. 2,700 rpm

[mcmxi]

Neal Messick did a video about fuel consumption and rpm a few months ago but I don't think he did anything like the comparison that I'm talking about here. I've been running the MX and snow blower (SB1574) at 2,200 rpm for the past few weeks vs. 2,700 rpm (540 rpm at the PTO) and not only does the blower work just fine, but the fuel savings are dramatic. I'm basing this on how often I have to add fuel after X number of hours blowing snow so I don't have actual numbers, just a very good idea of how often I was filling the tank running at 2,700 rpm. If you're interested in saving fuel give it a try and see if it makes a difference for you.

I'm interested in running the rotary cutter at lower rpm this summer to see how well it cuts at less than 540 rpm to see if a fuel savings can be realized there too while still giving a good finish.

 

[mcfarmall]

I have an ePTO on the M5660, but I couldn't tell you if it saves any fuel or not and I really don't care either way. Kinda like buying an expensive camera and crying about the cost of film...when cameras used to take film.

 

[mcmxi]

I have an ePTO on the M5660, but I couldn't tell you if it saves any fuel or not and I really don't care either way. Kinda like buying an expensive camera and crying about the cost of film...when cameras used to take film.

I have the ePTO on the M6060, but I would say it's more like owning a camera that takes film, complaining about the cost of film, and then buying film when it's on sale. If I can do X amount of work using B amount of fuel, or the same X amount of work using 0.75*B amount of fuel I'm choosing the latter. No point in throwing money away.

 

[North Idaho Wolfman]

I've always adjusted my tractors RPM's to be on the lowest rev to get the job done.
I've always noticed it takes fuel to get things done!
I think less wear and tear too!

 

[rc51stierhoff]

Just out of curiosity do you see difference on the gauge for the thermostat? I am not sure there is a difference or not, but I was told to run anything with regen hot…one of my super powers is not worrying about fuel economy and I generally run it WFO…and then I think for newer machines hotter in theory should be better to ‘burn it off’….so I wonder what is difference if any noticeable on the gauge in the temp…not that I know what to do with that data but it would be interesting to know or log and discernible difference on the gauge and then frequency to regen. If not starting right after a regen be hard to say but that would be an interesting data set even if sort of belly rubbin’ to compare against the fuel savings. Bring the data.

 

[ruger1980]

Just out of curiosity do you see difference on the gauge for the thermostat? I am not sure there is a difference or not, but I was told to run anything with regen hot…one of my super powers is not worrying about fuel economy and I generally run it WFO…and then I think for newer machines hotter in theory should be better to ‘burn it off’….so I wonder what is difference if any noticeable on the gauge in the temp…not that I know what to do with that data but it would be interesting to know or log and discernible difference on the gauge and then frequency to regen. If not starting right after a regen be hard to say but that would be an interesting data set even if sort of belly rubbin’ to compare against the fuel savings. Bring the data.

High engine rpm's do not equate directly to engine exhaust heat. Engine load or fuel delivery is what makes engine heat. Run a diesel at rated rpm all day long with no load and it will not run that much hotter than at or off idle.

 

[WDF]

I always run my tractor at idle unless it stalls doing the function needed, or PTO. God bless diesel engine torque.

 

[mcmxi]

Just out of curiosity do you see difference on the gauge for the thermostat? I am not sure there is a difference or not, but I was told to run anything with regen hot…one of my super powers is not worrying about fuel economy and I generally run it WFO…and then I think for newer machines hotter in theory should be better to ‘burn it off’….so I wonder what is difference if any noticeable on the gauge in the temp…not that I know what to do with that data but it would be interesting to know or log and discernible difference on the gauge and then frequency to regen. If not starting right after a regen be hard to say but that would be an interesting data set even if sort of belly rubbin’ to compare against the fuel savings. Bring the data.

I'm not seeing any issues of any kind running the snow blower with the engine speed set at 2,200 rpm and that includes the coolant temperature. Come to think of it, it's been a while since the MX went through a regen. I'm trying to satisfy Kubota's recommendation of running the engine/exhaust hot enough to burn up as much soot as possible, give the snow blower enough rotational speed to fling the snow off the driveway and consume as little fuel as possible.

 

[jyoutz]

Neal Messick did a video about fuel consumption and rpm a few months ago but I don't think he did anything like the comparison that I'm talking about here. I've been running the MX and snow blower (SB1574) at 2,200 rpm for the past few weeks vs. 2,700 rpm (540 rpm at the PTO) and not only does the blower work just fine, but the fuel savings are dramatic. I'm basing this on how often I have to add fuel after X number of hours blowing snow so I don't have actual numbers, just a very good idea of how often I was filling the tank running at 2,700 rpm. If you're interested in saving fuel give it a try and see if it makes a difference for you.

I'm interested in running the rotary cutter at lower rpm this summer to see how well it cuts at less than 540 rpm to see if a fuel savings can be realized there too while still giving a good finish.

Great information. I’m going to try that with my rotary cutter next summer.

 

[mcmxi]

Great information. I’m going to try that with my rotary cutter next summer.

I run a Del Morino Centurion Super 158 flail and RCR1884 rotary cutter behind the MX in the summer and will be experimenting with both to reduce fuel consumption while getting a satisfactory cut of my fields and my friend's. I'll most likely pull the 1884 behind the M as I did last year with good results, and the flail behind the MX.

 

[BAP]

I always run my tractor at idle unless it stalls doing the function needed, or PTO. God bless diesel engine torque.

Running at an idle all the time is a good way to create an oil burner.

 

[Hunter1157]

I run my MX6000 at 2000 to 2200 rpm while using my LP 2072 rotary cutter. It cuts just as well as running 2700 rpm and I am not listening to the engine scream. Couldn't tell you if it saves any fuel or not.

Mine seems to regen about every 40 hours and has since new.

 

[SDT]

Neal Messick did a video about fuel consumption and rpm a few months ago but I don't think he did anything like the comparison that I'm talking about here. I've been running the MX and snow blower (SB1574) at 2,200 rpm for the past few weeks vs. 2,700 rpm (540 rpm at the PTO) and not only does the blower work just fine, but the fuel savings are dramatic. I'm basing this on how often I have to add fuel after X number of hours blowing snow so I don't have actual numbers, just a very good idea of how often I was filling the tank running at 2,700 rpm. If you're interested in saving fuel give it a try and see if it makes a difference for you.

I'm interested in running the rotary cutter at lower rpm this summer to see how well it cuts at less than 540 rpm to see if a fuel savings can be realized there too while still giving a good finish.

I have countless hours operating a 5' rough cut mower with an 8N Ford equipped with a Sherman combination transmission. I nearly always mow with the Sherman in underdrive, which reduces both ground speed and PTO speed while increasing torque. I nearly always operate the engine at about 1,800 RPM which is about 540 PTO RPM when in direct drive but about 20% less when in underdrive. (Not going to take the time to look up actual underdrive ratio.) Mower cuts fine.

 

[Chanceywd]

I have countless hours operating a 5' rough cut mower with an 8N Ford equipped with a Sherman combination transmission. I nearly always mow with the Sherman in underdrive, which reduces both ground speed and PTO speed while increasing torque. I nearly always operate the engine at about 1,800 RPM which is about 540 PTO RPM when in direct drive but about 20% less when in underdrive. (Not going to take the time to look up actual underdrive ratio.) Mower cuts fine.

I have a 1950 8N with the over-under-direct sherman. i use that with my 5' Squealer the same way, in under. I kept them when getting my L2501 as the 8N is my firewood tractor too. The 8n size is what attracted me to the L2501 size.

Bill

 

[Captain13]

I run my 7’ finish mower at about 480-500 rpm’s and the fuel consumption is significantly lower that running it at 540. I was mowing in 6th gear and I dropped to fifth gear to reduce the high speed stress on the mower. I agree with the North Idaho Wolfman on running at the rpm’s I need and not necessarily what the manual calls for. Also, I keep all of my equipment well maintained, especially with the mower, that means good sharp blades to reduce wear on the equipment and to burn less fuel.

 

[troverman]

You don't need absolute wide-open to satisfy the active regen "RPM Up" warning light. I find I can run maybe a couple hundred RPM less while flail mowing heavy grass in the spring, more in the fall. In the old days, if a tractor started to smoke black smoke, you knew it had too much load for the RPM. With a DPF, you'll never see that, so be careful.

I'm going to try a 96" flail mower behind my MX6000 this summer, stay tuned.

 

[jyoutz]

I run my 7’ finish mower at about 480-500 rpm’s and the fuel consumption is significantly lower that running it at 540. I was mowing in 6th gear and I dropped to fifth gear to reduce the high speed stress on the mower. I agree with the North Idaho Wolfman on running at the rpm’s I need and not necessarily what the manual calls for. Also, I keep all of my equipment well maintained, especially with the mower, that means good sharp blades to reduce wear on the equipment and to burn less fuel.

How do you determine that you’re running 480-600 pto RPM? The RPM gauge only indicates 540.

 

[SDT]

I've always adjusted my tractors RPM's to be on the lowest rev to get the job done.
I've always noticed it takes fuel to get things done!
I think less wear and tear too!

Bingo.

Me too.

And accumulates fewer "hours" on the meter.

 

[Captain13]

How do you determine that you’re running 480-600 pto RPM? The RPM gauge only indicates 540.

My digital gauge gives me the PTO RPM. If the PTO isn’t engaged, it displays engine time. The analog gauge provides the engine RPM.

4. INSTRUMENT PANEL. Kubota M7040, M6040, M5040 | Manualzz

View online or download PDF (25 MB) Kubota M7040, M6040, M5040 User manual • M7040, M6040, M5040 Engine PDF manual download and more Kubota online manuals. 4. INSTRUMENT PANEL

manualzz.com

See page 9-M19 to see how it works. Not sure.

if you engage the Stationary PTO switch on your tractor, won’t it display the PTO rpm? It should if you are stationary. If you don’t disengage the switch when moving, it should still display PTO RPM. I’m not familiar with the MX6000 so maybe someone else might have an opinion on this. It seems like a workaround to provide the info you want displayed.

 

[jyoutz]

My digital gauge gives me the PTO RPM. If the PTO isn’t engaged, it displays engine time. The analog gauge provides the engine RPM.

4. INSTRUMENT PANEL. Kubota M7040, M6040, M5040 | Manualzz

View online or download PDF (25 MB) Kubota M7040, M6040, M5040 User manual • M7040, M6040, M5040 Engine PDF manual download and more Kubota online manuals. 4. INSTRUMENT PANEL

manualzz.com

See page 9-M19 to see how it works. Not sure.

if you engage the Stationary PTO switch on your tractor, won’t it display the PTO rpm? It should if you are stationary. If you don’t disengage the switch when moving, it should still display PTO RPM. I’m not familiar with the MX6000 so maybe someone else might have an opinion on this. It seems like a workaround to provide the info you want displayed.

The MX has an analog gauge only.