Stingy on fuel

[NCL4701]

Since it seems several of y’all have goats curious how many goats will an acre of acre of grass (broom straw, Johnson grass, clover, crabgrass, Timothy grass, etc. but mostly broomstraw)?

 

[RalphVa]

My B goat is up to 14 gallons now at 38.2 hours: 0.37 gph.

 

[B737]

 

[RalphVa]

Up to 16 gallons now at the 42.7 hour mark: 0.375 gph or 0.147 gphphr. Creeping up. Last fill was 2 gallons over only 4.5 hours.

 

[GeoHorn]

The cost of the horse's feed would be greater than the tractor fuel!

Horses have to be fed even on days they don’t work. Every day. All year.

 

[D2Cat]

The cost of the horse's feed would be greater than the tractor fuel!

Horses have to be fed even on days they don’t work. Every day. All year.


I thought that is what I said!

 

[B737]

 

[GeoHorn]

Horses have to be fed even on days they don’t work. Every day. All year.


I thought that is what I said!

The way I read your post…. I only saw you placed a Value or Price on the topic.

I was adding the LABOR also required to maintain a horse. Then there are Vet bills. Farrier bills. (and the time spent attending those appointments) Mucking out the stalls. Harness and Tack.

Tractors are definitely easier and cheaper. (And according to the latest motor-oil debate, Tractors also can Love.… so horses don’t have any advantages I can think of.)

 

[NCL4701]

If I figure fuel based on amount of work accomplished per unit of fuel or dollar of fuel, my L4701 beats the crap out of our antique gassers, however it was/is a substantial investment so overall cost of ownership and operation probably is quite a bit more. The primary reason for buying it was to do things the antiques simply wouldn’t do at all.

For example, noticed recently the lowest section of the graveled switchback leading to the dam was washing in the middle, possible because the ditch was clogged with leaves and some dirt. Using the 9N breaking that up with the three shank ripper so it could be graded with the light weight backblade and making all the associated tilt and top link adjustments would have taken probably an hour to an hour and a half. 9N still would have struggled pulling material up the hill from where it washed down. Took 20 minutes including a 5 minute warmup with the Kubota, boxblade, and hydraulic top/tilt. Granted the boxblade was already on the Kubota but still that’s a big difference in run time, which translates to lower fuel consumption, at least for some jobs.

 

[michigander]

I have always been confused on Horse Power vs tractor horse power !
If a park my B2601 that burns .61 gallons per hr diesel and go with horses.
Do I need to buy/feed water 26 horses ?
Winter time I don't really need them, October through April still have to care for them ?

 

[rc51stierhoff]

I tend to agree with GEO and NCL…or if I understand there posts I think i do…I generally look at the difference of price and cost vs value to me (what’s it worth). Those are three very different things. Based on that I then always consider what appreciates (value to me is an asset) vs replacement cost(price). Cost could be money or could be sweat, tears and medical copay….basically assets vs expense. All very different things. Basically How much it might cost is very different from what it’s worth (assets and expenses).

 

[NCL4701]

I have always been confused on Horse Power vs tractor horse power !
If a park my B2601 that burns .61 gallons per hr diesel and go with horses.
Do I need to buy/feed water 26 horses ?
Winter time I don't really need them, October through April still have to care for them ?

Yes, you need to purchase 26 draft horses, a barn with at least 26 stables to house them, and you’ll have to take care of them year round to avoid criminal charges for neglect and cruelty. Also, you’ll need a custom harness to allow you to hitch them 13 per row in two rows. Example below:

Those might be mules but if you pretend they’re horses you can get the idea. I’m sure your B2601 and a 26 Pershings in harness have equivalent drawbar capacity. Horsepower is horsepower after all.

More seriously, 1hp is the amount of force required to lift 550lb 1 foot in 1 second. So there’s a constant (550lb) and TWO variables: force (or torque if it’s rotational) and time (speed). That’s the basic problem with HP as a comparison for many things. If you can fix one of the two constants (such as measuring PTO HP at 540 rpm so speed is a fixed value in the comparison) then you get an apples to apples comparison. For tractors, PTO HP at a fixed speed is a fair comparison for PTO work.

Unfortunately HP is often bastardized by marketing into total BS such as air compressors with exactly the same compressor and motor but when set on a bigger tank the HP rating increases. The CFM at a fixed pressure of 40, 90, etc. is IMO a much better measure of true capacity with the tank size being pertinent for surge capacity only. Yet many “homeowner” grade items are marketed on HP when it’s all but irrelevant.

 

[Dieseldonato]

If I figure fuel based on amount of work accomplished per unit of fuel or dollar of fuel, my L4701 beats the crap out of our antique gassers, however it was/is a substantial investment so overall cost of ownership and operation probably is quite a bit more. The primary reason for buying it was to do things the antiques simply wouldn’t do at all.

For example, noticed recently the lowest section of the graveled switchback leading to the dam was washing in the middle, possible because the ditch was clogged with leaves and some dirt. Using the 9N breaking that up with the three shank ripper so it could be graded with the light weight backblade and making all the associated tilt and top link adjustments would have taken probably an hour to an hour and a half. 9N still would have struggled pulling material up the hill from where it washed down. Took 20 minutes including a 5 minute warmup with the Kubota, boxblade, and hydraulic top/tilt. Granted the boxblade was already on the Kubota but still that’s a big difference in run time, which translates to lower fuel consumption, at least for some jobs.

Your looking at a poor example imo. A 9n although a great tractor would fail in comparison to any tractor of the 60 or 70s. A 656 hydro, or even a 574 utility would have done the same work in the same time and barely burn more gas then diesel. The only thing the more modern tractor would have over the old ones is creature comforts and a hydro on the floor if comparing the 656. Both models were also available in diesel. Both models that the same remote capabilities as newer tractors, and both were a lot heavier then an l series. Keeping that in mind, we owned gas versions of each tractor (cousins had comparable jd models, many more larger and diesel) and could do the same work as comparable hp tractors of today. Don't get me wrong I really like and appreciate the modern tractors, hence why I don't own the old stuff. (Moving off the farm helped, no space for it all here) but at least compare a tractor that would be slightly newer then the 40s.

 

[GeoHorn]

The cost of that 9N versus what a simple tractor costs today….. and the fact that 9N had paid off it’s owner many decades-ago…. would have to be figured into the equation to compare apples to ORANGE (s).

My 1939 9N did its share of paying-off it’s cost over 18 years of hard mowing for me from 2000-2018 and is now continuing to earn it’s keep with it’s latest owner. (It did burn almost 4 gal-per-hour of gas compared to the 2 or 3 gph of diesel my M4700 uses mowing the same area.)

 

[NCL4701]

Your looking at a poor example imo. A 9n although a great tractor would fail in comparison to any tractor of the 60 or 70s. A 656 hydro, or even a 574 utility would have done the same work in the same time and barely burn more gas then diesel. The only thing the more modern tractor would have over the old ones is creature comforts and a hydro on the floor if comparing the 656. Both models were also available in diesel. Both models that the same remote capabilities as newer tractors, and both were a lot heavier then an l series. Keeping that in mind, we owned gas versions of each tractor (cousins had comparable jd models, many more larger and diesel) and could do the same work as comparable hp tractors of today. Don't get me wrong I really like and appreciate the modern tractors, hence why I don't own the old stuff. (Moving off the farm helped, no space for it all here) but at least compare a tractor that would be slightly newer then the 40s.

Very true. I compare to a 9N only because that’s what the Kubota functionally replaced. So, if I hadn’t bought the Kubota, we’d still be using the Ford.

Of course the Ford is still in its stall and will be around as long as I am being it’s the tractor I grew up with. Even back when I was a kid, something more along the lines of a MF 135 or Ford 4000 would have been much more suitable for the things we were doing.

 

[NCL4701]

The cost of that 9N versus what a simple tractor costs today….. and the fact that 9N had paid off it’s owner many decades-ago…. would have to be figured into the equation to compare apples to ORANGE (s).

My 1939 9N did its share of paying-off it’s cost over 18 years of hard mowing for me from 2000-2018 and is now continuing to earn it’s keep with it’s latest owner. (It did burn almost 4 gal-per-hour of gas compared to the 2 or 3 gph of diesel my M4700 uses mowing the same area.)

Most definitely the cost per year of the 9N v the Kubota is so vastly different there’s no way any increase in fuel efficiency could make the Kubota truly less costly overall. I have no expectation the Kubota will be running 60 or 70 years from now. And I agree the 9N was/is a great tractor and an impressive advancement in its time. It punched above its weight for decades. I still use the 9N every time it’s a better fit for the job than the Kubota. Which translates to I visit it occasionally and might get in a load of firewood on the carryall for nostalgic purposes but don’t use it for real work.

The real efficiency of the Kubota with loader, third function, three rear remotes, top/tilt, 4WD, HST, almost twice the PTO hp is in what it will do that the 9N simply is not capable of doing. That’s gotten to be more and more important as people have moved off, died off, aged out such that what used to be several guys with a little tractor is now more one guy who makes up for being one guy with a lot more capable machinery. Still love the 9N and always will. From a standpoint of what it can actually accomplish its not even close to the Kubota.

Oh, and speaking of cost of the 9N, my father bought it for $300 in 1965, rebuilt the engine and hydraulic pump, welded up a list of rather important broken stuff, and ran it hard until probably 10 years ago when the tractor and owner both started slowing down a bit. No telling how many thousands of hours he and I both have on it. It was a great machine. It just isn’t up to the jobs we need it to do.

 

[GeoHorn]

Yes, the 9N was great at what it was designed for…. Pull a 2 bottom plow. It’s amazing the numbers of jobs for which it was repurposed and did very well….. just not many of us still need to pull 2-bottom plows anymore.

 

[Dieseldonato]

Yes, the 9N was great at what it was designed for…. Pull a 2 bottom plow. It’s amazing the numbers of jobs for which it was repurposed and did very well….. just not many of us still need to pull 2-bottom plows anymore.

I still play farmer with my cub cadet and the garden every year.... single bottom 12" brinly on the 3 point. Then swap to the disk..... have a Tiller for the cub, but I like to plow for some reason. Gives me my farmer who moved off the farm fix lol. My wife says I just like to play. Bet I could pull a 3 bottom 12" with my B

 

[D2Cat]

I still play farmer with my cub cadet and the garden every year.... single bottom 12" brinly on the 3 point. Then swap to the disk..... have a Tiller for the cub, but I like to plow for some reason. Gives me my farmer who moved off the farm fix lol. My wife says I just like to play. Bet I could pull a 3 bottom 12" with my B

Well, you might be able to pull one but you'd have to fabricate one up! Don't think you'll find one because 12" is the smallest made and after that instead of multiples of 12" they just moved to a larger plow and more bottoms.

 

[Dieseldonato]

Well, you might be able to pull one but you'd have to fabricate one up! Don't think you'll find one because 12" is the smallest made and after that instead of multiples of 12" they just moved to a larger plow and more bottoms.

Brinly still makes a 10" and 12" i think they used to make a 8" as well, and no the B doesn't have the weight to pull a real plow lol. I did see a guy that home made one for a little jd garden tractor it was pretty cool and work fairly well. May be one day.