View Single Post
Old 09-11-2011, 10:28 AM
Ducati996's Avatar
Ducati996 Ducati996 is offline
LawnSite Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 188
Originally Posted by Ridin' Green View Post
Not according to their literature I have right here.

As for making up facts, both of you need to hone up on them.

What I said about Deere having as high or higher lift capacity than anyone else is fact. They had the highest 3 pt lift capacity for a very long time until only a couple years ago, and that again is looking directly at their literature as well as Kubota's and Case/New Holland, up until the 4 thousand 20 Deere series came out and Kubota and several others redsigned their to match or provide more. The lift capacity that Deere had well before any of its competition was the most the was practical and usable for tractors in that weight class, which is why I said that, while some may be more now, they are for show. If more was a necessity and practical/usable do you seriously think that Deere would let their competition stay ahead of them.

Also, another point- I didn't bring up rental equipment, lawn king did. Fact is, at least anywhere around where I live, neither Kubota nor Deere are used by any rental yards. Instead they go with Terex, or JCB which are both far heavier duty than anything from either Kubota or Deere for that purpose.

You guys seem to be getting all butt hurt about this, and start the name calling crap, but the fact is, I never said that Kubota or Case/new Holland are bad machines. They are all pretty nice, but Deere is is usually first with the the inovations. The Pow'r Reverser trans which uses muti pac wet clutches, and requires no clutching to go from forwards to reverse was out well before anything similar from their competion. The twin side by side hydro pedals was out Deere machines well ahead of them being used by their competition. The list goes on. Their competition comes out after a few years with something more, and about a year or so later deere ups the ante again, and that is fact.

The FEL lift capacity for Deere's loader was until very recently well ahead of their competion as well. If you are gonna start spouting off about things at least know what you ar talking about and make sure you are comparing lift capacities at the same point on the FEL, because in looking at the different brochures for al of them, many of Deere's competitors use the pivot pin for capacity while Deere usually show lift cap for the front edge of the bucket. Same goes for the 3 pt, Deere uses 24' behind the pins, while many of their competitors use the lift endss themselves. Not the same thing.

Finally, I do use these machines and have for a long time, and have plenty of hands on experience. When I buy a new machine, I can buy whatever I want, and I go lok at them all to see what's new, and I have always ended up buying a Deere for all of the above reasons.

I'm guessing you both drive orange and that's fine by me, since Kubota makes some good stuff, but at least get your facts straight before you come on here and feel the need to try to defend your choice.
I drive and own both...Kubotas ratings are both Pivot pin and front edge of bucket.....they are all significantly higher than really need to look at the literature with non green colored glasses again..... Deeres 2x20 series and 3000 series fall behind in lifting ability (FEL & 3pt and breakout)....its been this way for 7 years or more now.....

If Deere is so advanced why dont they offer a 3 speed hydro in the 2x20 series (which was originally the 4x10 series back in 1998 (built by Yanmar) much for cutting edge offerings.....all of Kubotas are 3 speed....I guess you missed that MAJOR feature

Your too easy of a target, to bother with this anymore.....
Like tractors and the like? see below -

Kubota L39 w/grapple, pallet forks, BH & QA buckets, Thumb and more!
John Deere 2520, 210Cx, 46BH
Cub Cadet 3204 with Blower & Simms Cab,
Ford 2006 F550 turbo diesel 4x4 w/11' mason dump, Wright Stander RH 52",
Better Outdoor Product Quick 32" WB mower, and more !!
Reply With Quote
Page generated in 0.05052 seconds with 8 queries