Tractor

Diarmuid B

Thinking about investing in a tractor in the next year or so, currently have a Massey 65 but it's just not strong enough for what we need. Bales are now getting too heavy and time taken to do things with it is too long. What would be the best tractor to invest in? I was leaning towards a newer Massey Ferguson 04-08 with a front loader.

f140

Diarmuid B wrote: »

Thinking about investing in a tractor in the next year or so, currently have a Massey 65 but it's just not strong enough for what we need. Bales are now getting too heavy and time taken to do things with it is too long. What would be the best tractor to invest in? I was leaning towards a newer Massey Ferguson 04-08 with a front loader.

If its massey you know, then I would stick with them.

davidk1394

Massey 5455 would be a good option, a new holland 6010 or maybe a john deere 6220

Who2

If a Massey 65 has done you until now then do you really need to move to such a fresh tractor? Is there anything else out there that that money might throw back a better return on?

Willfarman

If it's only to lift a bale then a aul massey or ford digger minus the back actor and a weight box is the business for the money...

Bass Reeves

For the work you seem to need a tractor for I tjinkmI would stay back a few years. A 2wd should be adequate. Hard to get tractors below 70-80hp. I bought a case cx80 it was 00 reg . Flaking tractor however I would not get caught up in the make. For less than 15k you will get a modern tractor with a shuttle etc in the 98-04 year bracket. In general 2wd tractors will have limited work done.

Diarmuid B

We've got pretty wet land in spots and a 2 wheel drive just isn't strong enough to get the work done. Have a good swipe of land under thick rushes that we're trying to clear and the power just isn't in this tractor for it. Was hoping to spend around 16K for a decent tractor.

Willfarman

Diarmuid B wrote: »

We've got pretty wet land in spots and a 2 wheel drive just isn't strong enough to get the work done. Have a good swipe of land under thick rushes that we're trying to clear and the power just isn't in this tractor for it. Was hoping to spend around 16K for a decent tractor.

Spend 10 thousand draining the land and 5 thou on a mf 50b. And use the other thou on a holiday!

GrasstoMilk

Willfarman wrote: »

Diarmuid B wrote: »

We've got pretty wet land in spots and a 2 wheel drive just isn't strong enough to get the work done. Have a good swipe of land under thick rushes that we're trying to clear and the power just isn't in this tractor for it. Was hoping to spend around 16K for a decent tractor.

Spend 10 thousand draining the land and 5 thou on a mf 50b. And use the other thou on a holiday!

10 thousand will go no where draining land

White Clover

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

10 thousand will go no where draining land

That's ridiculous. I'm not going doing the sums now but I have a lot of drainage done. 10k will do a lot of drainage.

Willfarman

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

10 thousand will go no where draining land

it'd drain lime and reseed 10 acres and fully tax deductible..

Bass Reeves

All a bigger tractor will do is compact land 16k will not buy you much in a 4wd tractor. As WF says The 10 k can be wrote off in the one year.as well vat can be reclaimed so you are spending nearer 12 k. Drain the land and buy a smaller lighter tractor. not sure if I would go down the digger route especially if you want to do a bit of road work or fertlizer spreading etc. Not sure with GLAS etc I reseed after drainage but just spread grass seed on the drains after a chain harrow. Might be a bit over 15 acres that way after vat reclaimed. Then if at higher tax 5 k back in tax and you could reclaim another 6_9 acres including the vat and the tax from year 3 . So for the 10k you might reclaim 20+ acres of land.

GrasstoMilk

Willfarman wrote: »

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

10 thousand will go no where draining land

it'd drain lime and reseed 10 acres and fully tax deductible..

Depends on level of drainage. Your talking 3000+ /ha to drain inc reseed after as well.
No doubt it's the 1st thing to be done but OP still has his tractor problem.

Any way op asked about a tractor not to be lectured on how to farm

Bass Reeves

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

Willfarman wrote: »

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

10 thousand will go no where draining land

it'd drain lime and reseed 10 acres and fully tax deductible..

Depends on level of drainage. Your talking 3000+ /ha to drain inc reseed after as well.
No doubt it's the 1st thing to be done but OP still has his tractor problem.

Any way op asked about a tractor not to be lectured on how to farm

3k/ Ha is about 1200.00000000000000000000000000002/ acre after vat it about 1050.000003750 acre so suppose we will have to give WF a slap on the wrist. As for lecturing will I look at it as a way of looking at different options. It is something we nearly always do on boards. Let lads make up there own minds after that. But in general money spend on machinery gives a lower return than money spend on fencing/ land improvement. In wet land big tractors solve nothing

MF290

Diarmuid B wrote: »

We've got pretty wet land in spots and a 2 wheel drive just isn't strong enough to get the work done. Have a good swipe of land under thick rushes that we're trying to clear and the power just isn't in this tractor for it. Was hoping to spend around 16K for a decent tractor.

https://www.donedeal.ie/tractors-for-sale/massey-ferguson-362-with-40k-box/13847891

bit small maybe... don't think you'll find much in the 04-08 category worth buying for 16k.

GrasstoMilk

Bass Reeves wrote: »

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

Willfarman wrote: »

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

10 thousand will go no where draining land

it'd drain lime and reseed 10 acres and fully tax deductible..

Depends on level of drainage. Your talking 3000+ /ha to drain inc reseed after as well.
No doubt it's the 1st thing to be done but OP still has his tractor problem.

Any way op asked about a tractor not to be lectured on how to farm

3k/ Ha is about 1200.00000000000000000000000000002/ acre after vat it about 1050.000003750 acre so suppose we will have to give WF a slap on the wrist. As for lecturing will I look at it as a way of looking at different options. It is something we nearly always do on boards. Let lads make up there own minds after that. But in general money spend on machinery gives a lower return than money spend on fencing/ land improvement. In wet land big tractors solve nothing

Again op asked about a tractor not drainage. We all know the merits of drainage but he still needs a tractor to travel the rest of the land. 2wd are old and outdated

farisfat

Diarmuid B wrote: »

Thinking about investing in a tractor in the next year or so, currently have a Massey 65 but it's just not strong enough for what we need. Bales are now getting too heavy and time taken to do things with it is too long. What would be the best tractor to invest in? I was leaning towards a newer Massey Ferguson 04-08 with a front loader.

I'd go for some of the older fiats, low maintenance and probably do what you need done.

Water John

It takes a bit of shopping around but a friend got a 4wd John Deere for 12K, no loader. Does all his farming. Uses a back end grab and bale handler.

kerry cow

I would be buying a basic tractor really .like a landini blizzard or a mf 390 or same .They will be in the 15k zone .get a machanic to check it over .possibly will need clutch and front bearings .and good to go .

Bass Reeves

[quote=GrasstoMilk;102123310
Again op asked about a tractor not drainage. We all know the merits of drainage but he still needs a tractor to travel the rest of the land. 2wd are old and outdated[/quote]

If OP managed even if he struggled with an MF65 why suddenly need a tractor With 4wd and maybe 20-30hp stronger. Farmers often get caught up in machinery. Where money is limited it is often better spend on developing land or buildings. I imagine that OP is handing 100 ish bales/ year. The 165 has value as well and may be worth 5k ish. Another 5 k with it will buy a fairly decent 2wd tractor. I feed 3- 400 bales / year with. 2 WD tractor. Until lately it was with an M675. She was a rust bucket with one door. I had to change it as front pillars rusted away.

2wd tractors are much more flexible around a yard than a basic 4wd tractor. And a way faster to feed bales as long as they are strong enough to lift the bales. You will struggle to buy any 4wd tractor sub 20k out of a dealership and even at that it will be mid '90s. Now most lad will have traded them in because there had some problem with the tractor. The dealer may not have found or solved the issue and unless you have find the problem with in the warranty period at best 6 months or 300 hours you will end up paying 2-3 k to fix it 2-3 years later. I imagine that OP is only doing 10ish hours/ week on the tractor. No matter how good a mechanic a lad gets there's are a lot of tractor issue hard to find that only show up with really hard work.

And yes OP asked about a tractor rather than drainage but WF and I are only giving an opinion. You butted in with an incorrect drainage cost that I made a joke about and you are ratty and upset. It like the morning tea club the lad that is fast with the quin but cannot take the rebuttal.

Willfarman

A couple of thousand euros worth of concrete can leave a handy tractor in a position to tip around with bales no bother.. Yes I know myself and bass aren't answering to the ops original mindset but what harm!

GrasstoMilk

Bass Reeves wrote: »

[quote=GrasstoMilk;102123310
Again op asked about a tractor not drainage. We all know the merits of drainage but he still needs a tractor to travel the rest of the land. 2wd are old and outdated

If OP managed even if he struggled with an MF65 why suddenly need a tractor With 4wd and maybe 20-30hp stronger. Farmers often get caught up in machinery. Where money is limited it is often better spend on developing land or buildings. I imagine that OP is handing 100 ish bales/ year. The 165 has value as well and may be worth 5k ish. Another 5 k with it will buy a fairly decent 2wd tractor. I feed 3- 400 bales / year with. 2 WD tractor. Until lately it was with an M675. She was a rust bucket with one door. I had to change it as front pillars rusted away.

2wd tractors are much more flexible around a yard than a basic 4wd tractor. And a way faster to feed bales as long as they are strong enough to lift the bales. You will struggle to buy any 4wd tractor sub 20k out of a dealership and even at that it will be mid '90s. Now most lad will have traded them in because there had some problem with the tractor. The dealer may not have found or solved the issue and unless you have find the problem with in the warranty period at best 6 months or 300 hours you will end up paying 2-3 k to fix it 2-3 years later. I imagine that OP is only doing 10ish hours/ week on the tractor. No matter how good a mechanic a lad gets there's are a lot of tractor issue hard to find that only show up with really hard work.


And yes OP asked about a tractor rather than drainage but WF and I are only giving an opinion. You butted in with an incorrect drainage cost that I made a joke about and you are ratty and upset. It like the morning tea club the lad that is fast with the quin but cannot take the rebuttal.[/quote]

Because tractors get worn out bass. Yes he may do 10 acres of drainage but what about the other land he has to travel, I know ye have to start somewhere with regards to drainage. If op needs to travel land a 2 wd isn't going to cut it.

Not ratty at all bass, 2wd grand if you've dry land and aren't out land early in the year or like you are using yours. I've 2 4wd here and what I consider to be a dry farm bar 10 acres and no way would I get any field work done at either sides of the year if they were 2wd

Willfarman

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

Because tractors get worn out bass. Yes he may do 10 acres of drainage but what about the other land he has to travel, I know ye have to start somewhere with regards to drainage. If op needs to travel land a 2 wd isn't going to cut it.

Not ratty at all bass, 2wd grand if you've dry land and aren't out land early in the year or like you are using yours. I've 2 4wd here and what I consider to be a dry farm bar 10 acres and no way would I get any field work done at either sides of the year if they were 2wd

In a stock situation if a 2wd won't travel on the land your better off it. That's the rule here unless in a really bad year, salvaging fodder or the like..

Bass Reeves

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

Because tractors get worn out bass. Yes he may do 10 acres of drainage but what about the other land he has to travel, I know ye have to start somewhere with regards to drainage. If op needs to travel land a 2 wd isn't going to cut it.

Not ratty at all bass, 2wd grand if you've dry land and aren't out land early in the year or like you are using yours. I've 2 4wd here and what I consider to be a dry farm bar 10 acres and no way would I get any field work done at either sides of the year if they were 2wd

That 10-20 acres of well drained land will be worth per acres 2-3 acres of the rest of his land. Believe it or not in such a situation you should the better wet land you have first. This is the land you will cut silage and hay off. The feed value of you winter fodder will increase and you will reduce cost. All a 4 WD tractor mean on this Thursday of land is that often you are on it doing damage.compacti the land and making ruts and holes where you should not be. If you get into a place you should not be the diff lock and you brakes should be able to get you out with a 2wd if not you should not be there.

Even for feeding for the winter a grave base around a shed will do as you do not necessarily need concrete under the bales.vI just fine it hard to understand/ believe if a 165 did the bales with a struggle why OP needs a a 4wd 80-100 HP tractor to bring in and feed 100 bales.

As we are discussing in another thread one of the issue with finished and wet land is that old stone drains that were put in by hand 100 years ago have been broken up by machinery over the last 50 years. Drainage and getting fertility right will cure a lot of the problems with rushes and wet lamd. A 4 WD tractor will only adds to the problems

cute geoge

Fuks sake a 2wd tractor is a disaster on any ground that needs drains ,you would hardly get a chance to spread fertiliser with a 2 wd tractor on heavy ground with this scutery climate we have .I remember 20 years ago contractor with all 2 w.d. drawing silage with 13' nathional trailers even in marshy ground ,but climate seems to have changed since and lucky now times to travel this ground with a 4 w,d. and baler.IF you keep a close eye plenty of genuine low hours mf 390/398 ,new holland 7740 ,zetor 8011 and case 4230 for less then 16 k even with loader .I have seen them zetor 8011 2 w.d. mighty traction ,you might get away with one of them in heavish ground but forget about 2 w.d. mf

Dylan collins

any man got any good advice on a tractor

Bass Reeves

Dylan collins wrote: »

any man got any good advice on a tractor

https://www.donedeal.ie/tractors-for-sale/john-deere-6430-amp-loader/14772211

https://www.donedeal.ie/tractors-for-sale/leyland-245/14643310

Which budget are you in

mythos110

Dylan collins wrote: »

any man got any good advice on a tractor

Tractors are much like cars. If there was one that was the best and great value for money then everyone would be driving that one.

On this thread in general, I completely disagree with all the people who advise to buy a handy sized 2wd tractor. The chances are that the time the mf68 was bought, it was considered too big and cumbersome to ever be of any use, and you may be sure lot of neighbours said lads were cracked to be buying something that size. Yet here we are xx years later and its still in use. I would say the same to the OP. Go find something comfortable that will allow you to attack the jobs you want. If its not under too much pressure then you will find that maintenance will be minimal and you will get a decent lifecycle from it.

I have a 6cyl ~100hp Renault 4wd at home. Bought new in 00 and now has circa 6k hrs. Mostly does yard feeding but gets called in to draw silage/top/spread fert etc (quite steep ground) when needed. Its a versatile tractor because the yard is big enough for it so it suits me. Other than a clutch and front tyres, I've never spend a penny on it. Not everyone needs to buy a 85hp 2wd tractor to get into sheds that then limits what you can do for the rest of the year!

Bass Reeves

With any Tractor you buy you need to access a few things. The main one is your budget. Then you have to decide on what are your priorities. If land is split will you get away with a 30k box or will you need a 40k box. Do you need a shuttle. Do you need a 4wd or will a 2wd do. Will it be cheap the long run to get a contractor to do certain work and have a smaller tractor.

Tractors and machinery cost money to run and maintain. It is very ash to get to a situation where 50k or even 80k+ is tied up in machinery on what are small farms. And most of this machinery is doing nothing the majority of the year. What cost do you put on having 30k or 50 k tied up in machinery. What is the maintenance cost of maintaining these machines. Will we every 2 or 3 years have a big bill when something goes wrong with a tractor, mower or slurry tanker.

When you add these maintenance costs, the depreciation of the machinery and give the money maybe a 5% value to you it is easy to run up a cost in excess of 5K+++/ year. I am not saying you should contract out everything but rather look at the time and cost associated with machinery. On most medium sized drystock farms I would see little need for a tractor that is bigger than 80-90 HP. However there may be exceptions. But where a farmer was getting away with a 60 hp 2wd tractor I cannot see the need for a 100 HP 4wd six cylinder tractor

4odh4n

Having come through a similar situation I would recommend going 4WD... and a loader too! we worked with a MF148 feeding few hundred bales each year, same thing tho... bales were getting too heavy, so we done a deal for a 94 MF398 with loader (we kept the 148). the extra weight of the tractor is easily carried by the larger tyres, in fact carrying bales out of a wet field the 148 would mark were the 398 wouldn't.

the uses for a loader are endless, it came with a spike, we have since bought a bucket and muck fork for it and you can be sure one or all attachments are being used most weeks for something, we haven't bought small bags of fert for a few years now and having it makes nearly every job handier... stacking logs, filling trailers, moving stuff!, and not just farming related jobs!... when cutting grass at home, fill the bucket with the clippings and heal them over the gate to the cattle... before it was filling the link box and trying to get into and out of the field opening and closing gates before the cattle spied ya and came taring across the field!!

for the budget you have mentioned you would get a 390/398 with a bit of change I would think. we've have had no issues (touches wood!) in the 4-5 years of owning it so far, (although the dreaded spring for the range change had just been replaced before we got it and it got a new clutch at that time too) so has just been usual servicing and I am trying to tidy up bits n pieces when I get a chance.

mythos110

Bass Reeves wrote: »

With any Tractor you buy you need to access a few things. The main one is your budget. Then you have to decide on what are your priorities. If land is split will you get away with a 30k box or will you need a 40k box. Do you need a shuttle. Do you need a 4wd or will a 2wd do. Will it be cheap the long run to get a contractor to do certain work and have a smaller tractor.

Tractors and machinery cost money to run and maintain. It is very ash to get to a situation where 50k or even 80k+ is tied up in machinery on what are small farms. And most of this machinery is doing nothing the majority of the year. What cost do you put on having 30k or 50 k tied up in machinery. What is the maintenance cost of maintaining these machines. Will we every 2 or 3 years have a big bill when something goes wrong with a tractor, mower or slurry tanker.

When you add these maintenance costs, the depreciation of the machinery and give the money maybe a 5% value to you it is easy to run up a cost in excess of 5K+++/ year. I am not saying you should contract out everything but rather look at the time and cost associated with machinery. On most medium sized drystock farms I would see little need for a tractor that is bigger than 80-90 HP. However there may be exceptions. But where a farmer was getting away with a 60 hp 2wd tractor I cannot see the need for a 100 HP 4wd six cylinder tractor

That's fine if you want to depreciate for tax purposes in say 7 years. Yet here I am with a 17 year old tractor that was bought new that is still going strong and would provide an excellent tractor for any farmer. Machinery doesn't become zero value after a few years. If minded properly the right machine can practically hold its value over many years. Just look at what MF390's are making! So its not really a fair comparison to say you are tying up say €30k. Over the lifetime of the machine (if minded) it can often amount to very little per year.
I agree that 80/90 hp is enough on most farms but my motto is better to have it than want it!
I have the hp and weight for steep ground. Sure I would replace with a well weighted 4cyl if changing now, but to lug a slurry tank on steep ground, its hard to beat the long wheel base and weight of a 6 cyl. I previously owned a 2wd 7610 and I can guarantee that the 6cyl burns less diesel per hour on most jobs.

Aravo

Sorry for bumping an old thread.
In terms of an new 100hp tractor with a loader does anyone know what's the typical price range. And in terms of JD, NH, MF, Case & Claas where are these in order of cost.