Another (dumb?) tractor question ...

O.K. guys, be gentle ...

We're looking at buying a new home, has just over an acre of land, and I am looking for something to plow/mow/dig with. A friend of my sons has a lo boy Cub Cadet with a bucket on front and a back ho ( on the back ) that seems to do a pretty good job ... but I am confused. Is a Lo boy just a small tractor, but bigger than a lawn or garden tractor? Is that overkill for what I am planning to do?
I plan on plowing the driveway with it, mowing the acreage, and maybe digging holes ( I don't know why, it just seems cool to be able to do that )
What do you all recommend for what I am wanting to do? I'm guessing a full size tractor is going to be too big ( although that would be cool as well).

Thanks for the assist in advance,
Dan

P.S. Type 1, type 2, and type 3. The difference is ...?

 

im no expert...theyll be here soon !

ford made "LCG" tractors...low center of gravity for mowing hills and such

maybe a "lowboy" is too
just a guess

mike

p.s.
hey ya could pull an engine with that ho too.....

 

Carl
You will find that the Cub does not have a straight axle. It and the Cub Low Boy have the same axles, just not assembled the same.
Both have a final drive gear reduction and the end of the axle housings. On the cub the housing points down thus raising the tractor for crop clearance. On the LowBoy this final drive is clocked or rotated forward thus lowering the tractor and shortening the Wb as well. The front axle is really the bigest differance as the LowBoy has shorter spindle height.
Here is a picture of a final drive unit http://www.cubguy47.com/images/DSC000882.JPG

David

 

The size category of implements is determined by the size of the attachment pins. The attachment pins get larger as the implements get larger.

Category '0' is for really little compact tractors.

Category '1' is for utility size tractors like the Ford 8N, M-F TO-35, JD 2010, etc.

Category '2' is for large ag tractors like the Ford Major Diesel, Case 930, JD 4240, etc.

Category '3' is for really large ag tractors like the Steiger and Cat Challenger.

Sleeves are available for larger tractors to operate smaller implements.

Power requirements to turn powered implements go up as you go up in category size.

Most category '1' implements are rated at 35-50 HP, more or less.

The size of the tractor you need is determined by the size of the ground you will be working and what you expect to do with your ground. Unlike the JD lawn tractor commercial, you really don't want something so big that it takes most of the yard to turn around.

One acre is not a lot of ground, particularly if you cover part of it with a house and a shed/barn.

A small Kubota tractor would make a good choice. They are available with four wheel drive which would be really handy when moving snow. Almost all Kubota tractors are available with bucket loaders which are really handy when moving materials or moving snow once it has been plowed.

Brush hogs, finish mowers, tillers, back blades, box scrapers, snow blowers, wood splitters, shredder/grinders, back hoes, concrete mixers, etc. are all available as well.

If you size your tractor correctly and get the right implements you won't need to spend any $$$ on a lawn tractor.

If you are starting with bare ground and you need to clear it before you build, I would suggest you rent what you need. You would be able to rent much larger machines than what you will need once everything is all roughed in. Large machines can get more rough work done in a weekend than a small machine would be capable of doing in a month of weekends.

I would keep away from any of the Oriental Kubota clones or gray market machines. They can be very difficult to get parts and service. Even some of the Eastern European tractors can be difficult when it comes to parts and service. And no matter how good the machine is, you will need parts and service if you keep the machine more than a couple of seasons.

Good luck.

Mark O.
Castle Rock, WA

 

Thanks all for the help ... as always, SOMEONE here on the BB has an answer ( and usually a pretty good one) .

I am trying to stay IH, I guess 'cause I have a Scout and am pleased with that. Would the lo boy Cub be comparable to the small Kubota? (And hopefully I didn't open a can of worms w/ that question!)

Thanks again,
Dan

 

It is hard to compare a Kubota to an IHC Cub mostly because they are a couple of generations apart.

One is diesel. The other is gas.

One is supported well with lots of parts and dealer service. The other is not.

One has a lot of easily available and affordable implements that were designed to used by that particular tractor. The other does not.

I can understand your penchant for wanting to stay all IHC. But unless you happen to come across a good Cub with all of the implements and attachments you want or need you would be better off purchasing a Kubota. Or any other more modern design compact ag tractor.

I am not in any way talking down the Cub. It is a great tractor, it is very affordable, it is very durable, and it is fairly easy on the fuel. But it is still an old design with limited dealer parts and service.

Since you live in Hudsonville I know there are a lot of farms around where you live (my wife's grandmother lives on a farm in Jamestown).

I would venture a guess that there is a sale barn or auction house somewhere in the area that sells ag equipment. As farms are overtaken by the 'burbs and farmers go out of the farming business the farmers tend to sell off all of their unneeded equipment.

Sometimes you can find some very good bargains at auctions. And if a farmer is liquidating all of his assets you might be able to purchase all of what you need at one time at very affordable prices. Plus, at an auction, there are usually several trucking companies that have their equipment on site all ready to transport stuff. It can be much less expensive that way than trying to move a lot of stuff yourself.

If nothing else, there must be an ag paper that has classifieds geared towards the ag customer in your area.

Check them out in order to get an idea of what the asking price is for equipment in your area.

An area like Hudsonville that is moving away from working farms to hobby farms is going to have higher prices on the compact equipment than an area that is still basically a working farm area.

Good luck.

Mark O.
Castle Rock, WA

 

Thank you all for the imput so far!

So just to make sure I have this straight:

IH Cub Cadet - lawn tractor ( get to it,you suburbanite!)

IH Cub - garden tractor, but confusing to me because of the shared color scheme w/ Cub Cadet (except for earlier ones, which were red?)

IH Cub lo boy - same as above, except different where???

IH Farmall - big, red, powerful,what all tractors want to be when they grow up.

Does that sum it up? Or is there water on the side of my head ( wet behind the ears that is)

Thanks again guys, appreciate your help!

Dan

 

OK Both the Cub Cadet and the Cub went thru periods of Red and Yellow.
The Cubs started as Red Tractors to compliment the Farmall line, They were just baby Farmalls. They became Yellow later on.
The Cub Lowboys are basicly the same tractor with the axle configuration changed to make them lower so you don't knock your hat off mowing your estate.
The Cub Cadets started out being yellow then became Red then back Yellow.
IHC Sold off the Cub Cadet line in the Early 80's.The Cub Cadets are still being made?owned by MTD I believe. Not the Quality of the old IH line but still better that a lot of others.
The Cub Lowboys were identified by a number after they became Yellow, like Model 259 or something like that.
The early Cub Cadets Lawn tractors actually used the Cast iron case, transmission and differental gears of the Cub Farm tractor. That is why they are so indestructable.
My personal opion is the engine of the Cub and Cub loboy are pretty underpowered piece of Junk. Worst thing IH ever made. A flatheed, Not sleaved so they need to have the block bored when rebuilt. Not any of the quality of other IH. Best not let yourself get behind on the lawnmowing. Best suited as a row boat anchor.
Just my opion and worth what it cost. But I agree that they are still a cute tractor.

 

Granted the Cub will run a woods mower but you better keep the blades sharp.
In my opion An A, B, or Bn are a much better choice. The A isn't really much bigger. Both the cub and A/B/BN all have 24" tires. Close to triple the HP not to mention the lugging torque. And around here you can buy one of these for 2/3 or less the cost of a cub.
The engines are cheap to rebuild by comparioson. Drop in new sleeves and pistons. In fact used piston/sleeves aren't all that hard to come by. And they will run a Woods mower like it's not even on there and will pull a 2/14" plow as well.

 

I'm not really saying it wasn't quality, but compare it to the rest of Farmall tractors.
From the introduction of the first Farmall in the early 20's all have had sleeved engines. Simple and cheap to rebuild. Overhead vlaves (with the exception of the first F-12's which had Waukashaw's) gave good reliability.
I would say more F-12/F-14 put tractors on the farm Than Cubs were ever built.
By the time the cub was introduced in the late 40's, most farms already had a tractor.
Incidently the F-14 was replaced by the A/BN series.
The Cub to me is just not up to the quality of the other IH's of the time.

 

HTML:

I'm not really saying it wasn't quality, but compare it to the rest of Farmall tractors.
From the introduction of the first Farmall in the early 20's all have had sleeved engines. Simple and cheap to rebuild. Overhead vlaves (with the exception of the first F-12's which had Waukashaw's) gave good reliability.

Yup, your right, simple and cheap to rebuild --- but I doubt IH was thinking they'd last 46 years and that's the reason they designed it with wet sleeves. They used it because it worked and it fit the special nitch that the F-12/14 was designed for.
They continued to use the C-113 in the A's and B's, because it used time proven technology and the motor had the size and strength to support a "cultivision" style of tractor. ( The A was designed for competing against the Allis Chalmers B, and in fact there were patent infringement lawsuits because of the "frameless" design.) It was already in production, it had the strength, and the engineering costs were greatly reduced by the use of it. It's a quality motor, no doubt, but IH didn't use it, just because it was wet sleeved. They used it because it fit the need at the time.

HTML:

The Cub to me is just not up to the quality of the other IH's of the time.

The "Farmall Cub" which came out much latter than the A's & B's, used a completely different engine design and was engineered from the ground up. It's competition was the Allis Chalmers G. (small, cultivating, truck farming tractor)

This expense of completely designing a new engine would not have been made if the C-113 would have worked in the "baby farmall" (small, cultivating, truck farming tractor) It required a smaller motor, but that motor had to have the strength to carry the "frame load" of a "cultivision" tractor. I believe that is why they designed and used the C-60, L head "bored in block" motor. It's a quality design that after 46 years --- still works well in the job it was designed for.

It all goes back to application and what the tractor was designed to do -----


No one has mentioned much about the "International" Cubs" and "numbered "Lowboys. (different than the "Farmall Cubs and Farmall" Cub Lowboys)

They might be something to consider --- The "Yellow" flat grilled "new International Cubs" are rated @ 13 hp (built 64-75) and the "yellow""increased horsepower International Cub" (built 75 -79) had 15 hp. The numbered Lo-boys, #154, has 15 hp and the #185 and #184 both have 18.5 hp. ( to me the numbered Lo-boys look like oversize Cub Cadets) They all use that trusty C-60 motor and they might be something to consider if you like the style of the "Farmall Cub" but want more power.

I've got a "Farmall" Cub on the place and find it to be under powered if I try to do anything but the lightest work. I also have an "improved horsepower Cub" with a C-2, 42 inch fast hitch mower. That dude is a workhorse --- I use it weekly, it fits my application perfectly!

The A's a good choice also, with 15 hp and 1/3 larger in size (as previously mentioned by dgregg) and many times can be bought cheaper than a cub. (The "Farmall" Cubs so darn cute and easy to haul, it's become quite collectable --- which drives up the cost.

This thread is interesting --- I've enjoyed listening to ALL the viewpoints!

Brad

 

To David Greg
You are right about the differance between a Cub and the A & B series ,however the cub is just as relyable as the A&B ,maybe even better
(I have never seen a cub with the front end broken off and the engine block broken like the A ,B ,BN ,C,Super C, And newer models did.) Where you live you might be able put a 2/14 plow behind an B or BN, however whare I live you don't want to pull the trip rope if you expect to pull the plow. A 1/16 plow was a big load for an A or B.

When you get a small tractor don't try to do the job of a bigger tractor .

Don Graves
part time buckeye ,part time okie.

 

I'm happily maintaining a little one acre piece of ground with my 122 Cub Cadet, 42 inch mowing deck, Lawn sweeper, homemade yard trailer, 36 inch snow thrower and a chipper/shredder. Its maneuverable enough to mow in my modest orchard. It tosses snow like a champ. The chipper is just fun, loud noisy fun. Its easy to load in my 4x8 tilt trailer but will also fit in the bed of my pickup so I can take it to my other property's or to RMIHR.
If I need a big hole dug I trade with a neighbor, fresh apple pies will get a lot of dirt moved

Willy

 

Does that mean you all got some snow up there already