# Opinions needed on tractor purchase



## mx113 (Jul 20, 2011)

Hello all. I am needing a little help with make a decision on a new tractor purchase. I am looking at either a New Holland T5040 or a T5050. The 5040 is 70 pto hp and the 5050 is 80 pto hp. We are a pretty small operation and put up about 325 tons of grass hay last year. I am running a New Holland 7080 5x5 round baler and a New Holland BC5060 square baler. I am currently running the round baler with a New Holland TS135A tractor, but a 15000 lb 135 hp tractor is just too much tractor running around all summer. It appears that the 5050 will use about a half a gallon more fuel per hour on average. No more time than it will be baling, that is no big deal. But it will be used all year long for other projects and that could add up. If in the same position as me, would you guys for the 80 pto tractor or the 70 pto tractor. Any opinions would be appreciated


----------



## Mike120 (May 4, 2009)

Looks like it's pretty much the same tractor with the smoke screw turned up. I'm not sure how hard it is to turn up the new tractors but with the round baler I'd want the extra HP.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

mx113 said:


> Hello all. I am needing a little help with make a decision on a new tractor purchase. I am looking at either a New Holland T5040 or a T5050. The 5040 is 70 pto hp and the 5050 is 80 pto hp. We are a pretty small operation and put up about 325 tons of grass hay last year. I am running a New Holland 7080 5x5 round baler and a New Holland BC5060 square baler. I am currently running the round baler with a New Holland TS135A tractor, but a 15000 lb 135 hp tractor is just too much tractor running around all summer. It appears that the 5050 will use about a half a gallon more fuel per hour on average. No more time than it will be baling, that is no big deal. But it will be used all year long for other projects and that could add up. If in the same position as me, would you guys for the 80 pto tractor or the 70 pto tractor. Any opinions would be appreciated


I think I may have lost you for a minute, I agree with mike, bigger is better, 80 vs 70 with a Big baler....I'll take the 80 thank ya....but you musta made a typo.....you stated the "5050 will use about a half gallon more". The new machines get worse run time than the older 135a despite being 50% lower on hp? Say it ain't so, and you have to add def as well? Tell me I read this wrong....


----------



## dubltrubl (Jul 19, 2010)

Mike120 said:


> Looks like it's pretty much the same tractor with the smoke screw turned up. I'm not sure how hard it is to turn up the new tractors but with the round baler I'd want the extra HP.


 +1. We run a 4X4 and while I can run it with our 55hp, our 75hp pulls it much better. A 5X5 can be a pretty heavy bale so I'd opt for the extra horses too.


----------



## mx113 (Jul 20, 2011)

somedevildawg said:


> I think I may have lost you for a minute, I agree with mike, bigger is better, 80 vs 70 with a Big baler....I'll take the 80 thank ya....but you musta made a typo.....you stated the "5050 will use about a half gallon more". The new machines get worse run time than the older 135a despite being 50% lower on hp? Say it ain't so, and you have to add def as well? Tell me I read this wrong....


I meant that the 5050 will use half a gallon more per hour than the 5040, not the TS135. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks for all the quick replies. Yes, the 5040 and and 5050 are exactly the same tractor, equipted the same and weight exactly the same. Only difference is the 10 ponies and $1400.00


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

I would go with the 80 hp unless the price is greatly different from the 5040 to the 5050. Especially since they are the same size of tractor (width, length). I don't know anything about round balers, but in our operation we always wanted at least an 80hp tractor for baling small squares. However we use a NH 5080 baler which does require more hp.


----------



## enos (Dec 6, 2009)

Go for the 5070. Plenty of hp( 100 pto) for haying and same frame size as 5050. Get the 40 kph tranny, nice for road work.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

I'm running a BR740A and I think you'll find 70hp is short on HP to run your 5x5 round baler especially if you have hills of any size to climb.

Also whats the weight difference between the older tractor and new? My 70hp tractor would run the BR740 but a person had to be really careful if you had to turn on hillsides as it would push the tractor in a turn.

I'm running the same baler now with a 110hp tractor, much heavier tractor and therefore safer on hillsides. In really heavy hay the bigger tractor actually uses less fuel than the smaller one did as the bigger tractor doesn't blow black smoke all day.


----------



## gradyjohn (Jul 17, 2012)

mx113 said:


> Hello all. I am needing a little help with make a decision on a new tractor purchase. I am looking at either a New Holland T5040 or a T5050. The 5040 is 70 pto hp and the 5050 is 80 pto hp. We are a pretty small operation and put up about 325 tons of grass hay last year. I am running a New Holland 7080 5x5 round baler and a New Holland BC5060 square baler. I am currently running the round baler with a New Holland TS135A tractor, but a 15000 lb 135 hp tractor is just too much tractor running around all summer. It appears that the 5050 will use about a half a gallon more fuel per hour on average. No more time than it will be baling, that is no big deal. But it will be used all year long for other projects and that could add up. If in the same position as me, would you guys for the 80 pto tractor or the 70 pto tractor. Any opinions would be appreciated


My JD dealer a long time ago told me "I have never had a customer complain because they bought a tractor with too much power, but have had many complain because they had too little". Are you trading the 135hp and will the cost of the new offset the fuel savings. How long would it take you to recoop the $?

I have a 130hp and 140hp jd's and I would love to have a new tractor. I cannot justify the cost. If you are going to keep the 135 and just buy another ... then I would go for the 80.


----------



## Chessiedog (Jul 24, 2009)

mlappin said:


> I'm running a BR740A and I think you'll find 70hp is short on HP to run your 5x5 round baler especially if you have hills of any size to climb.


I agree if you have hills I don't think you will be happy with evan the 80 horse .. Running a TL100a with a 770 5x5 baler , have much of a hill better be down shifting .


----------



## LaneFarms (Apr 10, 2010)

Keep baling with the 135A. You can probably make up the difference in fuel burnt just in the number of rolls you can do in an hour.I was faced with a similar issue several years ago. I was pulling my baler with a TM130 and traded it for a td5050 trying to save fuel. I did save about 4 gal./hour but also dropped about 10 rolls/hour. With a 4X5 baler my td5050's cooling system was not sufficient to keep the tractor cool. I am now using a 7130 and loving the extra hp when i need it.


----------



## R Ball (Feb 26, 2013)

It's always better to have extra HP than not enough. Just my opinion.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

The 40 and the 50 will burn the same fuel doing the same job at the same speed. You start pushing the 50 harder and it will burn more but you get more done. The brake specific hp is almost the same.


----------



## mx113 (Jul 20, 2011)

Thanks to all that responded. I really appreciate everbodys opinion. I think I am going to go for the 80 horse tractor. I'm not getting rid of the bigger tractor, just adding another one to the fleet. I'm currently running a 383 open station on the square baler, so it will be nice to get in the cool. I'll experiment with the round baler and see how it goes. Only about month to go before the fun begins!


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

mx113 said:


> Thanks to all that responded. I really appreciate everbodys opinion. I think I am going to go for the 80 horse tractor. I'm not getting rid of the bigger tractor, just adding another one to the fleet. I'm currently running a 383 open station on the square baler, so it will be nice to get in the cool. I'll experiment with the round baler and see how it goes. Only about month to go before the fun begins!


No problemo....Always fun to spend someone else's money! You'll enjoy the tractor and the cab! Just curious.....they ain't no Deere dealer in the volunteer state?


----------



## mx113 (Jul 20, 2011)

somedevildawg said:


> No problemo....Always fun to spend someone else's money! You'll enjoy the tractor and the cab! Just curious.....they ain't no Deere dealer in the volunteer state?


I'm color blind on tractors. 1 yanmar, 1 case, 1 massey, 1 kubota, 2 deeres, soon to be 3 new Hollands. I think this is getting out of hand


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Congrats on the soon to be purchase. Just like guns: I never met a man to replace two with one. I have met many who replaced one with two. Best of luck.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

It's funny you say that: I just spent what seems like a lot on my 2nd tractor and I'm already thinking about my 3rd!!! ( or maybe a SP discbine) lol


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

OK, I'm late to the party, but I'll echo what everybody else said: never wished I had smaller, several times wished I had bigger.
I have a M7040 (~65-70hp) & pull a 530JD 5x6 baler. It runs it OK, but it's all that tractor wants. I'm on flat land so handling on a hill is no problem.


----------



## mx113 (Jul 20, 2011)

I purchased the t5050 today and it should be delivered on Friday. The dealer that I bought from is in southern Indiana. They have several 4wd models left (I bought the last 2wd). The amazing part is that they are over 30% off of the new holland list price on these tractors. These are also tier 3 tractors and do not have all the new emissions garbage. If anyone has an interest, send me a message and I will give you there info. Nothing in it for me. I'm just a sucker for a good deal


----------



## balerguy1975 (May 6, 2012)

I would also comment that being underpowered in inefficient and needless. Likely a sawoff vs having a big enough tractor. We just swapped out our T6070 for a T6.175 and same thing while we could go with less HP I would go nuts when we are trying to bale through some of the major hill country we bale in.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I hated the feeling of my m7040 when it would bog down on steep slopes. Very un-nerving.
The pendulum swung a little too far in the other direction with the m126, but I just acquired some more even steeper property. I bet that 108 pto and 11,000 lbs will make that a lot more safe and secure.


----------



## blueridgehay (Dec 25, 2012)

I too agree with going with the extra horsepower. But I will say this, around here, we have to have the extra juice because of how steep the ground is. I don't know much bout In., assuming that it is much flatter than here. If that is the case, I would fall back to what my equipment requires. If you look at like this, you might not need the extra juice.


----------

