Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:34 am

For absolute practicality, I have to agree with gitractorman. If you are going to use ONE tractor for multiple uses, loader, mower, chore tractor, post hole digger, etc, then a SubCompact is the right tractor for you. There is a reason that technology has been advancing...ease of use.

That being said, I use Merlin for mowing the lawn and field now, and really love the job he does. Plus, I am the only one in the neighborhood with a Cub! It is a pain to mount the implements and change them around. Those things are HEAVY and take a lot of time to change. Why else would you see bolts or parts of a planter or cultivator or whatever implement left in place while another implement is mounted? Because it is a pain to change them. That being said, once set up for a task, they do a great job at what they do. They are also very fuel efficient in comparison with a lot of other tractors, even with a slower ground speed.

We all are here because we love our Cubs and want to keep them running. This is not an insult to a cub, but because of our love of the tractors, we tend to overlook the "pain in the arse" factor, but it is indeed there. As for me, I am amazed at how well it works despite being 40-70 year old technology!

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 9:25 am

Tezell wrote:When y'all decide to sell or give away your useless outdated Cub stuff and buy a sub compact, keep some of us old iron collectors in mind please. :D



I don't think anyone is saying a Cub is useless. It just comes down to having the right tool for the job.

Al

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:17 am

Most definitely there is a place and a job for those "sub compact" tractors. No doubt about it. If you can afford one to do all the things that maybe a Cub doesn't do so well then yeah, go for it and grab one. A Kubota or a Kioti are really good choices for:

  • FEL
  • Backhoe
  • small Boom Mower.
  • 4WD
  • ROPS

The "sub compacts" with 4wd are a good idea if you do a fair amount of woodlot use fetching firewood and such and you don't have a good logging road to work with. Cubs don't do so well in deep ruts. You have to keep in mind the operating envelope just as much as with a Cub as a "sub compact" is not a 50-100hp tractor and cannot do any useful work outside of its design parameters.

When it comes to gardening though, a Cub can't be beat by anything period. Of that I have become convinced that there is nothing within the price range/hp/implement options/design specs. It is also a quality of life issue as well. Cubs provide a je n'est c'est quoi when it comes to enjoyment/relaxation/quality of life that just can't be replicated with a more modern tractor. With the "sub compacts" most of those must be serviced by qualified technicians .. they are not as user friendly as our Cubs are for owner 2nd tier maintenance and that can get expensive.

And another component to the mix is time. If you got the time then Cubs provide good quality seat time. If you need to do a lot of work in a short amount of time, then the other types of equipment may be for you. But, if you have lots of time, then a Cub can be fitted with:

  • Backhoe with ROPS
  • Front mounted Snowblower with/without Cab
  • FEL
  • Mowers
  • Blades
  • Post Hole Diggers
  • Drags
  • Wood Splitters :wink:

and a host of other equipment not directly agriculture related. Whatever your decisions/rationale for making decisions it all boils down to personal preference and desires. As with anything else, before buying ... one should do the research. I would say don't make an impulse buy, but when it comes to Cubs .. I do a fair amount of that :lol:

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:23 am

Gee guys, after reading some of this thread I am wondering if I should dust off my for sale sign and stick it next to my Cubs in the front yard. :lol:

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:58 am

I think you get more bang for you buck for a cub. 1200-1500 bucks can get you one with a couple impliments. looks like a much larger investment for a sub compact. I feel like sub compacts are too much power in too small of a tractor and way too expensive. I like my cub for small stuff and for bigger stuff I use bigger machines and always find myself thinking that a sub compact would be too small for any of the work I do. then again I grew up with a wheelhorse lawn tractor and a shovel for everything in life that needed done so I suppose if you had nothing else to use you could make it work. maybe people that live on the outskirts of town with 3 acres would be real happy with a sub compact as a do it all machine. better just get one of everything that way you have what you need. :D

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:10 pm

Well I love all my old tractors, and enjoying using them from time to time simply because I can...but I just came back from the green tractor dealer...and for the third time this summer I've looked at a brand spankin' new 1026R John Deere. They let me try out a gently used one a few weeks ago. The 0% interest rate hangs on for a couple more months...I may very well pull the trigger in a few weeks...

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Fri Aug 30, 2013 2:56 pm

I used to import, sell and distribute sub-compact tractors. I still have one actually - yup it's Chinese made, but that's not the point here. IMHO, the SC's are too light and too expensive. I would buy 10 Cubs (and probably will), before I but another SC. I have a compact JD 5320 65HP. Great tractor, 3PT hitch - yet my Farmall H will out pull it because its heavy. The SC's and C's are just too damn light to be working tractors - at least for how I use a tractor.

Ken

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:13 am

are sub compacts lighter then cubs and farmall A's?

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:19 am

clodhopper wrote:....... I looked at grey markets, ......
One thing to remember about grey markets is that many of the parts are not interchangeable with the ones sold in the U.S., and in addition, many dealers will not even try to find the parts you need, so when you buy a grey market tractor you are taking a gamble. to those that say there is no difference, there are certain requirements that are different in the U.S. and other countries, and the tractors are built according to requirements where they are being shipped.

As to the implements being a pain to change on the cub, yes, some are. But with a little planning, selecting your implements, and an occasional modification, you can change implements pretty quickly. I have one cub set up that I mow with (Mott flail), plow, disk, and rototill with that I can change implements from one to the other as fast or sometimes faster than my neighbor can his 3 pt hitches for the same implements. Another one is setup with the carryall, plus belly blade and front blade, which I can change between the 2 blades just by pulling three pins. I have not figured a quick way to remove and reinstall the loader on my 3rd cub yet, but am working on it. :lol:

The subcompacts have their place, but I simply like tinkering with the old rigs, plus I have much less invested in all my cubs and implements including the cost of refurbishing a couple of them than a bare subcompact costs.

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:37 pm

Here are a couple of sub compacts that won't last long, well at least the ads won't last long. Somebody will have to flag them soon.

http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/grq/4040498323.html

http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/grq/4040444127.html

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Mon Sep 02, 2013 5:23 am

I agree with Ken, even if the tractor has enough power to work the equipment, the weight is not there. When I worked for the school system I drove a Ford 2110 LCG. Great for mowing & aereating. Fair with blade (turf tires). The Atheletic dept. got a small Satoh tractor, could not pick up the Ryan tracaire, tractor would raise up in front even with ballast in front tires and 300 lbs. of cast hanging on the front. Was fun to watch the grounds person try to drive a tractor he could not steer (didn't know how to use brakes to steer). Watched him drive all over the side of a building trying to get from equipment storage to football field! Compact tractors use engine speed to make up for lack of low end torque.

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Mon Sep 02, 2013 5:45 am

Sub-Compacts, generally foreign made, even the so called USA brands...The Farmall Cub is like Elvis's Jump suit...It says America to the world....

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:34 am

pickerandsinger wrote:Sub-Compacts, generally foreign made, even the so called USA brands...The Farmall Cub is like Elvis's Jump suit...It says America to the world....



Funny you should mention. My dad has purchased 4 new farm tractors in his life. I got to thinking about foreign vs. US made:

-1967: IH 424 gas. Partially assembled (from the clutch housing back) in Doncaster, England

-1982: JD 2940. Assembled in Mannheim, West Germany

-1991: JD 4255. Assembled in Waterloo, IA

-2010: JD 7130. Assembled in Mannheim, Germany

They just didn't start building tractors for the US market overseas yesterday.

Al

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:49 am

Subcompacts are great little tractors for what they were designed for - lots of power in a small package - but like others say - they quickly run out of weight to apply that power in some tasks. In 40 years of development something had to improve.

For those in my position - two kids in college and very little spare cash - a Cub is perfect - enough power to get most jobs done, just takes smaller nibbles on the job - and really low cost to own and operate. Even with my 50 year old rig, it seldom takes more than gas to keep it going. I can mow all summer on a 1/2 quart of oil. Many spare parts are still available at the dealer if you can't find used. I took a non-running parts tractor to running mowing rig for under $1000. It will outlast anything in that price range and outperform it as well...

Re: farmall cub vs. sub compacts

Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:08 am

Super A wrote:They just didn't start building tractors for the US market overseas yesterday.
I Agree totally....I've got 2 British Harry Ferguson's...(Thanks for the 3 point hitch, Harry)....And the Farmall Cub speaks volumes about what was once, and the sub-compacts what is now...And whatever happened to those steel mills :lol: Dave