|
|
ND | I'm trying to decide between an 2007 Cat 765B and a 2009 JD 8345RT both are set up with the ultra wide stance (120"-160"), 25" tracks, and similar hours.
The plan for this tractor is to pull an 80' planter in the spring, a nitrogen applicator bar in the summer, and a 1,400 bushel cart in the fall. My main concern is with pulling the planter and the cart, in the past both of these took 380HP + (mt845 or stx quad) to pull them. So the question is would either of these tractors accomplish this stock or even turned up a little?
As far as the comparison between the two tractors the Deere has a more use friendly transmission with the ivt (which would be very nice on a cart and a planter), the Deere also has a better suspension between the frame and undercarriage (more travel). As far as which one will get the power to the ground best I have know idea.
The cat may have a stronger axle assembly in the ultra wide configuration. My reasoning for this its the cat had this as a factory option versus a field installed option on the Deere. Atleast that is my perception. Also this is more of a concern with it on the planter since we'll also be carrying fertilizer on the tractor.
Now for the $ consideration, the Deere appears to command a $60k - $80k premium. Now I realize there is a 2 model year difference and there is series change in the cats between 07 and 09. Even with those differences I'm finding it difficult to justify the extra money for the Deere.
Thanks in advance fit your thoughts and opinions. |
|
| |
|
| Initially the ivt would be the trump card for me but I think the MT would be a better fit for you. I am assuming the MT800's can't go that wide? |
|
| |
|
ND | Yep looking to get to 140" and cat Mt 800 can only go out to 128" it would be niceif there were a kit to extend an 800 out further but I haven't found one yet. If anyone knows of one please let me know |
|
| |
|
West Texas | You do know you can program the MT765's transmission to act almost like an IVT. No it's not an IVT but you set how fast you want to go and it will keep that speed all day long (within reason!).
Cab is roomier in the Cat and quieter then same age Deere's.
We demoed a 8320R T and were very disappointed in the power (or lack of it). Our MT 745 would run circles around it. |
|
| |
|
East Central IL | Buy the Deere! I run 8320RT on a DB 80 and it handles it with ease. I have a friend that bought a 765 and rode in mine last fall and said the Deere was much nicer. He said he would buy a Deere next time. |
|
| |
|
| Both will do what you're looking at and do it very well. Suspension travel should be more on the challenger if I remember correctly. 8 degrees if oscillation vs 5 on the Deere. Looking at power to the ground, I think the challenger is balanced a little better and with the bogie wheel desugn they will give better traction. |
|
| |
|
MN | why the ultra wides? i assume you know that the MT will be derated one transmission gear (transport speed) because of that.. I dont know about the deere. i'd also check and see if the MT is guidance ready? alot would depend for me on what monitors etc you run. |
|
| |
|
WC MN & Valley of the Sun, AZ | swmn8560 - 6/15/2012 13:56 why the ultra wides? i assume you know that the MT will be derated one transmission gear (transport speed) because of that.. I dont know about the deere. i'd also check and see if the MT is guidance ready? alot would depend for me on what monitors etc you run.
A Challenger that is adjustable from 80-120" is a wide gage and does not have any transport gear limitations. There is also a 120-160" ultra wide gage model but they are a more rare critter. |
|
| |
|
| ??? The OP is looking at an ultra wide. Everything swmn8560 said was spot on. |
|
| |
|
WC MN & Valley of the Sun, AZ | Oops, missed the ultra part in the OP. =) |
|
| |
|
NE SoDak | 25" tracks for side dressing? No thanks |
|
| |
|
| "the Deere also has a better suspension between the frame and undercarriage (more travel). As far as which one will get the power to the ground best I have know idea."
Depends which salesman spin or company propaganda you believe. The Cat's pivoting midwheels, which thus far Deere has either not chosen or not been able to add to their undercarriage still gives the MT undercarriage the upper hand here, even though Deere publishes suspension travel only and chooses to ignore this fact. While both systems will do a decent job cushioning the operator, the MT system is simpler in nature and allows the track to conform to ground irregularities better than Deere's. Also, you'll be hard pressed to convince me that Deere's 9L engine with EGR equipment is better than a C9 - no way, no how. So suppose for the sake of argument that we consider track systems equal, the MT has the better engine. CVT is nice, yes, but 60-80k nice, Deere is hoping that you'll pay it but unless you've got that to throw away, the MT is a good choice. No, neither tractor is perfect, but as to the merits of the respective powertrains, still feel that Cat has the better nuts and bolts here and have served us well.
|
|
| |
|
| The MT765B is not a CAT product. It is a Challenger built by AGCO in Jackson, MN. |
|
| |
|
| yeah, but Cat designed it and built them initially. Not much agco in those tractors except the stamp on the serial number plate. |
|
| |
|
SE ND | What kind of monitors-GPS are you going to run. That would decide it for me. I like having a JD tractor on a JD planter (9530T on DB88). Things just seem to integrate better and when you have planter problems JD cant blame the tractor. |
|
| |
|
SE ND | The JD is definitely quieter than the Cat and the cab is significantly nicer. Ride on the cat is slightly better because of pivoting mid rollers. |
|
| |
|
| Not correct. |
|
| |
|
WC MN | Has Agco fixed its Reaction arm bearing problem?
FWIW: They have stood behind the failures very well IME.
For my education: At what point did Agco start building the MT from the ground up, rather than bolt together parts shipped from CAT? |
|
| |
|
NE SD | Actually he is correct. |
|
| |
|
NE SD | Have you looked at this one? Ultra wides don't seem to hold their value very well.
http://www.machinefinder.com/ww/en-US/machine/2009-challenger-mt765c-tractor-2082144 |
|
| |
|
Iowa | Drive both,either one is a pleasure to drive,pick what u like best. |
|
| |
|
WC MN | We run both a 755c and 8345rt. We like both but will soon be trading the cat off for another rt. John Deere auto steer and monitor works the best for us and the cab is much quiter and nicer in the John Deere. They both ride very good. Love the iv t. Reaction arms bearings are a cat problem still. |
|
| |
|
Chebanse, IL..... | Maybe if you still have 40" rows it would be OK. I wouldn't be interested in it for our 30" rows though. |
|
| |
|
| Actually you are partially right. After looking around on the web, it appears that Cat never did build any MT700s but they were designed by Cat, no question. |
|
| |
|
NW central IL | you can find a used set of narrows, doesnt take long to switch them out. have couple neighbors do it all the time |
|
| |
|
NW central IL | question, are the c9's better in the tractors then the dozers (6r II) when looking at dozers the c9 was a downfall.. expensive to work on, fuel inj where a known prob, etc. |
|
| |
|
|
I wonder why the hour meter is showing 667 hours on it? |
|
| |
|
NE SD | Probably when it was traded for a new RT. It was out on rent this spring. |
|
| |
|
| Chad H - 6/16/2012 10:07
Probably when it was traded for a new RT. It was out on rent this spring.
An 800 hour spring?
|
|
| |
|
NE SD | Last time I inquired about a tractor they were a year out. Could have been traded in March of 2011 as far as we know. I would guess we'll be in that 700 hour range this year if we have decent crops. |
|
| |
|
Brazilton KS | Cat built MT700s for one or two years before AGCO was involved. The MT800 was ready to introduce when they sold it. All B models were always AGCO. |
|
| |
|
WC MN | I purchased a 2002 Mt765 in the late winter of 2001. By the time I bought it, and the time it showed up was when the Cat salesman told me Agco bought the rights to assemble and market MT's. At that time, Agco had nothing to do with building or assembling any of them.
To say Cat never built an MT does not make sense. To say Agco builds them doesn't make sense, to say Agco puts em together I completely understand..... C series seems to have some of the only AGCO technology integrated into it.
Half way through the B series, Reaction arm bearings started to get some attention...... Hmmm?
Edited by Newguy 6/16/2012 18:34
|
|
| |
|
| AGCO does build them, and have since 2002. Was there a time where more of the components were sourced through CAT than today, yes. CAT has been a supplier of components for the MT track tractors since they began, to say CAT shipped AGCO all the components and AGCO put the tractor together is false. There are many components that come from many other suppliers, always have. Just like a GM vehicle isn't made of all GM components, a Challenger tractor (or CAT tractor) isn't made of all CAT (or AGCO) components. AGCO does manufacture components for the MT tractors and you can take a tour of the plant and see that the tractor is, in fact, built there. Did JD "build" the AGCO TerraGator then when they used Funk transmissions in them? How about when the TerraGators had Cummins engines, or CAT, or JD.... who "built" them? Same can be said for CNH, Deere, and every other manufacturer out there. Everyone has suppliers that build part of the final product.
I don't understand your comment about reaction arms "half way through B series". What are you saying by that? |
|
| |
|
SW MN | CMWS is spot on. CAT never built a MT. AGCO bought the Challenger in 02. Someday people will give AGCO credit for building the Challenger. It is NOT a CAT it is a Challenger. Hopefully with the D series track with the SISU people will admit is is AGCO product. But if not go visit the facility they are made and go through the visitor center and figure it out. |
|
| |
|
| From my dealings with AGCO I prefer to call it a Ziegler Cat. |
|
| |
|
WC MN | Maybe the visitor center needs a fact check.
Im finally getting old enough to say "I don't care what they tell you, I was there, and this is how it was". In late 2001 I personally signed a order for a new 2002 MT 765 from Ziegler Caterpillar in Marshall mn. Never saw one in person, just the sales lit. AGCO had 0% to do with anything, it was a CATERPILLAR product that has CATERPILLAR on all the paper work still sitting in my drawer. At that point in my life, I could not tell you what AGCO did for a living. The only AGCO recognition was 2x5 inch stamped plate serial number riveted on.
In late December our Zeigler salesman sat us down and told us about the Agco acquirement. In VERY early 2002 the MT 765 showed up on a truck. In feb of 2003 we had an MT 735 show up. That was built in Dekalb Illinois also. Yes at that time Agco's name was put on a tractor that was 100% designed by CAT and put together by CAT employees probably paid by Agco, in a CATERPILLAR assembly plant that to this day Im not sure what goes on since 2003 when Agco decided to move production to Jackson. (which is great for a MN guy like me) FYI: the 35-55's have a challenger logo on them too.
This was written by Robert Radcliff (CEO AGCO) in 2002.
ACQUISITION OF CATERPILLAR TRACK TRACTORS OPENS NEW OPPORTUNITIES:
In December,we announced another major acquisition that we believe will generate a new growth opportunity for AGCO.We agreed to purchase the agricultural equipment business of Caterpillar,mainly a new range of track tractors from 225 to 500 horsepower.Caterpillar has been in the design,manufacture,and distribution of a range of track tractors,generally focused on the broad-acre or corporate farm customer,for more than 15 years and has gar- nered a major share of this particular market segment.The track tractor features the highest horsepower available to pull multiple implements with minimal ground compaction.Such work is possible only with the track system.The Caterpillar acquisition includes the design of the new MT 700 and MT 800 series product;the production operations at DeKalb,Illinois; supply and technology agreements with Caterpillar for long-term manufacturing;and product development.The agreement also includes the ownership of the Challenger brand name,the use of the CAT logo on the Challenger track tractors,and the authorized distribution of any AGCO products through the CAT dealer network,garnering AGCO unrestricted market access throughout the world. This relocation means an addition of approximately 100 new jobs and approximately 40 relocated jobs from DeKalb, Ill. Production will start in July 2003. Duluth, Ga.-based AGCO (NYSE: AG ) anticipates that the facility rationalization will generate annual savings of approximately $8 million by the year 2004. On March 3, AGCO announced the closing of the DeKalb plant, which was acquired from Caterpillar Inc. in March 2002. AGCO is a worldwide designer, manufacturer and distributor of agricultural equipment.
Im not an AGCO hater, I have sat at a round table where Ziegler has shown the brass at agco whats up. This is not the place to air that laundry as AGCO did step up (after persuasion) and has made me a happy customer on these tractors....... This was in 2003.
If not for a CAT dealership, there would not be an AGCO product on this farm.
Follow the trail on reaction arm bearings. Again, I appreciate AGCO stepping up to keep them going on their dime. They know how and why the problem that does not affect all tractors is there.
FWIW: that wheel tractor they make sure is nice.
Edited by Newguy 6/17/2012 06:35
|
|
| |
|
| Thanks for getting the historical details straightened out on this - yes, the MT700 and 800s started out 100% built, sold, distributed, marketed by Cat, but it changed very shortly after the tractor's introduction. Cat remains a large component supplier and AGCO builds the tractor and handles everything after that. So all this boils down to, who cares? Products should be evaluated without any bias (positive or negative) toward the mfr. who builds them - whether it be Cat, AGCO, Deere, CNH, etc. They can all build some things well, and they can all build things that deserve some improvement. And they all use outside suppliers to various levels. Those of you picking on AGCO for "just assembling" the MT tractor, not building it, had better take a tour of both Jackson, MN and Waterloo, IA, and it will probably turn your world upside down to see how similarly the tractors are built. Anyone looked at the nameplate affixed to your RT tractor undercarriage lately? Deere didn't exactly design this from the ground up themselves, although they do cleverly hide it pretty well on the machine hoping you won't see it:)
Edited by 9700 6/17/2012 08:43
|
|
| |
|
| fastxcr - 6/17/2012 01:10
CMWS is spot on. CAT never built a MT. AGCO bought the Challenger in 02. Someday people will give AGCO credit for building the Challenger. It is NOT a CAT it is a Challenger. Hopefully with the D series track with the SISU people will admit is is AGCO product. But if not go visit the facility they are made and go through the visitor center and figure it out.
Whoa, I didn't say CAT never built one, I just said AGCO has been building them since 2002.
I think we are splitting hairs over terminology...built/assembled...
The fact of the matter is (today) AGCO holds design control over the tractor, sources all supplier components, manufactures many other components, and puts them all together to make a tractor. That is as much as can be said for any company.
Edited by CMWS 6/17/2012 11:09
|
|
| |
Cat 765B vs John Deere 8345RT
