Agree Tim, been in the diesel industry for a decade now. That being said, my view of emissions has changed from my previous thoughts. With the advent of "common rail injection" and modern electronic engine control, my opinion is we don't really need an aftertreatment system so much on new engines. Common rail injection is so efficient, and can be done with such precision, as far as timing/pattern/pressure/rate, that you should not really see little if any particulate out of the exhaust. I feel like we need to change the laws, to reflect the current technological level we're at in 2022.
@@robs8882 The extra fuel that needs to be produced and sold to run regens on all these diesel engines is less eco friendly to the atmosphere then it would be to run these new common rails without dpf's
@@TractorTimewithTim Think how much COOLER the engines run with Regen. I plugged off my EGR as well. No smoke, no soot.. more power. OH, and runs cool exhaust. Without EGR the DPF wouldnt get plugged up with crap they are trying to burn that isnt burnable.
I am totally amazed at all of the "climate change" scientists and experts that watch your channel Tim. I had no idea. You must feel lucky to have such highly educated geniuses following you.
I agree and it’s important to say what you believe and tell the truth. Just tell the truth about what you believe in in the world will be a better place
Tim, I’m right there with you on your Global Warming rant. The existential threat may very well be… politicians on a mission to separate us from our money… in the process of lining theirs… under the cover of an ever changing ‘Climate Change’ panic! And, thanks for your excellent explanation of the EPA regs.
We are trying to lead the world on emissions reduction. I support our efforts to do that. I think its the moral and responsible action. I understand your logic that this segment of the market is small, but it is a start. Its a road that world needs to proceed down.
Tim I've watched your channel for a long time, but I gotta say I can't disagree more. The argument of, "why are we trying to save the planet when no one else will" doesn't sit well. I agree with you that the current solutions are a big hassle, and they do add cost to a tractor, but we can't just go back to the way things were. DPF might be the stop-gap we have for now but, without something better to replace it, it's what we have for now. I'd strongly encourage that we keep trying to find a better and more cost effective solution, but growing pains will be there along the way. Just going back in time won't fix today's problems. Dumping our crap in the river might get rid of our... well crap... and be cheaper than installing a state regulated septic system but what about the people drinking from the river downstream? Who's protecting you from the people living upstream of you? I think we can do better than "every man for himself". I don't want to ramble too much, but I'll say this. Reducing or eliminating fossil fuels is more than just that graph you posted. It's about power. Right now, whoever keeps the oil flowing has all the power. When you don't need the oil anymore you take their power away. If the world's petroleum was reserved for high energy machines only (rockets, planes, tanks) and all consumer products moved (or nearly all) away from petroleum, then the US can produce it's own gas and break away from foreign influence. I'd say that a positive thing. As adoption grows and competition follows; like most goods and services, the prices will decline in response. Once the US doesn't need foreign oil anymore it can put economic pressure on places like China to say, "we only do business with green countries" and together with other green countries it will eventually twist everyone's arm to follow. But Rome wasn't built in a day, and a cleaner future won't be either. What is worst that could happen by trying to clean up emissions? We have clean drinking water, and air to breathe.. On the flip side, if we do nothing, and we were wrong to do nothing we all die... 🤷♂️ by flood, drought, starvation, or mutiny.
I’m not suggesting we throw out all attempts to improve. Rather, I’m suggesting moderation. Also, a lot of your comment is about achieving energy independence. We had that just 2 years ago. I agree, we should have kept that direction! Anyway, thanks for watching, and thanks for a thoughtful, reasoned and respectful response.
@@TractorTimewithTim yeah energy independence is just 1 small slice of the bigger pie, but related, as emissions only exist because we are burning fuel.
For interest rerun the CO2 charts per person, rather than by country. China 7.38 tons per person, USA 15.52, India 1.91, Russia 11.44. It’s a little unfair to say we can’t do anything compared to a country with 1.3 billion people, in a country that does a lot of our manufacturing. My point is that each and everyone on the planet needs to reduce their personal carbon output to zero, therefore people in the USA need to reduce by 15.52 tons each per year.
My tractor, JD 2038R which is now 4 yrs old and purchased new, has 936 hrs & I’ve not had a single problem & its gone through the regen cycle many times. ALL personal use hrs at home.
Just a little bit of clarifying information about the regulations. The Nonroad Compression Ignition (diesel) standards were first proposed in 1995 (Clinton administration) as a result of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments passed by Congress and signed by George Bush. Regulations are not developed overnight, and the development of these regulations would have started during the Bush administration. These regulations required a phased in approach to the regulations with the first phase (Teir 1) being required in model year 2000. Depending on the size of engine, there were between 3 and 5 phases until we got to Teir 4 requirements in 2008. Additionally, it's important to note that these regulations only address what is often referred to as criteria pollutants (particulate matter, hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen). The criteria pollutants have all been found to have direct health impacts to humans at elevated concentrations. Thus, the reason they are regulated. The nonroad compression ignition standards (or currently Tier 4 standards) DO NOT regulate carbon dioxide which is the primary issue in the climate change issue.
Also fair to note, this scenario is somewhat of a chicken and egg, we regulate to control issue, the regulations drive innovation and technology. Would the development of common rail injection have occurred without the push to do so? I am reminded of this when I am sitting in traffic behind an old muscle car, antique car, old diesel truck when you can see, and smell the exhaust....and I think....jeesh, could you imagine if every car and truck did this as to how bad it would be with the population density we have now?
Good video. I agree with Tim. I own a 2032R with 80 hours on it. It did a regen once. No big deal. Life is short people. Who cares if once every 100 hours my tractor has to do this "regen" thing. Look at what the past 2 years has done to us.
Tim the reazin that cumpueas like john deere and kubota have not moved away from a DPF is that a DOC sistom resrcllaets hot air and burnt feal into the air intake and the last time I checket engine's don't like dirty air
the best thing about the regen is no black smoke noxious fumes to work in. i can still remember back in 80s when drive w windows down would always find that black smoke truck or car like a cigarette smoker making us all smell it. i do agree with the graph on the lack of world wide benefits, however when the recent pandemic pictures of cities showed more clarity from the lack of driving in the air. i hate second hand smoke. thats about the main benefit i see from it . i believe there is some health benefits locally more than globally.
How much of the opinion section was edited out? Looked like you were starting to spin up pretty good but wanted to hold back. Love the videos and all the good information and I love the opinion section! Keep up the good work!
Heya Tim. Great video as always. I just wanted to point out that you are comparing apples to oranges in your "opinion" section. The DPF and other emissions equipment is not meant to counter CO2, so that comparison simply isn't relevant. It is to capture and/or prevent particulate matter from being released into the atmosphere. In other words, microscopic ash. That ash is extremely harmful to respiratory health. I don't know if you've had the "pleasure" of traveling to India or China lately, but I have and the smog is so thick in industrial areas like Shanghai that you can't see more than a block down the street and everyone wears a mask to filter the air (this was pre-covid, mind you). Personally, I quite enjoy having actual clean air to breathe that doesn't cause smoker's lung in a matter of a few years from just living there. But that's me. I definitely agree with your point that is matters little what the U.S. and EU do for the sake of climate change if the rest of the world isn't doing their part, but there's also the old adage of two wrongs don't make a right. I believe that you have a good point in that the EPA sometimes does go overboard for the benefit conferred from a given regulation..but I'd rather have that than the environmental hell-scape being created in places like China where the environment is considered in the pursuit of economic development. A happy median should be the goal of course, but if there has to be an over-shoot in one direction...my vote is for the direction that doesn't poison my home while the details are being worked out to find the optimal solution for the long-term. This is obviously a much bigger topic than a single video or comment can address..I hope I have a chance to grab a coffee or a cheeseburger with you sometime and debate it properly. Have a good one!
Well, sounds like we sorta agree on the happy medium. I’m certainly not advocating a ‘free for all’. I just think a $3000 tax on a 27 hp tractor is senseless. Pretty sure common rail alone would burn pretty clean.
@@TractorTimewithTim yep it's pretty steep and definitely a bummer in a number of ways (and a major reason I bought a 25-hp 2025R). But if it was easier and cheaper to do without it, you can bet they would be doing so. The DPF itself isn't a mandate..the resulting particulate-free exhaust is. The manufacturer is free to implement whatever solution they want to achieve that. Therefore, they must think they have a competitive advantage by implementing DPF versus a more expensive design of the engine that would run cleaner.
I like my TYM 4820 because it’s a mechanical injection with no ECM. As long as you run it under a load regularly it just runs. It’s the low rpm puttering around that clogs up DPFs. Brush hogging or even just roading them at higher RPMs will burn off the spot. I’m honestly far less worried about the global temperature than I am breathing in diesel particulates. I’ll pay a little more for a cleaner machine as long as it is still reliable just to keep me and the kids from choking on more combusted hydrocarbons than necessary.
Ok. Sorry to trigger you, Cliff. Doesn’t matter to me who (or which party) created the EPA. At this point, I think it is out of control. Again, just my opinion. Thanks for watching!
Let’s talk about that diesel particulate: It is microscopic charcoal. Guess what charcoal does? It absorbs carcinogens in the combustion byproducts. Why should this matter? The diesel particulate is so small that our noses and airways don’t capture it. So what happens when you inhale diesel particulate? The microscopic chunks of carbon lodge in your lungs. Once in your lungs, that particulate releases some of those carcinogens into your blood stream. So this isn’t just about CO2, NO2 and other atmospheric issues, it’s about the tractor operator and those nearby being exposed to carcinogens. This is to protest YOU. So before you go lobbying Congress to relax the rules, give that some thought.
The diesel emissions standards were enacted during the George HW Bush administration in 1991 and started to take effect in 1994. They’ve been progressively phasing in tighter and tighter standards every few years since. The most noticeable changes were ULSD and DEF, which took effect in 2006. The last set of standards currently planned take effect in 2025!
"If the US went to Zero, it would not make a difference." I have to disagree with you on that point. The developments are done for the US/EU market, and the rest of the world follows us because it becomes cheaper once there is manufacturing scale. Well except China, who are still building coal fired electrical generation facilities. Farming on a world scale is huge and most x US farms can use this small scale tractor, so it is a good thing. With the US and factory scale farms, they need the large Equpment where this Urea and DPF technology works and make the large tractor give the emissions of a standard truck, which is a also a good thing. Your explanation of the DPF emission system and different systems, was excellent! Also, the effect that the US and EU, as compared to the rest of the world was also excellent. These programs are having an effect on Emissions. Calling India and China Developing countries is a mistake, because they are currently developed and manufacturing a lot of goods for the world. They need to be called what they are and that is developed countries, so their emissions need to be addressed. Great job with this video!
I bought a new 25 HP compact with hydro trans and loader. 4,000 lbs or more with an implement on the 3-point. I found that it was too much weight for 25 horsepower. Low range was fine. Medium range was ok on level ground. High range was useless. Overall not enough power. I took the tractor back and got the same tractor with 40 horsepower and couldn't be happier. Regen once per 30 hours, tons of power.
At least with Kubota, as frame size goes up, HP stays the same via RPM limit of larger displacement engines. HP is a factor of torque. BX2680 is a 1L, 24.8hp at 3200 rpm LX2610 is a 1.3L, 24.8hp at 2500 rpm L2501 is a 1.6L, 24.8hp at 2200 rpm What that means, is the torque curve is going to be more favorable when loaded down to carrying the higher frame size weight and load, due to the larger displacement having a higher torque figure in the lower rpm range. You are still getting more power with the larger frame tractors, even if not represented by the rated HP rpm.
I just needed something a bit bigger then a lawn tractor so I got a JD 1023E. It idles fast so I hardly ever even push up the throttle. If my wife hears it rev up she knows I am giving my five year old granddaughter a ride. First thing she does is push the throttle wide open. She does the same thing with my JD E130 lawn tractor. She stands on the floorboard and I control the speed and steering and would never ride her while cultivating or mowing. That girl is going to be something when she gets older.
So the DPF needs to Regen because it filtered out diesel particulate to make the environment cleaner. However, the Regen process requires extra fuel to be burned. So, is it possible these opposing actions are counterproductive or not really necessary? Yep. Thanks much for the help messing up stuff Big Gov.
PS thanks seriously, the info on your channel has been a big help with our ongoing tractor research to purchase for the church property. Information is gold when it comes to buying any of these.
I think it has less to do with co2 emissions/ global warning than hazards to health. I know that I can’t deal with it in major cities. However, we aren’t operating in urban areas so I’m not sure that it is at all necessary for these small tractors which aren’t operated for long periods anyway. I know that my 25hp tractor exhaust doesn’t bother me at all and I’m very sensitive to such things.
Also essentially the filters just contain the harmful substances then they have to be cleaned which just releases it at a later time so not sure how it helps not to mention the more fuel burnt
The cost increase in 75plus hp tractors is ruthless. It has also had a major cost addition to older tractors that don't have the same level of emission controls. I would put my two cents forward on the matter, however it would ruin my day. I have had some small issues with my 2016 3046r. All of them are relating to the exhaust system. I haven't had any big out of pocket costs yet, but I know they're coming. Ultimately I think it is a software glitch. The tractor is waiting to long to go into clean mode. It will not go into manual clean. JD does have a 'fix', it's only about $2000. They have been less than forthcoming on what they think the problem is, or what the solution is. During the summer, I run the tractor hard enough that it's not an issue. It's during the winter when I using it for snow removal that I have issues.
There are more acres of lawn grass under cultivation by suburban homeowners than acres of food crops by farmers. Small tractor emissions can be significant.
So your first observation was about CO2, but I'm not sure diesel regs / regen address CO2 but particulates that contribute to local air pollution and heart/lung impacts. I don't think any of the regulators think the regs address global warming or CO2.
Okay , facts time. Tier 4 standards were phase in, in 2008 , fully implemented by 2015. Obama 2009.Just the facts. Still going to watch , and I don't even have a tractor. Just remember you brought it up.
I’m wondering why manufacturers and buyers are so enamored with HP when buying a tractor,. The term “peak HP” is just that, the power the engine makes at one specific point in its RPM range. I recently purchased a new, sub-25 HP tractor… many engine choices available, from .9 liter up to 1.6 liter all with “25 HP”. If I could find the dyno charts on these engines, my guess would be the larger displacement 25 HP engine would have a much flatter, and therefore more usable torque curve which would allow the tractor to grunt through tasks that would have a smaller 25 horse tractor struggling.
DPF has nothing to do with CO2 emissions it removes soot and other particles from the exhaust that are harmful to human health, think of Asthma like symptoms. Do you remember acid rain? It is pretty much not a thing in North America anymore because of government regulations adding emissions systems and forcing fuel companies to make cleaner burning fuels. If anything emission systems cause more C02 to be emitted because they cause restrictions that means you need to burn more fuel for the same power. So if you want clean air for you and your family to breath you should probably be pro emissions...
On way is a filter that needs to be burned out, and the calaytic system needs heat but uses platinum's and other catalytic metals to cause a chemical reaction in the gases coming out turning them into something less toxic. On gas cars its water and other byproducts. Not sure on diesel. Cataytic systems are more efficient and much easier to maintain.
DOC DPF and catalyst filter system run all as one system on over the road truck system and larger off road equipment as a diesel mechanic for over 30 years these system ave more equipment down time
Tim we love your analysis of the whole co2 comparison of the US to the rest of the world and the impact our farm equipment makes in the grand scheme of things!
I've been looking for a used 25hp tractor for a couple years now. Haven't been able to find one under 13,000 that was legitimate. What's bad is you can almost buy a new one for that price.
Follow the trail of money involved in the emissions decisions. You will find things leading back to various politicians lining their pockets with money from things that are not needed, but they get kickbacks for voting/pushing these things.
I agree with your take on emissions. I’m a truck driver and the emission regulations since 2008 have made all trucks so unreliable and costly to operate. The ironic part is that fuel economy is at best the same as pre-emission engines but usually worse when comparing apples to apples. Just another example of why government regulations should be far and few!
DOC is Diesel Oxidation Catalyst. More or less it's a very efficient Catalytic converter for your diesel engine. The higher engine temp is negligible Cat and Deere already have what will most likly Tier 5 diesel engines running in the mid bore (around 10 liter) running in the European market. They both have no DPF and no EGR. Both are using a DOC and a high efficiency SCR system. Scr is what uses DEF. I know Cat has a few 3 and 4 cylinder engines that are using DOC only untill they get to the 75hp mark they they are using the SCR as well. The future of Diesel engine emissions is looking to be a more simple system and a more reliable system. The ammount of improvement already since 2007 when epa 07 hit all onroad engines is pretty outstanding. Just like the automotive market it had growing pains but we don't see too many people looking to rip EFI and converters off of modern-day cars.
Only thing I can say about DPF is it changes my engine sound on my Deere. And word is in about 5 years I will most likely see problems out of the DPF. We’ll see right?
I had a similar conversation with my brother today about EPA regulations not just their affect on OEM repair/replacement costs but also the possible diminished effect on modern efficient engine design and modifications but also the onerous way it acts as a tax as well. Like you, its just my opinion. My shorts don't get in a wad over it. Well, not too much! LOL! Thanks Tim!
Don’t get political. There are those of us who appreciate saving our environment. Just don’t wait until you have 2 week planting windows because of warming. Please don’t harp. We love ya but we all have our opinions
Thanks for your perspective. Please don’t paint me with a broad brush. I appreciate our environment too. We just need to be reasonable as well as responsible. There IS middle ground here. At least in my opinion. As always, thanks for watching!
Why do people complain so much about the regulations and so little about how companies choose to implement things? Like Tim said, Mahindra made a research and development investment in how to do thing cheaper and more convenient for their customers. We are doing it to ourselves by supporting companies who would rather charge customers more rather than figure out how to make a better product.
Tim you the first to talk about this regen tractor last year I sold my deer because of this I never could get it too go into this Regen so I sold it. And did buy the Massey Ferguson. Now I can get the work done with out stopping.
I'll agree with you the EPA regulations are not cost effective. The electronic common rail system can provide a very clean exhaust without the added on garbage. I'm still a bit leery of the electronic common rail when it's working good it's fine. But, it's certainly not as easy or inexpensive to work on as an older Roosa-Master mechanical system which any good mechanic could work on and rebuild with a minimum of special tools. Even the newer mechanical injection systems are extremely reliable and not extremely difficult to repair. And any mechanic can pull a pump and send it off for a rebuild and reinstall it and have a tractor back in service, not so with the computer controlled common rail.
My quandary of sorts is that I need a tractor with a smaller footprint that a large tractor more in line with a compact,, but a subcompact lacks the capabilities to perform the functions that I will engage in, and I will be running devices such as grapples, tillers, post hole diggers, log spiders, box blades, which probably do better with HP exceeding 25. THE EPA should up the requirement to 30 -35 HP engines Greenhouse Gas emissions include CO2 (contributing 76% of all Greenhouse gases, with fossil fuel and industry accounting for 65% of CO2 emitted, and forestry and other land use accounting for an additional 11% of CO2 emitted). Nitrous Oxide (N2O) accounts for approximately 6% of total GH gases, and are derived primarily from agricultural activities, with fertilizers the primary source of N2O emissions. Fossil fuel combustion also generates N2O. Methane (cows emit lots of methane, as do waste management, energy use, the thawing of the permafrost, and biomass burning contribute 16% of GH gases), and 2% of GH gases are Fluorinated gases (F-gases), a produce of industrialization, refrigeration, aerosol sprays, hydrofluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, perifluorocarbons. 25% of all Greenhouse gas emission are the product of burning coal, natural gas, and oil for electricity and heat, being the greatest contributor to GH gas emissions. Agricultural, Forestry, and other Land use activities accounts for 24% of all GH gas emissions, and includes cultivation of crops, fertilization with Nitrogen based products, raising livestock, and the destructive process of deforestation throughout the world. However, the biomass, dead organic matter, and soil also sequester some of that CO2 removing it from our atmosphere, offsetting around 20% of the emissions from this sector. Industrialization, primarily from burning fossil fuels, but also chemical, metallurgical, and mineral transformation processes not associated with energy production, contributes roughly 21% of GH gas emissions. Transportation, involving fossil fuel burning accounts for approximately 14% of the worlds GH emissions. Buildings emit GH gases through energy production and fossil fuel burning to heat the buildings and cooking accounts for roughly 6% of the worlds GH gases emitted. Roughly 10% of the remaining GH gases emitted comes from the energy sector which are not directly associated with electricity or heat production, such as fuel extraction, the refinery processing, and transportation of those energy sources to market. Global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels have increased dramatically since the onset of industrialization, and since 1970, CO2 emissions have increased approximately 90%, with emissions from fossil fuels combustion and industrial processes accounting for approximately 78% of the total Greenhouse gas emissions. Agricultural, deforestation, and other land0use changes are the 2nd largest contributor to GH gas emissions in the past 50 years. The USA has approximately 5% of the world population but produces 15% of CO2 (not total GH Gas) emissions annually, but because we started the industrialization process earlier than both China and India, we have emitted roughly 25% of all CO2 that has been emitted via industrialization to date. twice the amount China has emitted. China with a population roughly 4X that of the USA contributes 30% of current annual CO2 emissions, the European Union contributes 9% of CO2 emissions, India with a population that will soon exceed that of China is responsible for 7% of annual CO2 emissions, Russians for 5%, Japan 4% of annual CO2 emissions, and rest of the world 30% of CO2 emissions. So your concerns the the USA can not in and by itself reverse this trend and the damage already done, is justified. But to continue along this path, and destroy the bounty that the Lord has provided us with is reckless. We must lead the world by example, show them the path.
There is no better stuard or the land than the agriculturist. He/she tends the fields and animals and only wants what's best for either. Then you have the folks who claim to be stuards of the environment or animals but only do so from behind a desk in some downtown office building and decide that tractors need things like DPF or DEF and never consider what are the effects of one cardboard box and one 2.5 gallon empty plastic jug every time my tractor or dually needs DEF. Lastly, I have a Kubota m5-111 has DPF and DEF. The "DEF header" failed about 4 times. Yes it was a pain especially because it always failed when I had hay laying on the ground or a paying customer waiting for me to do a chore for them. The blue and green tractors in my area were also seeing failures of these parts. Apparently, there were only two manufacturers of DEF components and both of them were having issues. All of my issues were fixed by warranty and only cost me some fuel to take the tractor in to the shop each of those times. My dealer took good care of me offering loaner tractors and putting me on the "fast track" in the repair shop to get me going again. The problem seems to be fixed for good as it's been well over a year and maybe getting close to 2 since I had an issue. Bottom line for me is, if you really want something that is working effeciently to become the opposite just let the government make it better.
It appears that you have had a falling out with the green tractor company. I would like to talk to you about the one series all I know about his John Deere from your blogs do you ever take calls and if so how do I get in touch with you Theron
I really don't want to hear from any activist or government about carbon emissions, if they're not serious about implementing nuclear power in our infrastructure. It's as close as we're going to get to clean, sustainable energy on a global scale. Yay tractors!
Good Morning Tim, I'm a diesel mechanic for a large trucking company, and one of our largest cost is DPF issues. I agree 100 percent with everything you said. God Bless!
You are looking at the results of the EPA's efforts over several decades. if you looked at the US pollution rates in the past we would dwarf what China and India produce now. They will eventually come into line and reduce their pollution, their markets in NA and EU will demand it. Air pollution is the 3rd largest cause of death world wide.
Agree Tim, been in the diesel industry for a decade now. That being said, my view of emissions has changed from my previous thoughts. With the advent of "common rail injection" and modern electronic engine control, my opinion is we don't really need an aftertreatment system so much on new engines. Common rail injection is so efficient, and can be done with such precision, as far as timing/pattern/pressure/rate, that you should not really see little if any particulate out of the exhaust. I feel like we need to change the laws, to reflect the current technological level we're at in 2022.
Right. Moderation and working within the technology we have. I agree. Overall, we want to treat the environment as best we can without going broke!
wouldn't that suggest that the regen mode would never run? if regen runs it must have a certain amount of contaminants.
@@robs8882 The extra fuel that needs to be produced and sold to run regens on all these diesel engines is less eco friendly to the atmosphere then it would be to run these new common rails without dpf's
@@TractorTimewithTim Think how much COOLER the engines run with Regen. I plugged off my EGR as well. No smoke, no soot.. more power. OH, and runs cool exhaust. Without EGR the DPF wouldnt get plugged up with crap they are trying to burn that isnt burnable.
@@Morpheen999 SO TRUE!!
"We've done this to ourselves" So true!
Like you voicing your opinion. I share your views and appreciate your freedom of speech.
I am totally amazed at all of the "climate change" scientists and experts that watch your channel Tim. I had no idea. You must feel lucky to have such highly educated geniuses following you.
I like you more and more every time I watch you. Thanks Tim!!!
Thanks for the kind words. Appreciate you continuing to watch.
I agree with your opinions .
I'm 100% behind you on the whole green house crap stuff
Like I said won't stop watching. I just like facts. Independent .
Thanks Cliff. As you indicate, both parties deeply involved in this.
I thought I recognized the dealer you were filming! I bought my first tractor there, Good Folks
I agree and it’s important to say what you believe and tell the truth. Just tell the truth about what you believe in in the world will be a better place
Your opinions section is my favorite part! Love the videos.
thank you tim
Sure love my kubota l2501! Super dependable, and no stupid DEF!
I have a TYM 574 it's a 55hp turbo with no def fluid.... I do have a particulate filter it has regenerated one time in 200hrs.
Only once! That is good!
Tim, I’m right there with you on your Global Warming rant. The existential threat may very well be… politicians on a mission to separate us from our money… in the process of lining theirs… under the cover of an ever changing ‘Climate Change’ panic!
And, thanks for your excellent explanation of the EPA regs.
Blessings in your opinion
Tim, you're looking good on that Massey!
Nice to see you in Westfield. Roudebush has been great to work with for me!
Your correct. We must all vote every election, it is important
Happy to see you guys visting Roudebush! I have always had good dealings with them. -GC1723
Tim go man go you are right on it.
thanks for the video, and the information that you gave to us. have a great weekend
You are 100% correct....
Great information
We are trying to lead the world on emissions reduction. I support our efforts to do that. I think its the moral and responsible action. I understand your logic that this segment of the market is small, but it is a start. Its a road that world needs to proceed down.
We just recently bought a cub cadet pro z 100 mower with a 25 hp kohler engine and a stihl fs 91 r weed eater.
Great information!!!!! Thank you!
Good video. Looking forward to the other parts of the series
They are all published now!
Great video Tim!👍🏻
Tim I've watched your channel for a long time, but I gotta say I can't disagree more. The argument of, "why are we trying to save the planet when no one else will" doesn't sit well. I agree with you that the current solutions are a big hassle, and they do add cost to a tractor, but we can't just go back to the way things were. DPF might be the stop-gap we have for now but, without something better to replace it, it's what we have for now. I'd strongly encourage that we keep trying to find a better and more cost effective solution, but growing pains will be there along the way. Just going back in time won't fix today's problems. Dumping our crap in the river might get rid of our... well crap... and be cheaper than installing a state regulated septic system but what about the people drinking from the river downstream? Who's protecting you from the people living upstream of you? I think we can do better than "every man for himself".
I don't want to ramble too much, but I'll say this. Reducing or eliminating fossil fuels is more than just that graph you posted. It's about power. Right now, whoever keeps the oil flowing has all the power. When you don't need the oil anymore you take their power away. If the world's petroleum was reserved for high energy machines only (rockets, planes, tanks) and all consumer products moved (or nearly all) away from petroleum, then the US can produce it's own gas and break away from foreign influence. I'd say that a positive thing. As adoption grows and competition follows; like most goods and services, the prices will decline in response. Once the US doesn't need foreign oil anymore it can put economic pressure on places like China to say, "we only do business with green countries" and together with other green countries it will eventually twist everyone's arm to follow. But Rome wasn't built in a day, and a cleaner future won't be either. What is worst that could happen by trying to clean up emissions? We have clean drinking water, and air to breathe.. On the flip side, if we do nothing, and we were wrong to do nothing we all die... 🤷♂️ by flood, drought, starvation, or mutiny.
I’m not suggesting we throw out all attempts to improve. Rather, I’m suggesting moderation.
Also, a lot of your comment is about achieving energy independence. We had that just 2 years ago. I agree, we should have kept that direction!
Anyway, thanks for watching, and thanks for a thoughtful, reasoned and respectful response.
@@TractorTimewithTim yeah energy independence is just 1 small slice of the bigger pie, but related, as emissions only exist because we are burning fuel.
Well said!
Thanks Tim & Christy!!.. Another great episode.. God Bless you all.. "Hi" to Katriel..
Totally agree. Thank you
I agree Tim!
For interest rerun the CO2 charts per person, rather than by country. China 7.38 tons per person, USA 15.52, India 1.91, Russia 11.44. It’s a little unfair to say we can’t do anything compared to a country with 1.3 billion people, in a country that does a lot of our manufacturing. My point is that each and everyone on the planet needs to reduce their personal carbon output to zero, therefore people in the USA need to reduce by 15.52 tons each per year.
My tractor, JD 2038R which is now 4 yrs old and purchased new, has 936 hrs & I’ve not had a single problem & its gone through the regen cycle many times. ALL personal use hrs at home.
Just a little bit of clarifying information about the regulations. The Nonroad Compression Ignition (diesel) standards were first proposed in 1995 (Clinton administration) as a result of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments passed by Congress and signed by George Bush. Regulations are not developed overnight, and the development of these regulations would have started during the Bush administration. These regulations required a phased in approach to the regulations with the first phase (Teir 1) being required in model year 2000. Depending on the size of engine, there were between 3 and 5 phases until we got to Teir 4 requirements in 2008.
Additionally, it's important to note that these regulations only address what is often referred to as criteria pollutants (particulate matter, hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen). The criteria pollutants have all been found to have direct health impacts to humans at elevated concentrations. Thus, the reason they are regulated. The nonroad compression ignition standards (or currently Tier 4 standards) DO NOT regulate carbon dioxide which is the primary issue in the climate change issue.
Idiocracy …. Exactly …. My wife that movie is over the top, i say : its a documentary …
It plays better with his audience if he just blames Obama without doing his research.
I have removed this statement. It may take a few hours for the edit to take affect.
Also fair to note, this scenario is somewhat of a chicken and egg, we regulate to control issue, the regulations drive innovation and technology. Would the development of common rail injection have occurred without the push to do so?
I am reminded of this when I am sitting in traffic behind an old muscle car, antique car, old diesel truck when you can see, and smell the exhaust....and I think....jeesh, could you imagine if every car and truck did this as to how bad it would be with the population density we have now?
Good video. I agree with Tim. I own a 2032R with 80 hours on it. It did a regen once. No big deal. Life is short people. Who cares if once every 100 hours my tractor has to do this "regen" thing. Look at what the past 2 years has done to us.
My 2038r, once every 50 hours.
LX3310 every 15 hours.
@@TractorTimewithTim Wow, every 15 hours? Wow. Yes, I expect another regen in 20 more hours or so.
Looking forward to the frame size comparison. I'm still stuck looking at the GC1725m
The frame size episode (and several more) are already out. Check out ‘2022 Compact Tractor Buyers Guide’ playlist
Tim the reazin that cumpueas like john deere and kubota have not moved away from a DPF is that a DOC sistom resrcllaets hot air and burnt feal into the air intake and the last time I checket engine's don't like dirty air
My filter failed even the forced regen. It was the first or second the service manager had seen 10 years. JD 3039r
Gr8 video, very informative.
the best thing about the regen is no black smoke noxious fumes to work in. i can still remember back in 80s when drive w windows down would always find that black smoke truck or car like a cigarette smoker making us all smell it. i do agree with the graph on the lack of world wide benefits, however when the recent pandemic pictures of cities showed more clarity from the lack of driving in the air. i hate second hand smoke. thats about the main benefit i see from it . i believe there is some health benefits locally more than globally.
How much of the opinion section was edited out? Looked like you were starting to spin up pretty good but wanted to hold back. Love the videos and all the good information and I love the opinion section! Keep up the good work!
Heya Tim. Great video as always. I just wanted to point out that you are comparing apples to oranges in your "opinion" section. The DPF and other emissions equipment is not meant to counter CO2, so that comparison simply isn't relevant. It is to capture and/or prevent particulate matter from being released into the atmosphere. In other words, microscopic ash. That ash is extremely harmful to respiratory health. I don't know if you've had the "pleasure" of traveling to India or China lately, but I have and the smog is so thick in industrial areas like Shanghai that you can't see more than a block down the street and everyone wears a mask to filter the air (this was pre-covid, mind you). Personally, I quite enjoy having actual clean air to breathe that doesn't cause smoker's lung in a matter of a few years from just living there. But that's me. I definitely agree with your point that is matters little what the U.S. and EU do for the sake of climate change if the rest of the world isn't doing their part, but there's also the old adage of two wrongs don't make a right. I believe that you have a good point in that the EPA sometimes does go overboard for the benefit conferred from a given regulation..but I'd rather have that than the environmental hell-scape being created in places like China where the environment is considered in the pursuit of economic development. A happy median should be the goal of course, but if there has to be an over-shoot in one direction...my vote is for the direction that doesn't poison my home while the details are being worked out to find the optimal solution for the long-term. This is obviously a much bigger topic than a single video or comment can address..I hope I have a chance to grab a coffee or a cheeseburger with you sometime and debate it properly. Have a good one!
Well, sounds like we sorta agree on the happy medium.
I’m certainly not advocating a ‘free for all’.
I just think a $3000 tax on a 27 hp tractor is senseless. Pretty sure common rail alone would burn pretty clean.
@@TractorTimewithTim yep it's pretty steep and definitely a bummer in a number of ways (and a major reason I bought a 25-hp 2025R). But if it was easier and cheaper to do without it, you can bet they would be doing so. The DPF itself isn't a mandate..the resulting particulate-free exhaust is. The manufacturer is free to implement whatever solution they want to achieve that. Therefore, they must think they have a competitive advantage by implementing DPF versus a more expensive design of the engine that would run cleaner.
I like my TYM 4820 because it’s a mechanical injection with no ECM. As long as you run it under a load regularly it just runs. It’s the low rpm puttering around that clogs up DPFs. Brush hogging or even just roading them at higher RPMs will burn off the spot.
I’m honestly far less worried about the global temperature than I am breathing in diesel particulates. I’ll pay a little more for a cleaner machine as long as it is still reliable just to keep me and the kids from choking on more combusted hydrocarbons than necessary.
Oh, one more fact. The EPA was started in the Nixon administration. Facts.
Ok. Sorry to trigger you, Cliff. Doesn’t matter to me who (or which party) created the EPA. At this point, I think it is out of control. Again, just my opinion.
Thanks for watching!
Tim’s finally on a real tractor! Go Massey! Looking good!
massey ferguson the perkins diesel
Tim 🚜 I really enjoyed this video 🇺🇲 I really agree with you
I might be able to get by with 25 hp if more manufacturers offered 3 speed ranges and shuttle shift.
Let’s talk about that diesel particulate: It is microscopic charcoal. Guess what charcoal does? It absorbs carcinogens in the combustion byproducts. Why should this matter? The diesel particulate is so small that our noses and airways don’t capture it. So what happens when you inhale diesel particulate? The microscopic chunks of carbon lodge in your lungs. Once in your lungs, that particulate releases some of those carcinogens into your blood stream. So this isn’t just about CO2, NO2 and other atmospheric issues, it’s about the tractor operator and those nearby being exposed to carcinogens. This is to protest YOU. So before you go lobbying Congress to relax the rules, give that some thought.
Can't wait for electric tractors!
The diesel emissions standards were enacted during the George HW Bush administration in 1991 and started to take effect in 1994. They’ve been progressively phasing in tighter and tighter standards every few years since. The most noticeable changes were ULSD and DEF, which took effect in 2006. The last set of standards currently planned take effect in 2025!
"If the US went to Zero, it would not make a difference." I have to disagree with you on that point. The developments are done for the US/EU market, and the rest of the world follows us because it becomes cheaper once there is manufacturing scale. Well except China, who are still building coal fired electrical generation facilities. Farming on a world scale is huge and most x US farms can use this small scale tractor, so it is a good thing. With the US and factory scale farms, they need the large Equpment where this Urea and DPF technology works and make the large tractor give the emissions of a standard truck, which is a also a good thing. Your explanation of the DPF emission system and different systems, was excellent! Also, the effect that the US and EU, as compared to the rest of the world was also excellent. These programs are having an effect on Emissions. Calling India and China Developing countries is a mistake, because they are currently developed and manufacturing a lot of goods for the world. They need to be called what they are and that is developed countries, so their emissions need to be addressed. Great job with this video!
Hi Tim, love your channel. This is off topic, but where is the best place to ask a question?
I bought a new 25 HP compact with hydro trans and loader. 4,000 lbs or more with an implement on the 3-point. I found that it was too much weight for 25 horsepower. Low range was fine. Medium range was ok on level ground. High range was useless. Overall not enough power. I took the tractor back and got the same tractor with 40 horsepower and couldn't be happier. Regen once per 30 hours, tons of power.
This has been my experience as well.
At least with Kubota, as frame size goes up, HP stays the same via RPM limit of larger displacement engines. HP is a factor of torque.
BX2680 is a 1L, 24.8hp at 3200 rpm
LX2610 is a 1.3L, 24.8hp at 2500 rpm
L2501 is a 1.6L, 24.8hp at 2200 rpm
What that means, is the torque curve is going to be more favorable when loaded down to carrying the higher frame size weight and load, due to the larger displacement having a higher torque figure in the lower rpm range.
You are still getting more power with the larger frame tractors, even if not represented by the rated HP rpm.
I just needed something a bit bigger then a lawn tractor so I got a JD 1023E. It idles fast so I hardly ever even push up the throttle. If my wife hears it rev up she knows I am giving my five year old granddaughter a ride. First thing she does is push the throttle wide open. She does the same thing with my JD E130 lawn tractor. She stands on the floorboard and I control the speed and steering and would never ride her while cultivating or mowing. That girl is going to be something when she gets older.
I have a Mahindra 1640 and I deleted my emissions. Now it runs way better
Amen Tim, I wholeheartedly agree with you. Thanks
Dang facts!
So the DPF needs to Regen because it filtered out diesel particulate to make the environment cleaner. However, the Regen process requires extra fuel to be burned. So, is it possible these opposing actions are counterproductive or not really necessary? Yep. Thanks much for the help messing up stuff Big Gov.
PS thanks seriously, the info on your channel has been a big help with our ongoing tractor research to purchase for the church property. Information is gold when it comes to buying any of these.
I think it has less to do with co2 emissions/ global warning than hazards to health. I know that I can’t deal with it in major cities. However, we aren’t operating in urban areas so I’m not sure that it is at all necessary for these small tractors which aren’t operated for long periods anyway. I know that my 25hp tractor exhaust doesn’t bother me at all and I’m very sensitive to such things.
I completely agree on the environmental tax we pay
I think it is crazy some of the really large frame 25 ho Tractors out there. It doesn’t match the machine
Also essentially the filters just contain the harmful substances then they have to be cleaned which just releases it at a later time so not sure how it helps not to mention the more fuel burnt
I would have liked less emphasis on emissions and a focus on what hp suits what implements or how pto hp between hst and gears means to a greenhorn
There are more episodes coming.
The cost increase in 75plus hp tractors is ruthless. It has also had a major cost addition to older tractors that don't have the same level of emission controls. I would put my two cents forward on the matter, however it would ruin my day.
I have had some small issues with my 2016 3046r. All of them are relating to the exhaust system. I haven't had any big out of pocket costs yet, but I know they're coming. Ultimately I think it is a software glitch. The tractor is waiting to long to go into clean mode. It will not go into manual clean. JD does have a 'fix', it's only about $2000. They have been less than forthcoming on what they think the problem is, or what the solution is. During the summer, I run the tractor hard enough that it's not an issue. It's during the winter when I using it for snow removal that I have issues.
There are more acres of lawn grass under cultivation by suburban homeowners than acres of food crops by farmers.
Small tractor emissions can be significant.
So your first observation was about CO2, but I'm not sure diesel regs / regen address CO2 but particulates that contribute to local air pollution and heart/lung impacts. I don't think any of the regulators think the regs address global warming or CO2.
Okay , facts time. Tier 4 standards were phase in, in 2008 , fully implemented by 2015. Obama 2009.Just the facts. Still going to watch , and I don't even have a tractor. Just remember you brought it up.
Thanks for your perspective.
Obama January 2009 to January 2017.
I’m wondering why manufacturers and buyers are so enamored with HP when buying a tractor,. The term “peak HP” is just that, the power the engine makes at one specific point in its RPM range. I recently purchased a new, sub-25 HP tractor… many engine choices available, from .9 liter up to 1.6 liter all with “25 HP”. If I could find the dyno charts on these engines, my guess would be the larger displacement 25 HP engine would have a much flatter, and therefore more usable torque curve which would allow the tractor to grunt through tasks that would have a smaller 25 horse tractor struggling.
I have a neighbor with a B3350, after his warranty was up he ekotuned it.. it is a great running tractor and does not skip a beat..
DPF has nothing to do with CO2 emissions it removes soot and other particles from the exhaust that are harmful to human health, think of Asthma like symptoms.
Do you remember acid rain? It is pretty much not a thing in North America anymore because of government regulations adding emissions systems and forcing fuel companies to make cleaner burning fuels. If anything emission systems cause more C02 to be emitted because they cause restrictions that means you need to burn more fuel for the same power.
So if you want clean air for you and your family to breath you should probably be pro emissions...
On way is a filter that needs to be burned out, and the calaytic system needs heat but uses platinum's and other catalytic metals to cause a chemical reaction in the gases coming out turning them into something less toxic. On gas cars its water and other byproducts. Not sure on diesel. Cataytic systems are more efficient and much easier to maintain.
DOC DPF and catalyst filter system run all as one system on over the road truck system and larger off road equipment as a diesel mechanic for over 30 years these system ave more equipment down time
Tim we love your analysis of the whole co2 comparison of the US to the rest of the world and the impact our farm equipment makes in the grand scheme of things!
I've been looking for a used 25hp tractor for a couple years now. Haven't been able to find one under 13,000 that was legitimate. What's bad is you can almost buy a new one for that price.
Follow the trail of money involved in the emissions decisions. You will find things leading back to various politicians lining their pockets with money from things that are not needed, but they get kickbacks for voting/pushing these things.
So is there really a difference?
-Regular engines - burns off
-Emmsion controlled - burns of as well.
Great video and I agree with what you said!
Great point about voting Tim
I agree with your take on emissions. I’m a truck driver and the emission regulations since 2008 have made all trucks so unreliable and costly to operate. The ironic part is that fuel economy is at best the same as pre-emission engines but usually worse when comparing apples to apples. Just another example of why government regulations should be far and few!
DOC is Diesel Oxidation Catalyst. More or less it's a very efficient Catalytic converter for your diesel engine. The higher engine temp is negligible Cat and Deere already have what will most likly Tier 5 diesel engines running in the mid bore (around 10 liter) running in the European market. They both have no DPF and no EGR. Both are using a DOC and a high efficiency SCR system. Scr is what uses DEF. I know Cat has a few 3 and 4 cylinder engines that are using DOC only untill they get to the 75hp mark they they are using the SCR as well. The future of Diesel engine emissions is looking to be a more simple system and a more reliable system. The ammount of improvement already since 2007 when epa 07 hit all onroad engines is pretty outstanding. Just like the automotive market it had growing pains but we don't see too many people looking to rip EFI and converters off of modern-day cars.
This is why I bought my Mahindra, and I am very happy with the performance of the tractor.
I'd rather have a used tractor without all the epa junk on it. I hope to watch a video of yours covering used tractors.
I address this topic in several videos. Check out our ‘used vs. new’ episode in this series. Also, check out our recent auction videos.
@@TractorTimewithTim checking it out now
Only thing I can say about DPF is it changes my engine sound on my Deere. And word is in about 5 years I will most likely see problems out of the DPF. We’ll see right?
I had a similar conversation with my brother today about EPA regulations not just their affect on OEM repair/replacement costs but also the possible diminished effect on modern efficient engine design and modifications but also the onerous way it acts as a tax as well. Like you, its just my opinion. My shorts don't get in a wad over it. Well, not too much! LOL! Thanks Tim!
Loved the education and the rant was spot on.
Don’t get political. There are those of us who appreciate saving our environment. Just don’t wait until you have 2 week planting windows because of warming. Please don’t harp. We love ya but we all have our opinions
Thanks for your perspective. Please don’t paint me with a broad brush. I appreciate our environment too. We just need to be reasonable as well as responsible. There IS middle ground here. At least in my opinion.
As always, thanks for watching!
Why do people complain so much about the regulations and so little about how companies choose to implement things? Like Tim said, Mahindra made a research and development investment in how to do thing cheaper and more convenient for their customers.
We are doing it to ourselves by supporting companies who would rather charge customers more rather than figure out how to make a better product.
I think there is merit in this comment and point of view.
Tim you the first to talk about this regen tractor last year I sold my deer because of this I never could get it too go into this Regen so I sold it. And did buy the Massey Ferguson. Now I can get the work done with out stopping.
I'll agree with you the EPA regulations are not cost effective. The electronic common rail system can provide a very clean exhaust without the added on garbage. I'm still a bit leery of the electronic common rail when it's working good it's fine. But, it's certainly not as easy or inexpensive to work on as an older Roosa-Master mechanical system which any good mechanic could work on and rebuild with a minimum of special tools. Even the newer mechanical injection systems are extremely reliable and not extremely difficult to repair. And any mechanic can pull a pump and send it off for a rebuild and reinstall it and have a tractor back in service, not so with the computer controlled common rail.
Love the Bible verse at the end
Keep them coming
Cat uses both DPF and DOC on a machine. DPF cleans up soot and the DOC addresses NoX with the addition of DEF.
My quandary of sorts is that I need a tractor with a smaller footprint that a large tractor more in line with a compact,, but a subcompact lacks the capabilities to perform the functions that I will engage in, and I will be running devices such as grapples, tillers, post hole diggers, log spiders, box blades, which probably do better with HP exceeding 25. THE EPA should up the requirement to 30 -35 HP engines
Greenhouse Gas emissions include CO2 (contributing 76% of all Greenhouse gases, with fossil fuel and industry accounting for 65% of CO2 emitted, and forestry and other land use accounting for an additional 11% of CO2 emitted). Nitrous Oxide (N2O) accounts for approximately 6% of total GH gases, and are derived primarily from agricultural activities, with fertilizers the primary source of N2O emissions. Fossil fuel combustion also generates N2O. Methane (cows emit lots of methane, as do waste management, energy use, the thawing of the permafrost, and biomass burning contribute 16% of GH gases), and 2% of GH gases are Fluorinated gases (F-gases), a produce of industrialization, refrigeration, aerosol sprays, hydrofluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, perifluorocarbons.
25% of all Greenhouse gas emission are the product of burning coal, natural gas, and oil for electricity and heat, being the greatest contributor to GH gas emissions. Agricultural, Forestry, and other Land use activities accounts for 24% of all GH gas emissions, and includes cultivation of crops, fertilization with Nitrogen based products, raising livestock, and the destructive process of deforestation throughout the world. However, the biomass, dead organic matter, and soil also sequester some of that CO2 removing it from our atmosphere, offsetting around 20% of the emissions from this sector. Industrialization, primarily from burning fossil fuels, but also chemical, metallurgical, and mineral transformation processes not associated with energy production, contributes roughly 21% of GH gas emissions. Transportation, involving fossil fuel burning accounts for approximately 14% of the worlds GH emissions. Buildings emit GH gases through energy production and fossil fuel burning to heat the buildings and cooking accounts for roughly 6% of the worlds GH gases emitted. Roughly 10% of the remaining GH gases emitted comes from the energy sector which are not directly associated with electricity or heat production, such as fuel extraction, the refinery processing, and transportation of those energy sources to market.
Global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels have increased dramatically since the onset of industrialization, and since 1970, CO2 emissions have increased approximately 90%, with emissions from fossil fuels combustion and industrial processes accounting for approximately 78% of the total Greenhouse gas emissions. Agricultural, deforestation, and other land0use changes are the 2nd largest contributor to GH gas emissions in the past 50 years.
The USA has approximately 5% of the world population but produces 15% of CO2 (not total GH Gas) emissions annually, but because we started the industrialization process earlier than both China and India, we have emitted roughly 25% of all CO2 that has been emitted via industrialization to date. twice the amount China has emitted. China with a population roughly 4X that of the USA contributes 30% of current annual CO2 emissions, the European Union contributes 9% of CO2 emissions, India with a population that will soon exceed that of China is responsible for 7% of annual CO2 emissions, Russians for 5%, Japan 4% of annual CO2 emissions, and rest of the world 30% of CO2 emissions. So your concerns the the USA can not in and by itself reverse this trend and the damage already done, is justified. But to continue along this path, and destroy the bounty that the Lord has provided us with is reckless. We must lead the world by example, show them the path.
Consider a Deere 3R. You still get that tight turning radius, but with much more capability!
There is no better stuard or the land than the agriculturist. He/she tends the fields and animals and only wants what's best for either. Then you have the folks who claim to be stuards of the environment or animals but only do so from behind a desk in some downtown office building and decide that tractors need things like DPF or DEF and never consider what are the effects of one cardboard box and one 2.5 gallon empty plastic jug every time my tractor or dually needs DEF. Lastly, I have a Kubota m5-111 has DPF and DEF. The "DEF header" failed about 4 times. Yes it was a pain especially because it always failed when I had hay laying on the ground or a paying customer waiting for me to do a chore for them. The blue and green tractors in my area were also seeing failures of these parts. Apparently, there were only two manufacturers of DEF components and both of them were having issues. All of my issues were fixed by warranty and only cost me some fuel to take the tractor in to the shop each of those times. My dealer took good care of me offering loaner tractors and putting me on the "fast track" in the repair shop to get me going again. The problem seems to be fixed for good as it's been well over a year and maybe getting close to 2 since I had an issue. Bottom line for me is, if you really want something that is working effeciently to become the opposite just let the government make it better.
It appears that you have had a falling out with the green tractor company. I would like to talk to you about the one series all I know about his John Deere from your blogs do you ever take calls and if so how do I get in touch with you
Theron
I really don't want to hear from any activist or government about carbon emissions, if they're not serious about implementing nuclear power in our infrastructure. It's as close as we're going to get to clean, sustainable energy on a global scale. Yay tractors!
Hit the nail on the head, it is a tax. Just like inflation is.
Good Morning Tim, I'm a diesel mechanic for a large trucking company, and one of our largest cost is DPF issues. I agree 100 percent with everything you said. God Bless!
You are looking at the results of the EPA's efforts over several decades. if you looked at the US pollution rates in the past we would dwarf what China and India produce now. They will eventually come into line and reduce their pollution, their markets in NA and EU will demand it. Air pollution is the 3rd largest cause of death world wide.
Excellently explained especially the graff