Fastrack 4220

[Two Tone]

I am glad someone finally got to the point: they are unreliable as sin and basically always have been. Not convinced the handlers are much better. JCB trade on their name.

Absolute Bollox!
You obviously have a very prejudiced view on JCB’s

I can’t justify a 4000 series here yet, but I have run 4 2000 series here over the past 22 years. With regard to reliability, they are 2nd to none. I even had our accountant ring me up to say they are the cheapest tractors we have ever had regarding running costs!


Our TM320s handler is the dogies dangly bits too.

 

[Andrew]

How much is a new 4220 in the uk , the price here is €170 k which is a ride of a price in my opinion.

Not going to list prices on here as the last ones we had were 2 years ago, but at the time the same spec JD was 5 figures more.

 

[jonnyjon]

I am glad someone finally got to the point: they are unreliable as sin and basically always have been. Not convinced the handlers are much better. JCB trade on their name.

Very true

 

[Pringles]

I thought @ollie989898 was a doctor!

How many doctors own and run JCB forklifts and Fastrac’s?

I take his comments as completely meaningless!

 

[General-Lee]

I thought @ollie989898 was a doctor!

How many doctors own and run JCB forklifts and Fastrac’s?

I take his comments as completely meaningless!

My boss is a retired doctor, no Fastrac mind.

 

[jonnyjon]

I have had in the past a fastrac, shovel, digger, and 2 handlers. All have been unreliable and worse, not user friendly. No donkey drivers either. Scrap

 

[mikep]

I am glad someone finally got to the point: they are unreliable as sin and basically always have been. Not convinced the handlers are much better. JCB trade on their name.

If they are rubbish then what name have they to trade on?
Can't understand the logic of your statement.

 

[Oscar]

Had a quote for a U530 Unimog month ago, £182k.
295hp,5 spools,front pro (no rear pto as expensive option), vari drive (combination of gears and hydro) sliding steering wheel ie lh drive or rh drive, 3 way tipping body on back.
3 year warrenty and service package.

 

[Two Tone]

Any new concept tractor is bound to have a few teething problems. But glad to hear that JCB are now changing suspect parts with modified versions before they fail.

One thing that perhaps doesn’t surprise me is higher fuel consumption when hauling than a Uni-mog. Gears are the most efficient way of transmitting engine power to the wheels. As soon as you put hydro into the equation you will lose some efficiency. Why don’t lorries use Vario?

 

[mikep]

This thread looks like so many others and a pattern that is apparent on many forums especially plant ones.
The biggest denigrates of a brand and most vociferous moaners are, often, in the end just jockeys paid to ride (no fingers pointed just an observation).
How often did I used to hear how someone wouldn't drive X because they were sh!t and they knew because a man down the pub said. My first job after college was on a largish arable farm in the 70's and a new fleet of Deere's was bought including a 4040. The 4040 was always in the dealers or had a mechanic out to it. One day I was in the dealership and had a word with the foreman about it. "nothing wrong with that machine that a new driver wouldn't cure". Drivers changed and bingo a transformed machine appeared. May have been coincidence.........
If brand X was so bad then there would be no buyers to say all X Y or Z brands are bollox is plain stupidity. No brand is faultless all have weaknesses some more expensive ones but if you avoid a known weakness you will be ok. For example if you buy a brand that is known to have vulnerable brakes for transport work you are a fool but in another situation that may be the best machine.
Some machines have a reputation for series of small faults perhaps others may run faultless for a while and then lunch a major component. You only know the true cost of a machine once it's sold and if researching for a possible purchase I would put far more value on the organ grinders opinion than on the monkeys no offence to anyone.

 

[james ds]

Any new concept tractor is bound to have a few teething problems. But glad to hear that JCB are now changing suspect parts with modified versions before they fail.

One thing that perhaps doesn’t surprise me is higher fuel consumption when hauling than a Uni-mog. Gears are the most efficient way of transmitting engine power to the wheels. As soon as you put hydro into the equation you will lose some efficiency. Why don’t lorries use Vario?

So now your saying the fendt Vario is not fuel efficient , that's going against fendt theories for the last 10 years , 29 mpg springs to mind.

 

[Pheasant Surprise]

pro (no rear pto as expensive option),

Eye watering price for the rear PTO wasn’t it!!

Gearbox out, shake it all about, fit a different gearbox from Werner and all the PTO gubbins.

£35k just for a PTO

 

[Pheasant Surprise]

Had a quote for a U530 Unimog month ago, £182k.
295hp,5 spools,front pro (no rear pto as expensive option), vari drive (combination of gears and hydro) sliding steering wheel ie lh drive or rh drive, 3 way tipping body on back.
3 year warrenty and service package.

Was quoted £149k for basic U530
£2,450 for front links
£12k for rear links

By the time we got to talking about price of the rear PTO I had fallen off my chair, just a bit

Little point hitching on a baler on to show folks what it can do, if you then fail to get one with a PTO fitted. Just a display model. Oh yeah and the price! Sorry.

 

[davidroberts30]

Was quoted £149k for basic U530
£2,450 for front links
£12k for rear links

By the time we got to talking about price of the rear PTO I had fallen off my chair, just a bit

 

[Pheasant Surprise]

They have great hospitality though . If you ever get invited to go on a jolly with Merc Trucks, do it!

 

[General-Lee]

They have great hospitality though . If you ever get invited to go on a jolly with Merc Trucks, do it!

All very good, but can you really just pretend you’re buying a Mog?!

 

[Pheasant Surprise]

All very good, but can you really just pretend you’re buying a Mog?!

To be honest there were all sorts of folks there. I'd reckon less than 1 in 10 were the true "buyers" or the chequebook holders shall we say. Merc didn't mind a bit. It was all good customer relations.

 

[Tom H]

Was quoted £149k for basic U530
£2,450 for front links
£12k for rear links

By the time we got to talking about price of the rear PTO I had fallen off my chair, just a bit

Little point hitching on a baler on to show folks what it can do, if you then fail to get one with a PTO fitted. Just a display model. Oh yeah and the price! Sorry.

View attachment 766842 View attachment 766844 View attachment 766846

All very true, but hey don't really deprecated. Our last u500 lost just over 25k in ten years..... Cheapest machine we run. new one due next month. Rear PTO (luckily I don't need one) is absolutely nuts though. I think it will cause them issues getting more out. They should have sorted Mr Werner out when they had chance 10-15 years ago.

 

[Two Tone]

So now your saying the fendt Vario is not fuel efficient , that's going against fendt theories for the last 10 years , 29 mpg springs to mind.

Well no, not exactly.

The Fendt Vario system has a great many advantages in certain situations. For example, maintaining engine and PTO speeds at all times, ideal for a pto driven fertiliser spreader or baler. In this type of situation, they are probably the most fuel efficient.

However, for sheer pulling ability, it is not as ideal as a gear only type transmission for getting maximum torque and power from the engine to the wheels. Which is precisely why lorries don't use a Vario type gearbox. In this situation, Fuel consumption would reduce if a Vario system was adopted.

It is all a question of compromise. Where Fendt score is their ability to do certain things more efficiently, which overall might be better than using a gear only system.

Anything that uses oil (other than for lubrication) in its traction system, be they Vario and to a lesser extent, hydraulic clutch packs in a Powershift transmission, is going to be less efficient than gears in any draft haulage situation. Even Torque converters and Automatic gearboxes are less efficient than gears because they need oil to transfer power through the torque converter. However, these losses can be reduced to a minimum by using a torque lock to in effect lock up the torque converter. This means that (epicyclic) automatic cars can now be very nearly as fuel efficient as a manual.

Where the Vario might score is keeping the engine revs in the absolute max torque sweet spot. But this is lost in the lack of efficiency of the Hydro pump and motor system swashplates. That inefficiency creates lots of heat that needs to be dissipated via a cooling system.


Ironically, the use of oil to transfer torque explains why my 160hp 2155 Fastrac, using a lorry type gearbox, out-pulls our 205hp Newholland 7050 Powershift when being used on the same plough. The fact that it struggles to lift it quite so easily, is a different matter.
But also ironic is that the NH needs a lot of weight on the front to keep the front wheels on the ground when the plough is lifted off the ground, whereas the JCB needs none whatsoever!


PS: I would strongly doubt that any tractor, Fendt or otherwise could possibly travel 29 miles on a gallon of fuel, even unladen. Unless it was driven at Idol, in neutral, downhill all the way!
There simply isn't enough energy in a gallon of fuel to enable such a possibility to happen.

 

[Frankzy]

Ironically, the use of oil to transfer torque explains why my 160hp 2155 Fastrac, using a lorry type gearbox, out-pulls our 205hp Newholland 7050 Powershift when being used on the same plough.

Just to nitpick a bit:
Powershifts do not use oil to transfer torque they use it to keep the clutch engaged nothing more.
The requirement to maintain oil pressure at all time is (almost) the only reason a powershift is not as efficient as a mechanical gearbox.