John Deere 6125r
- Thread starter jackstor
- Start date
Forever Fendt
Member
- Location
- Derbyshire
fendt
Chae1
Member
- Location
- Aberdeenshire
forever
How do you find it on fuel? Is it 50kph?
I used a neighbours for baling this summer. Impressively quiet cab. Controls are laid out to please Deere users though I don't like the spool lever angles or the high force required to move them.
Engine pulls very well provided the revs are kept up. Forward vision is appalling over the enormous bonnet. Using these tractor for loader work is a form of torture that would get the most hardened terrorist to talk I'm minutes.
Fuel economy is not good. Baling silage it used over 20% more fuel per hour than my same HP tier 3 Deutz. The huge bonnet on the Deere hides the back pressure generating particulate filter, the exhaust gas recirculation, and the very large cooling pack required to get this engine to meet emissions standards. This all needs diesel to be burnt to reduce harmful gases, not producing power.
If you're workload is light and you aren't concerned about the high running costs, then the poor fuel efficiency probably won't be a deciding factor in the purchasing decision. However the high purchase price, thirst, and high depreciation will make this an expensive tractor to own.
Air conditioning seems over zealous and freezes the matrix, though this is likely to have been specific to the tractor I was using, and not model generic.
Gearbox powershifts are smooth with the engine revs automatically blipped or cut in the now standard Deere soft shift. Remember to switch it off on PTO work like mowing to avoid large torque variations being transmitted to the implement. Gear spacing and overlap is adequate, though first gear is relatively fast if it's on something like a straw blower for example. I don't know if a creeper range I'd an option? Moving the gearstick through the ABC etc ranges is a chore if you're used to a slick stick, but the clunky slow movement is OK once you've become accustomed to it.
Oil flow is very good, though the one I drove had an optional high capacity pump. Check the take off capacity if you're tipping large trailers, everybody around here adds extra to the gearbox for silage carting.
Three point linkage arm length has been increased, and externally beefed up. It therefore has a better lift arc than pervious Deere offerings, meaning it is no longer one of the smallest on offer. It doesn't look to have been increased enough to cause replacement of all those very short PTO shafts required for Deere's of old. I don't know if the internals, specifically the cross shaft, has also been beefed up to match.
Overall it's not an unpleasant place to spend a day, helped significantly by the very quiet cabin. If you can live with the cost of ownership there doesn't seem to be the head gasket, injector, or turbo vane problems associated with the thirty series.
Just don't put a loader on one unless you can drive by sense of feel
Engine pulls very well provided the revs are kept up. Forward vision is appalling over the enormous bonnet. Using these tractor for loader work is a form of torture that would get the most hardened terrorist to talk I'm minutes.
Fuel economy is not good. Baling silage it used over 20% more fuel per hour than my same HP tier 3 Deutz. The huge bonnet on the Deere hides the back pressure generating particulate filter, the exhaust gas recirculation, and the very large cooling pack required to get this engine to meet emissions standards. This all needs diesel to be burnt to reduce harmful gases, not producing power.
If you're workload is light and you aren't concerned about the high running costs, then the poor fuel efficiency probably won't be a deciding factor in the purchasing decision. However the high purchase price, thirst, and high depreciation will make this an expensive tractor to own.
Air conditioning seems over zealous and freezes the matrix, though this is likely to have been specific to the tractor I was using, and not model generic.
Gearbox powershifts are smooth with the engine revs automatically blipped or cut in the now standard Deere soft shift. Remember to switch it off on PTO work like mowing to avoid large torque variations being transmitted to the implement. Gear spacing and overlap is adequate, though first gear is relatively fast if it's on something like a straw blower for example. I don't know if a creeper range I'd an option? Moving the gearstick through the ABC etc ranges is a chore if you're used to a slick stick, but the clunky slow movement is OK once you've become accustomed to it.
Oil flow is very good, though the one I drove had an optional high capacity pump. Check the take off capacity if you're tipping large trailers, everybody around here adds extra to the gearbox for silage carting.
Three point linkage arm length has been increased, and externally beefed up. It therefore has a better lift arc than pervious Deere offerings, meaning it is no longer one of the smallest on offer. It doesn't look to have been increased enough to cause replacement of all those very short PTO shafts required for Deere's of old. I don't know if the internals, specifically the cross shaft, has also been beefed up to match.
Overall it's not an unpleasant place to spend a day, helped significantly by the very quiet cabin. If you can live with the cost of ownership there doesn't seem to be the head gasket, injector, or turbo vane problems associated with the thirty series.
Just don't put a loader on one unless you can drive by sense of feel
warksfarmer
Member
6150r's on hire that we make use of. Gutless compared to 6930's they replaced. Nice to drive though, nice cabs and about the same as a 6930 on fuel ish .......
Totally reliable so far though. These things are doing 1500hrs per year so worked hard.
I don't know and don't care, it replaced a mf 5475, most uncomfortable tractor we have owned.
We have one as a second (Dad's) tractor, it's 50k autoquad full suspension.
It's better that I thought it was going to be, much nicer to use than the MF 6470 it replaced, and better on fuel (believe it or not
)Also the JD is much easier for anyone to jump on and drive, the dyna 6 was a nightmare for novices to use
The engine pulls very well above 1500rpm, a recent software update improved low rev torque a lot, but they have promised another update in the new year to improve it further.
Only done about 550hrs so far, but it hasn't broken down yet any any niggles have been sorted very quickly.
A few people I've spoken to reckon that the 125 is the best one of the 6r series.
green giant
Member
- Location
- Northumberland
This is something new A thread that seems to be showing a little praise for the uk's number one manufacturer, was there something in the water over Christmas
A thread that seems to be showing a little praise for the uk's number one manufacturer, was there something in the water over Christmas 
Give it a bit of real work and see how it goes , the jobs you've listed could be done with an old my390t.
Daniel
Member
- Location
- Mildenhall, Suffolk
This is something new
Dunno about that, a friends 6125R had to have a new engine after a month or so due to a manufacturing fault!
I don't actually care if a tractor has a catastrophic failure early on through a defect in the build process, as long as it's sorted efficiently, it can happen to any make.
Yes could do and used to, but times move on and if you only doing small hours that's great, but I find it cheaper to replace at 5000 hrs and keep it updated than be driving around in a knackered old tractor.
We have one as a second (Dad's) tractor, it's 50k autoquad full suspension.
It's better that I thought it was going to be, much nicer to use than the MF 6470 it replaced, and better on fuel (believe it or not
Also the JD is much easier for anyone to jump on and drive, the dyna 6 was a nightmare for novices to use
The engine pulls very well above 1500rpm, a recent software update improved low rev torque a lot, but they have promised another update in the new year to improve it further.
Only done about 550hrs so far, but it hasn't broken down yet any any niggles have been sorted very quickly.
A few people I've spoken to reckon that the 125 is the best one of the 6r series.
We are replacing a MF6465 dyna6. We had a 6125r on demo and we found the same as you regarding ease of driving, build quality etc, and once the revs got up power was good enough. The simplicity of the gearbox was a bonus, like going back to the dynashift.
The main issue was fuel economy, we measured it on haulage work and it wasn't good! It was only 40k though and we were comparing it with a 50k. We didn't measure it on field work, but by what doctordunc says, it's using more on pto work.
Basically, what we found is the tractor is extremely well built, simple to drive ( not keen on screen though) nice cab, fairly compact. Just the engine lets it down.
Jd are launching new r series next year, not sure how far down the range size the tweaks go.
http://www.farol.co.uk/john-deere-at-ftmta-farm-machinery-show-2015
http://www.farol.co.uk/john-deere-at-ftmta-farm-machinery-show-2015
Chae1
Member
- Location
- Aberdeenshire
Why do you feel they're knackered after 5k hours. We've a couple done just over 8k and give us very little bother.
Chips
Member
- Location
- Shropshire
What would these new r series be like once the derv doctor has taken the egr out of the picture and remapped it , it transformed my 6330 but obviously the r series would still have the particle filter , how would the particle filter on it's own without egr effect fuel consumption and power if at all ?
Ever stuffed a potato up a cars exhaust for a laugh and witnessed it cough and splutter?
A particulate filter does the same.