2007 L48 vs. 2008 M59 Comparison

Dougster

Old Member
Dougster,
My 511 can only move the top foot or so of the pile sideways. The Kubota I rented could push lower into the pile sideways and move it. Same thing with the Bobcat 331 mini-excuvator I rented. It didn't have much swing power either. But you are right. You can't get a stump out with swing power.:badidea::no::notthatway:
hugs, Brandi
Correct. I certainly know that from personal experience now!

Interesting that you don't think the Bobcat 331 has sufficient swing power. That machine is one of the mini's at the very top of my interest list due to relatively low price (in used) compared to CAT, Deere and Yanmar. How was it for digging power compared to the 511?

Dougster
 

Bindian

Member
Correct. I certainly know that from personal experience now!

Interesting that you don't think the Bobcat 331 has sufficient swing power. That machine is one of the mini's at the very top of my interest list due to relatively low price (in used) compared to CAT, Deere and Yanmar. How was it for digging power compared to the 511?

Dougster
Douster,
I loved the machine except for it only had one transport speed....creep slow.
hugs, Brandi
 

Dougster

Old Member
Douster,
I loved the machine except for it only had one transport speed....creep slow.
hugs, Brandi
Ha!!!!! :yum:

It is true that if you are used to using a backhoe mounted on a tractor, those little mini-excavators make you think you are riding on a large turtle. At least the 2-speeds are slightly better. Takes forever to get anyplace! They may dig fine... but what they do dig up better be able to stay in the immediate vicinity or you are up the creek without a paddle!!! ;)

So you were happy with its digging power compared to the 511???

Dougster
 

Bindian

Member
Ha!!!!! :yum:

It is true that if you are used to using a backhoe mounted on a tractor, those little mini-excavators make you think you are riding on a large turtle. At least the 2-speeds are slightly better. Takes forever to get anyplace! They may dig fine... but what they do dig up better be able to stay in the immediate vicinity or you are up the creek without a paddle!!! ;)

So you were happy with its digging power compared to the 511???

Dougster
Dougster,
You trade off creep slow speed for awesome manueverabiltiy with a mini. I love the digging power at full rpm of my 511. Best thing this side of a large TLB for power AND depth and reach.:thumb:
hugs, Brandi
 

mike69440

New member
Getting Back to the M59

The weight of a M59 seems dangerous for its loader specs.

I have a weighted (8100-8300LB) L39 depending on grapple or bucket, and it is finally reasonably stable. The inside wheel weights act as spacers adding 1.75" to the track width. I have the hydraulics turned up just a tiny bit so it can lift maybe 2350-2400 lbs to full height, and get near 3000 Lbs off the ground. At 7000 lbs this is asking to tip the tractor.

Anyone who does not ballast an M59 to 10,000 lbs is asking for trouble, especially carring an edge load in that 7' bucket. Why a 7' bucket? To me, it seems a max. 6'-4" wide bucket with more depth for the same volume would make more sense?

BH specs on the M59 seem real nice for its size.

I do not need more hydraulic flow on the L39, even I swap out to larger cylinders someday for more bucket curl force.

The M59 seems to have this area covered compared to even the L48. I like that. Being able to break out and loosen a hard pile is actually easier on the machines drivetrain than pushing into it.
 

Dougster

Old Member
The weight of a M59 seems dangerous for its loader specs.

I have a weighted (8100-8300LB) L39 depending on grapple or bucket, and it is finally reasonably stable. The inside wheel weights act as spacers adding 1.75" to the track width. I have the hydraulics turned up just a tiny bit so it can lift maybe 2350-2400 lbs to full height, and get near 3000 Lbs off the ground. At 7000 lbs this is asking to tip the tractor.

Anyone who does not ballast an M59 to 10,000 lbs is asking for trouble, especially carring an edge load in that 7' bucket. Why a 7' bucket? To me, it seems a max. 6'-4" wide bucket with more depth for the same volume would make more sense?

BH specs on the M59 seem real nice for its size.

I do not need more hydraulic flow on the L39, even I swap out to larger cylinders someday for more bucket curl force.

The M59 seems to have this area covered compared to even the L48. I like that. Being able to break out and loosen a hard pile is actually easier on the machines drivetrain than pushing into it.
Hey Mike! :wave: Welcome aboard... and thanks for posting the very first serious "critical comments" on the new M59 tech specs. I was beginning to think that I was the only one who even cared about them!

Added weight would be great for operation. The problem, of course, is that most folks who'd be interested in (and actually able to purchase) a new M59 would be commercial folks and would likely want to be able to transport it to various jobsites. Already the weight is at the upper bounds of pickup truck or small dump truck trailerability. The question then becomes... if a larger dump truck is needed to transport it around fully weighted, is it still worthwhile to buy and load up an M59??? Or would it be better to go all the way to a full-size backhoe? As folks often point out... the Terex 760b in ROPS form ain't gonna cost much more money than a new M59. And a slightly used full-size hoe could be a whole lot less. Depending on your local laws, the full-size hoe could also be driven on town roads to reasonably local jobs.

Yes, some folks don't like Terex, but I still think the comparison is noteworthy.

I guess your weight comment also begs the question: How many owners of L48's have felt the need to add on extra weight? :confused:

Dougster
 

Curtisfarmer

New member
I have my rears loaded and with hyd. thumb, my L48 weighs 9800 lbs +/-. Just bought second L48 this week without hoe brandnew and will have the tires loaded as well. Without loaded the tires, you would have to have the hoe on all the time to move as many pounds as it will pick up. Same with M59 I am sure. I don't like the new 7' bucket width, getting kinda big.
 

larryRB

Member
you talk about Terex. When the town highway wanted a new hoe, I tried a Case 590 for a week, JCB 217 for a week, a Deere 410 for the same, a Cat 436 for one day, and a Terex for a week. For mechanical purposes the Terex is much better designed than the others,, For operational purposes the same. All cab glass is flat, Much easier to replace than those fancy curved glass doors such as on a Deere. Had equivalent power, and had silicone blocks that look like a tuna fish can, that lubricated the extenda hoe system,, I wanted the Terex bad,, bad politicians and back door dealings with a particular dealer squelched the Terex,..
 

Dougster

Old Member
I have my rears loaded and with hyd. thumb, my L48 weighs 9800 lbs +/-. Just bought second L48 this week without hoe brandnew and will have the tires loaded as well. Without loaded the tires, you would have to have the hoe on all the time to move as many pounds as it will pick up. Same with M59 I am sure. I don't like the new 7' bucket width, getting kinda big.
May I ask why you bought a second L48 without the BH? I didn't even know you could do that. Were you looking for a second tractor with BH interchangability with the existing L48? Or some other logic? :confused:

Dougster
 

Dougster

Old Member
you talk about Terex. When the town highway wanted a new hoe, I tried a Case 590 for a week, JCB 217 for a week, a Deere 410 for the same, a Cat 436 for one day, and a Terex for a week. For mechanical purposes the Terex is much better designed than the others,, For operational purposes the same. All cab glass is flat, Much easier to replace than those fancy curved glass doors such as on a Deere. Had equivalent power, and had silicone blocks that look like a tuna fish can, that lubricated the extenda hoe system,, I wanted the Terex bad,, bad politicians and back door dealings with a particular dealer squelched the Terex,..
That's an interesting review Larry. Most folks on-line seem to dismiss or put down the Terex as some crude, odd, sub-par machine with every cheap-out and shortcut in the book taken to hold new price to the lowest in the industry. But they've always looked serviceable to me and certainly no worse than a JCB in a used machine. I recently bid on one but didn't manage to break the reserve price. Other than maybe a used JCB, it's the only full-sized BH could ever hope to afford that would be less than 5 years old.

Dougster
 

Curtisfarmer

New member
May I ask why you bought a second L48 without the BH? I didn't even know you could do that. Were you looking for a second tractor with BH interchangability with the existing L48? Or some other logic? :confused:

Dougster


I did buy the 2nd L48 with BH1100 interchangability in mind. I have KX 121 and L48 with Hyd. thumb and still need a 2nd machine. I figured I might as well get 2nd L48 which is 2X any L40 series machine with BH90 at less money brand new. 2 backhoes and excavator is too many digging arms for me. I paid $27.5K for new L48 no hoe vs. $47k+ for M59 with hoe my L48 won't fit. Thanks for the technical comparison, reinforces my investment as I feel the M59 is certainly a fine machine, but getting too near a full size machine in price for what the existing L48 already does. The synergies in having 2 L48s powering an already owned BH1100 with awsome hyd. thumb leaves me with $20k less investment which can be used more productivly eslewhere.

I posted these reasons on TractorbyNet.com and I just recently joined this forum:

Just dropped a deposit on my second L48 before the new M59 comes out. I fretted and dithered all summer but I think I did the right thing. The reasons are::shitHitsFan:

1- have existing new L48 with custom hyd. thumb which can swap back and forth. 2 hoes would not pay for itself having an excavator.

2- I like the L48s ruggedness to the new M59 or L39. Hardnose all the way as opposed to thin metal. I like the boxy construction over curves, but it is the thickness of the metal and routing of hyd. lines which count for me.

3- The L48 is not much more $ than a bigger homeowner L series, but is 2X the machine in terms of Hyd flow, lift, and overall construction. BH90 is no match for BH1100. Not even close.

4- I have KX-121-3 so now I can have 2 jobs going at the same time.

5- Could not justify the cost of a M59, $48k +/-, versus paying around $27.5-29K for a L48 without hoe. Would like M59, cannot afford right now, maybe in the future.

6- L48 is big enough for me, I cannot think of one thing, other than going faster in Medium HST, that I need a bigger machine for right now. The M59 84" bucket may become to big for landscape stuff, I know I have aproblem handling my 84" bushhog on trailers.

7- The L48 has proven its value to me being so versatile.

8- I may be in denial about not wanting a M59! The extra $20K can be used more productively somewhere else.:wink:

I think there comes a time where you have enough breakout force and lift capacity which say the L48 has and the the new M59 may be bigger, but have power it does not need in most applications. If the L48 won't lift or dig it out, most cases you need a full sized machine. So far I have not much. I really like the boxy, beefy design over the 2nd generation "sleek" L39 styles, way too thin for me and for what I do. I do miss out on the new HST plus, but I still think 2 L48s with 1 hoe is much more productive for the $ invested.:letitsnow:

I like the covered stabilizer arms, loader control arm, and a few other things of the M59.....but still love my L48.:wave:
 

Dougster

Old Member
I did buy the 2nd L48 with BH1100 interchangability in mind. I have KX 121 and L48 with Hyd. thumb and still need a 2nd machine. I figured I might as well get 2nd L48 which is 2X any L40 series machine with BH90 at less money brand new. 2 backhoes and excavator is too many digging arms for me. I paid $27.5K for new L48 no hoe vs. $47k+ for M59 with hoe my L48 won't fit. Thanks for the technical comparison, reinforces my investment as I feel the M59 is certainly a fine machine, but getting too near a full size machine in price for what the existing L48 already does. The synergies in having 2 L48s powering an already owned BH1100 with awsome hyd. thumb leaves me with $20k less investment which can be used more productivly eslewhere.

I posted these reasons on TractorbyNet.com and I just recently joined this forum:

Just dropped a deposit on my second L48 before the new M59 comes out. I fretted and dithered all summer but I think I did the right thing. The reasons are::shitHitsFan:

1- have existing new L48 with custom hyd. thumb which can swap back and forth. 2 hoes would not pay for itself having an excavator.

2- I like the L48s ruggedness to the new M59 or L39. Hardnose all the way as opposed to thin metal. I like the boxy construction over curves, but it is the thickness of the metal and routing of hyd. lines which count for me.

3- The L48 is not much more $ than a bigger homeowner L series, but is 2X the machine in terms of Hyd flow, lift, and overall construction. BH90 is no match for BH1100. Not even close.

4- I have KX-121-3 so now I can have 2 jobs going at the same time.

5- Could not justify the cost of a M59, $48k +/-, versus paying around $27.5-29K for a L48 without hoe. Would like M59, cannot afford right now, maybe in the future.

6- L48 is big enough for me, I cannot think of one thing, other than going faster in Medium HST, that I need a bigger machine for right now. The M59 84" bucket may become to big for landscape stuff, I know I have aproblem handling my 84" bushhog on trailers.

7- The L48 has proven its value to me being so versatile.

8- I may be in denial about not wanting a M59! The extra $20K can be used more productively somewhere else.:wink:

I think there comes a time where you have enough breakout force and lift capacity which say the L48 has and the the new M59 may be bigger, but have power it does not need in most applications. If the L48 won't lift or dig it out, most cases you need a full sized machine. So far I have not much. I really like the boxy, beefy design over the 2nd generation "sleek" L39 styles, way too thin for me and for what I do. I do miss out on the new HST plus, but I still think 2 L48s with 1 hoe is much more productive for the $ invested.:letitsnow:

I like the covered stabilizer arms, loader control arm, and a few other things of the M59.....but still love my L48.:wave:
Very interesting post CF! Thanks for taking the time to explain. :thumb:

You raise a number of common sense and provocative issues, but I am most interested in your assessment (and pardon my interpretation/ paraphrasing) that the L48's backhoe is about optimum for a machine of this general size/type and that any task more demanding would be better suited to a full-size machine anyway.

That very positive assessment speaks volumes to me about the L48 and brings into question the need for (and wisdom of) Kubota building the M59. I will never be in a position to afford either brand new, but a used L48 is a lot closer to my financial radar screen than a new M59... all the while recognizing that my more logical upgrade path (for financial reasons) is still to a used JD 110 or a used 7-8,000 lb class mini-excavator.

It became clear to me last summer that my Bradco 509... while it got the job done... was falling something short of what I desired in a mobile, tractor-mounted backhoe used for business and primary income purposes. The question since then has been "how much more powerful will ever be enough"? Do I really need a full-size machine to achieve my expanded business range goal... or can something compact and towable still meet all or most of my client's needs? Sounds like you feel that the L48, if truly the optimum, is the machine best able to answer that question.

BTW, I too have considered buying a machine identical (or near identical, different HP) to my current Mahindra 4110 tractor but without the backhoe. I also saw many potential advantages to that approach including cost savings and near full redundancy. It would be fabulous to be able to run one machine with grapple and BH installed while running a second identical machine on the same site (or a different site) with my CAT toothed digging bucket and box blade, rake or tiller installed.

Dougster
 

larryRB

Member
Very interesting post CF! Thanks for taking the time to explain. :thumb:
It became clear to me last summer that my Bradco 509... while it got the job done... was falling something short of what I desired in a mobile, tractor-mounted backhoe used for business and primary income purposes.
Dougster

Been here and done that, the simple answer is the Mahindra's with one pump will never be able to keep up. In fact any machine out there with one pump falls into the same category. As you know Doug, I too had a 4110 only with the 511 hoe and not 9 footer., Mahindra posts these numbers for their main pump a lot higher than I am convinced they can ever produce,, When operating hoes, they need a dedicated swing pump and a main pump of 17 gpm or so... THe 48's have 27 gpm although this number is all three pumps combined
 

Dougster

Old Member
Been here and done that, the simple answer is the Mahindra's with one pump will never be able to keep up. In fact any machine out there with one pump falls into the same category. As you know Doug, I too had a 4110 only with the 511 hoe and not 9 footer., Mahindra posts these numbers for their main pump a lot higher than I am convinced they can ever produce,, When operating hoes, they need a dedicated swing pump and a main pump of 17 gpm or so... THe 48's have 27 gpm although this number is all three pumps combined
Well, I see that post woke you up! :respect: :wave: :mrgreen:

It is no longer about the 509 vs. something else... or one pump vs. multiple pumps... or this flow figure vs. that figure. Now it's all about whether anything short of a full-size machine can get me to where I want to be. The L48 is a great machine, but somewhat out of my financial reach unless it can expand my range dramatically. Used ones are going for as much as decent, used, full-size machines. :eek:

The question of "how much is enough" will continue to haunt me... and I'm not sure there is any quick or easy way to answer that question. :confused:

Dougster
 

larryRB

Member
around these parts when I bid a job, they are given an estimated time frame, So far, and maybe I am lucky, my estimates have come under the proposed time, and not by much, half hour, 45 minutes at best,, It is one of the major attributes to make or break it, if you want work again. Of course I have ten thousand hours in over 30 years running hoes, so I should be expected to zero in on times and costs., My 48, I have down pretty much to a science for a digging job. The point is, it is 5 times or more faster than a one pump machine with equal as much more power, So to say, one or more pumps or this hydro pressure or that one,, they are the critical point in getting things done in a reasonable time frame.. My only problem now is the yuppies are moving in by the droves, buying compact machines and takiing over this work by bidding miserably low or even for 50 bucks a day. It makes it impossible to work with these yuppies that are instant experts at everything,..
 

Dougster

Old Member
around these parts when I bid a job, they are given an estimated time frame, So far, and maybe I am lucky, my estimates have come under the proposed time, and not by much, half hour, 45 minutes at best,, It is one of the major attributes to make or break it, if you want work again. Of course I have ten thousand hours in over 30 years running hoes, so I should be expected to zero in on times and costs., My 48, I have down pretty much to a science for a digging job. The point is, it is 5 times or more faster than a one pump machine with equal as much more power, So to say, one or more pumps or this hydro pressure or that one,, they are the critical point in getting things done in a reasonable time frame.. My only problem now is the yuppies are moving in by the droves, buying compact machines and takiing over this work by bidding miserably low or even for 50 bucks a day. It makes it impossible to work with these yuppies that are instant experts at everything,..
Well Larry, you have the rich Yuppies and I have the illegal aliens. :eek:

I'm not sure which one is worse for business. :rolleyes:

Dougster
 

Curtisfarmer

New member
Well Larry, you have the rich Yuppies and I have the illegal aliens. :eek:

I'm not sure which one is worse for business. :rolleyes:

Dougster

I like jobs when the homeowner wants to keep the cost down by "helping" with their homeowner machine and soon realizing that the L48 is no oridinary machine and works circles around theirs.......and then get bummed out when I tell them their CUT with backhoe attachment is only slightly less $ than buying a TLB to begin with. I cannot count how many customers ask how I did that or how they tried and couldn't. My big problem is guys/ rednecks who work dirt cheap and then when I bid they say so and so did that for $50 when the job is $400 in reality. I tell them go get that guy cause they don't have the equipment and insurance I do, and hope for the best. Or how about people who claim they can go rent the same stuff and do it themselves. Go for it!
 

Dougster

Old Member
I like jobs when the homeowner wants to keep the cost down by "helping" with their homeowner machine and soon realizing that the L48 is no oridinary machine and works circles around theirs.......and then get bummed out when I tell them their CUT with backhoe attachment is only slightly less $ than buying a TLB to begin with. I cannot count how many customers ask how I did that or how they tried and couldn't. My big problem is guys/ rednecks who work dirt cheap and then when I bid they say so and so did that for $50 when the job is $400 in reality. I tell them go get that guy cause they don't have the equipment and insurance I do, and hope for the best. Or how about people who claim they can go rent the same stuff and do it themselves. Go for it!
Well, not sure where you are from... but few people calling me already own their own CUTs. And while skidsteers, mini-excavators and backhoes can be rented around here... I don't think that everyday homeowners renting equipment by the hour or day is a big threat to me. Such an approach can get very expensive very fast as things start to go wrong... and most intelligent homeowners know that.

The real threat to me is from the illegal alien community and the underground economy that thrives in Eastern MA... and, in particular, in the Metrowest area. These folks can undercut me by half (or more) on almost any job. Seems like the only non-snowplowing work I get anymore is from folks specifically looking to avoid the illegal aliens for fear of property theft, identity theft or personal harm. Security, integrity and privacy are becoming my three biggest selling points in a market where I can be undercut by cheap underground labor running junk equipment almost any day of the week. :eek:

Dougster
 

larryRB

Member
I My big problem is guys/ rednecks who work dirt cheap and then when I bid they say so and so did that for $50 when the job is $400 in reality. I tell them go get that guy cause they don't have the equipment and insurance I do, and hope for the best. Or how about people who claim they can go rent the same stuff and do it themselves. Go for it!

I agree wholeheartedly, this is why I parked my machine,, I've had two small jobs that had to re-do what the yuppie experts already destroyed. KNow what? I'll keep the 48 parked rather than wear it out keeping up iwth these city slickers, The sad thing is, and there is more than enough records to prove it,, 60% and sometimes a little more, move right back to the city they came from. In the meantime, the year,year and a half out here, they aready did the damage. Where I'm at, there are no stores, nothing,, one of the largest towns in square miles, the least in population, (660 or so) and only 6 stop signs.
 
Top