TRACTOR PARTS Allis Chalmers Case & David Brown Farmall & International Ferguson Ford & New Holland John Deere Massey Ferguson Massey Harris Minneapolis Moline Oliver & Cockshutt Kubota / Yanmar

TRACTOR MANUALS

Allis Chalmers	Case	Farmall IH	Ford 8N,9N,2N	Ford
Ferguson	John Deere	Massey Ferguson	Minn. Moline	Oliver

Tractor Talk Discussion Forum

JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register

Author

IAHay

12-29-2005 11:39:05

Report to Moderator

Howdy,

I'm thinking of buying one of the three of these(4430, 4630, 4440). 4440 would be my preference, but I'm not sure it would be worth the extra money for me. I need something to primarily pull 946 disc mower and to do some baling and bale moving. How does the fuel consumption compare between the 3? Powershift vs. quadrange? Thanks.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

IHHay

01-03-2006 06:29:15

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

Thanks for the input folks. I currently pull the 946 disc mower and 566 baler with a 4450 MFWD. The mower tends to throw the tractor around quite a bit when turning around on end rows-especially on hills. I have a neighbor who actually put a 4850 MFWD on his 946.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

nw_bearcat

12-31-2005 08:38:43

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

Dad uses a 4430 powershift and a 4440 quad to hay with. You can definately tell the hp difference between the two motors, the 466 has alot more torque, and when dad hooks onto a disk to make fire brakes, the 4440 will chug along while the same disk will work the 4430, and make it spin-neither tractor using duals, good tires and weights on both.

for the powershift, there are gaps yes, but we would have nothing different for a baler tractor. we bale with a vermeer 605F, and the powershift is only one lever to move for forward/reverse, and is easy to bump it up a gear when in light hay. i have also been told that with the powershift, holding the clutch pedal down only diverts oil, no pilot bearing wear. we do use the 4440 quad on the loader, but would prefer another powershift. it is smoother, but the powershift makes it a little quicker when moving hay bales, you can just shift up, without clutching, and you never think about being in the right range.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Seth_ia

12-30-2005 17:12:01

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

I would buy a later 4430 quad range. The latter 4430s are more similar in cab features. Quad or synchrorange is mandatory if you going to do small square baling. The powershifts don't have enough gears and are too jerky as the other mentioned. You will most likly pay as much or more for a 4030 than a 4430. I just saw a great looking 4430 sell for $9700. Good motor and paint. The only fault was that it had a synchro range, which would work for what your doing at that price. My mechanic tells me that most 4430 are putting out 140 horse. If your worried about fuel consumption have the tractor dynoed, and turned down if you don't need the power. Atleast you'll always have the option for more power if you ever need it. As far as I'm concerned, 4430s are one of the best tractors ever made and would be my chose hands down.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

R. John Johnson

12-30-2005 07:13:46

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

How many HP does that disc mower need? If it is less than 125 HP then maybe you could look at something smaller. A 4230 or a 4040 might be better choices. I bought a 4230 last year and have been very happy with it. I used it to bale and haul hay. It has all the power I need and is reasonalbly nimble. It can probably be had for slightly less money and may use less fuel.

My two cents

John

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Eldon (WA)

12-29-2005 19:43:36

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

If you look at the Nebraska tractor test info it looks like the 466 cid engine is more economical (HP hrs per gal) than the 404 cid....at least under max load.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

farmerboy

12-29-2005 19:23:29

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

The 4630 is out of the running immediately as it has 1000 only PTO. You can get an adaptor and run half throttle but you'll still tear stuff up. Our 4640 is quite quite clumsy. The only advantage it has is lower cost per HP than the more nimble and more usable 4240 or 4440.

The 4430 is a great tractor. Its 125 HP turbocharged 404 has all the power you'd ever need in a haying operation. The 4440 is also a great tractor. That 130 horse turbocharged 466 has plenty o' snort. The 4440 seems a bit clumsier than the 4430.

You'll be happier with a 16 speed Quad Range. They have a lot more ground speed choices for variable cutting and baling conditons than those 8-speed powershifts. I don't like the powershift at all. Our 4640 has one. It's very jerky and supposedly very expensive to fix. You'll find yourself clutching between gears just to smooth out the transition.

As far as cost per HP, The 4630 wins at 12 to 16K around here. The 4430 will bring the same. 4440s still bring 19-24K in this area. A 4640 will also bring 19-24k

I'd look for a 4240QR or 4430QR for your needs.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

RodInNS

12-29-2005 18:44:55

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

The only real info I could give you would relate to the 4440, quad range. I ran one of them a bit a year ago last summer chopping silage. The tractor was working fairly hard, and burning 8-9 gal/hour. Pound for pound, I thought it rather inefficient compared to my Ford (7710 turned to 105 hp). It (4440) was probably doing 25% more work on a little more than double the fuel. I didn't really care for the transmission either. The powershift was good, but the rest seemed rather herky jerky to me..... it was by no means a baling tractor suited to my style with that transmission.
It seems to me like that would be a lot of tractor to run a baler to begin with, although I don't know what power requirement you need for the MoCo. I think if I could get away with a 4040 or a 4240 on the mower, I'd try that to save a bit of fuel.... Size the tractor to be a little more hp than the MoCo's minimum requirement. That's a good idea, aside from fuel consumption. But I think the best fuel savings will come from either a couple series' newer green paint, or another color paint form that vintage. I don't hear too many guys rave about the fuel efficiency of the 40 series Deere's, whatever other virtues the tractors have. FWIW,

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

BobMo

12-29-2005 15:11:09

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

Why not pick what you want and go for it. There is very little difference in the prices. I looked at (27)4430's and the average price was 16,200. You can buy a 4440 for 19000 or less. 4630's ncan be had for less than either one.
All being said for what you describe a 4440 is a lot more tractor than you need but thats up to you. good luck..... ...

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Heat Houser

12-29-2005 14:16:30

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

The 4630 is 1000 RPM pto only.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Jon Hagen

12-29-2005 12:02:53

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to IAHay, 12-29-2005 11:39:05

All three are good tractors. The 4440 with the 466 engine has more low rpm torque than the 30 series with the 404 engine. I have a 4450 with 15 spd powershift,this is much better for hitting just the right gear for PTO work. The 8 spd powershift of the earlier machines has quite a speed jump between gears. The down side of the powershift,is that it makes the tractor into a fuel hog at light loads. I am told that the powershift trans consumes 15 more HP than the manual trans. If your using the tractor under a light load that consumes say 15-20 hp,then the light load + the powershift power drain means the engine must make aprox twice the power it would need with a manual trans,and the fuel guage shows it.
In my case,pulling a 21 ft PT swather with my 466 powered,170 hp,manual trans IH tractor VS using the 466 powershift 4450 at 140HP,was that the JD uses right at twice as much fuel. Your call if the reliability and convenience of the powershift is worth the extra fuel it will use.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

edchainsaw

12-29-2005 17:54:48

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to Jon Hagen, 12-29-2005 12:02:53

well your going to be using a BIG tractor for your work and that is given a fuel useage.

now as for a power shift using 2 times the fuel

We've had them both.. used them both for all kinds of jobs and IT dont take twice the fuel and that 15hp drain is against a straight up Syncrorange on a FULL LOAD. yes an IH w/466 does use a bit less fuel BUT ours never did.

we've owned 4430's and 4630, 1586,5488 4650's and used them hard and easily.. that 2times the fuel usage just aint true at all UNLESS UNLESS SOMEthing was wrong with the one.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Jon Hagen

12-29-2005 18:50:29

Report to Moderator

Re: JD 4430, 4630, 4440 comparison in reply to edchainsaw, 12-29-2005 17:54:48

That 2X fuel fuel consumption is at very light load,like a mower or swather,where powershift power consumed is as much as the impliment load. If your running the tractor at a 100 hp + load,then an extra 15 hp for the powershift will not change things much,maybe 10=15% higher fuel useage.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

[Options] [Printer Friendly] [Posting Help] [Return to Forum] [Log in to Reply]

TRACTOR PARTS	TRACTOR MANUALS

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home | Forums

Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy