4020 vrs 4040 HP

[Alan in VA]

Please excuse me if this covers models that are too new for this forum. I do own a 2 cyl 520 and a 720.
Can anyone tell me why the 4040 had 404 ci and tested at ~ 77 hp on the drawbar, whereas the 4020 had a 366 ci engine after 1966 and tested ~ 80 plus drawbar hp? The 4020 was even a lighter tractor. Where and how did John Deere find the extra hp from the smaller engine?

 

[Tx Jim]

(reply to post at 17:00:38 06/28/13)

4020 diesel was 404 cid
John Deere
diesel
6-cylinder 12-valve
liquid-cooled inline
404 ci [6.6 L]

 

[JohnDeereJimOhio]

4020 ha a 404 In them if they were diesel I believe they had a 363 or 341 gas engine in them don"t quote me i would have to look it up.. Also a 4010 originally came with a smaller diesel than a 404 think it was a 380 but most have been rebuilt to the size of a 4020

 

[Alan in VA]

Thank you all for your submissions.
What I really want to know is what John Deere did to build the 4040 with a 404ci engine and have it have LESS horsepower than the smaller 366 ci engine in the 4020 that gave over 80 drawbar horsepower?

 

[4010 puller]

4040 hp should be somewhere around 100 hp. They took the place of the 4230. 4020 should be maybe 95 hp. there is a website called tractor data dot com which will show the Nebraska tests for hp for each model tractor.

 

[Alan in VA]

The external_link site is where I got the info.
They list the 4040 as testing at 77 drawbar horsepower and the later 4020 at almost 84 drawbar horsepower. Doesn't make sense.
The 4040 did test at a higher pto horsepower. (90)

 

[gfs]

don't think the tractor had any less power, the drawbar horsepower is an engineering setup, the testing shows that the 4020 got more power to the ground while using the drawbar. these numbers have fallen to the wayside in the newer tractors but when i was learning tractors from my dads and uncles buying practices these were the only ones that mattered.

 

[johnwayne360]

transmission loss? Are you comparing powershift to powershift? powershift trans take extra hp. If you are comparing synchro to powershift might make a difference.

 

[LonM]

The 4040 most likely had a larger hydraulic system to operate and air conditioning. Extra features like those take power away from the drivetrain.

 

[larryanderson]

All 4020 diesel were 404s.4040 Europeons and also some 4050 had the 359T that had plenty of power and was very fuel efficient.The 404 4040s I have been around were usually around 110H.P PTO where most 4020 are around 100 if not fueled up.

 

[Alan in VA]

What measurements are in use now?

 

[Alan in VA]

That's a good observation, and could well be the culprit -- so to speak.
It just seems almost impossible that the same manufacture (John Deere) would build a 360 some ci
engine that put out more HP than a 404 ci engine built 10 years or so later, all things being equal. Neither was turbocharged, which would have influenced HP production in a big way, as we all know.

 

[Tx Jim]

Alan
Take a look at the many different horsepower ratings the JD 276 CID(4.5L) is rated at today. One of the variables besides type of trans its rated at is different engine rpm's

 

[DrDirt]

Ok, this was long ago, but just in case someone is searching the archives...

A good comparison is the 4020,4230 and 4040. All had the 404 diesel. If you compare pto hp which is a better indicator of actual engine output, you will find 90 or 94 hp for the 4020 depending on model year as well as 100 for the 4230 and 90 for the 4040. The primary difference in each if these is how much fuel is being delivered by the pump/injectors. It wont take much searching of the archives here to find many people who have turned up their pump for a bit more hp.
The drawbar numbers reflect the power of the tractor, but are also influenced by transmission, ballast, and test conditions. A close look at the Nebraska tests will reveal that the 4040 was tested with significantly less ballast than the other two, resulting in diminished traction which will show up as lower drawbar hp. The 4040 was the lowest power 404 of that group.
Why did Deere choose to lower the hp on the 4040 relative to the nearly identical 4230? I dont know, but I suspect it was a marketing decision. The pto hp spread between all the 40 series rowcrops was 20 each. A 100 hp 4040 would have seemed strange next to the 110 hp 4240. Thats just my guess, maybe it was entirely an different reason.