Home > Subcompact Tractors > John Deere > 1023e << Back to List of Reviews

John Deere 1023e Review



Overall Rating:
rating
 3.80
Build Quality:
4
Features:
rating
3
Performance:
rating
4
Value:
rating
4
Reliability:
rating
4


A Good Tractor That Could Be A Great Tractor Posted by Robert Gould on 02/24/2019

The drive-over auto-connect mower is great! I have only removed and reinstalled it once, but it was very simple and straightforward.

The 120 loader is also great. It is easy to connect and disconnect, and the hydraulic lines are easily accessible (much easier than on my 425). When removed, there is much less left on the tractor than is the case with the 425. Also, there is no need to open and close a barely accessible and difficult to operate valve to get hydraulics to the loader. Hydraulics are always available.

The comfort is very good.

The steering cylinders operate way too slowly, so steering is too slow. I can see one getting in trouble and having difficulty maintaining control (which has happened to me in normal driving) compared to the speed on the 425, which is just about ideal. The difference is almost like driving a 1960 Chevy compared to an XK-E.

There is a lot of very hot air is directed right at the operator's feet. That may be great when snow-blowing in Minneapolis in the winter, but is terrible in Honolulu!

The mower height selector is poorly designed. It operates on only one side of the lift linkage, so the mower tends to droop toward the right when it puts its weight on the height selector stop. On the 425 it operates on the center of the linkage, so the mower does not sag to one side. Also, the selector is labeled with numbers, which one would assume translate to inches of cut height, but that is not the case at all. As such the positions should be labeled ABCD instead of 1,2,3,4. I suspect the steps on the stop may wear with time causing inaccurate height selections. Had there been a similar linked, stop on the right side, it might be okay, but a center one would be better. I like the lock and 'load' positions, though, but I can easily do the same thing on the 425 with much more fine control. I have also found that the setting tends to drop to the next lower level, so when I set it to the 3.5 position I often find it has dropped to the 3.25 position and is scalping my lawn.

Since I had to put the mower inside my Toyota Sienna when I picked up the tractor (it would not fit through the gate of the UHaul trailer I rented with the mower attached), I would have preferred to have the gauge wheels act as casters. My old mower (which was a real pain to install and remove from the 425) allows the wheels to be turned 90 degrees to allow it to roll out from under the tractor. That also makes it easier to roll in and out of a van or pickup truck bed. Maybe a single hole above maximum height setting could be drilled at 90 degrees from the others to allow setting the wheels at 90 degrees for such activities. But the drive over auto-connect features far outweigh any such deficiencies!

The rollover protection system is, in my opinion, more of a hazard than a safety item. I have been driving garden tractors for 45 years, and I have never had an issue with an incipient tipping on my lot with a fairly good slope to part of the lawn. The system actually increases that likelihood, as it is a lot of weight up high, which raises the center of gravity significantly. Also, one must always be concerned about hitting the tail lights, which are on the outside of the rollover protection system and too close to the outside edge of the tractor. I like to mow close to a fence line where the ground slopes slightly toward the fence, and I can't get close enough without hitting the fence with the tail lights! Similarly, there is a palm tree that is just far enough away to fit the 54-inch mower between it and the fence, but I can't mow that area now because I would hit the fence with the tail lights. I can't get close to trees because the tail light or rollover protection system itself will hit the branches. Even a huge monkey pod tree is a hazard because the rollover protection system will hit the huge sloping branches that are no hazard at all without the rollover protection system. I was initially concerned about the turning radius of the 1023 being slightly larger than on my 425, but the turning radius is not the limiting factor when working around trees because the rollover protection system keeps one so far away. It would be a little better if the tail lights were mounted on the inside of the rollover protection system, where one would only need to be concerned about that strong structure hitting branches and such, but I expect that tail lights are some of the first things damaged on these tractors due to their exposure. I did move the tail lights to the inside of the rollover protection system and that is much better. One must spend so much time being sure the rollover protection system is clear of obstacles (such as tree branches, fences, roof overhangs, gutter downspouts, etc.) that attention is diverted away from actually driving the tractor safely. John Deere's answer is to stay about 5 feet away from anything (including tree drip lines) and spend more time weed whacking than mowing. If the rollover protection system were shaped at the top part to more closely conform to the shape of a human (maybe with head padding) and if the tail lights were mounted inside the lower posts, it would be a bit better and would not encourage one to simply remove the entire system as is now the case. John Deere should have made the rollover protection system easily removable, as there are cases when it makes the tractor unusable (think of an orchard). Instead it was designed to be almost impossible to remove because it acts as a spacer for other components at the bottom rear of the tractor frame. I was able to remove the top hinged part fairly easily, but to make it really usable I will have to cut part of the system off, which is permanent.

While I know I will get used to it, I dislike having to start in neutral. The hydrostatic transmission, if one's foot is off the pedals, will hold the tractor sufficiently, and if the operator forgets to put the tractor in gear when starting on a slight slope (like a ramp to a garage) and releases the brake, away goes the tractor. This is not a big issue, and is a matter of experience and familiarity, but the 425 (which has only one speed and no neutral selection for its hydrostatic transmission other than pedal position) is much more straightforward.

It would be easier to get on and off the tractor if the neutral position was all the way up and back rather than between H and L, as that would move the lever out of the way of one's legs and also have the benefit of making it more attractive to shut the tractor down in neutral.

The seat 'safety' switch is also a hazard (more so on the 140 I also have than on the 1023), because if one leans to one side when losing traction to put more weight on the wheel (often necessary on the 140, seldom on the 1023), it often inadvertently causes the engine to die just when one needs maximum control.

The RIO system is another 'nanny tractor' frustration that can in itself be a safety hazard. There should be a defeat switch that can be set at the beginning of a work session to disable it, because having to manipulate that switch every time one wants to work in reverse can cause hazards when working in certain areas.

The manual for the 1023 has many labeling errors and poor descriptions. It took me some time to even find the section on opening the hood, for example, and the description made it sound like one uses a screwdriver as a prying handle rather than a push button actuator. The hood release is a poor design that should be able to be actuated by a finger, and can easily get out of adjustment, allowing the hood to pop open. Surely there is a better, more reliable, and simpler way! Another example is in the control descriptions, one of which has an A and an E swapped on the drawing (or the description).

The 1023 is missing many items and features that the ads and brochures imply are included. Among these are the auto-connect mower feature (which ends up costing about $800 extra by the time it is installed by the dealer), some are apparently included in the 1025 but not the 1023E, also such as cruise control (which my 425 has), tilt steering wheel (which my 425 has), rear power take-off shaft cover (which my 425 has), rockshaft depth stop, seat suspension, arm rests, etc. John Deere should have a comparison list on all their information brochures and web pages that make these differences clear. Maybe they would sell more 1025s.

If I were doing this all over again, I would look much more thoroughly at a Kubota tractor.

ITEM INFORMATION
Model year: 2018 Date Purchased: 10/18/2018 Number of Hours: 20
REVIEWER'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Pros: Auto connect mower, ease of connecting front end loader Cons: 'Nanny tractor' features that could have been much better done Type of User: Homeowner 1-10 Acres Location: United States Hawaii I also considered buying: Kubota B2320, New Holland Workmaster 35
REVIEWER'S PHOTOS
© 2020 TractorByNet.com. TractorByNet is a registered trademark of IMC Digital Universe, Inc. Other trademarks on this page are the property of their respective owners.