What is the lead time for production?

The average lead time is one month for both peak and off-seasons.

What payment terms are accepted?

We accept LC, T/T, D/P, PayPal, and Western Union.

What is the net weight of the AT110 model?

The net weight of the AT110 model is 244kg.

ATV Lawn Mower with Self 13-15HP Engine (AT110, 120)

Name: ATV Lawn Mower with Self 13-15HP Engine (AT110, 120)
Brand: Changzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd.
SKU: 2015139635

Jiangsu, ChinaChangzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd.

US$800.00-990.00

5 Pieces

Product profile

Customization

Available

Type

Professional Mowers

Moving Way

ATV-Mounted

Model NO.

AT110, 120

Cutter Type

Rotary Lawn Mower

Applicable Area

500-1000m²

Feature

2-Stroke, Steel Chassis, Mulch

Certification

Cutter Kind

Hammer

Mowing Requirements

Ground Type

Usage

Common Lawn

Transport Package

Steel Crates

Specification

CE Standard

Trademark

Kaideli

Origin

Changzhou, China

Production Capacity

100 Sets Per Month

Key features

High-Power Engine: Equipped with a 13-15HP gasoline engine for efficient mowing performance.

Precision Balance: Blade shaft dynamic balance ensures unbalance weight is less than 30g.

CE Certified: Product meets CE safety standards for quality assurance.

Durable Construction: Features a steel chassis and high-quality materials without deduction.

Quality Testing: Every model undergoes strict testing before delivery to the port.

OEM/ODM Support: Customization services available with 4 dedicated R&D engineers.

Fast Response: Commitment to solving any quality problems ASAP within one year.

Company profile

Changzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd.

Jiangsu, China

CertifiedBusiness Type: Manufacturer/Factory & Trading Company CertifiedR&D Capacity: ODM Service Available & OEM Service AvailableExport Year: 2011-12-01 CertifiedNearest Port: Shanghai PortAverage Response Time: ≤4.22h CertifiedTerms of Payment: LC, T/T, D/P, etc.

AI-Powered supplier vetting

SummaryChangzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd. is a China-based limited company established in 2011, with operations in Jiangsu and manufacturing facilities in Changzhou. The supplier reports agricultural machinery and component manufacturing experience, five production lines, a 6,510.57 m² manufacturing plant, 90% export sales, and exports to approximately 30 countries. It claims CE certification for most popular products and describes service responsiveness, but no supplier management-system certification is recorded. Evidence indicates established production and export capability, with four years of R&D engineer experience and 11–20 quality-control staff reported. However, the available information does not sufficiently verify financial strength, customization capability, after-sales execution, or specific customer cases.

Supplier typeThe supplier is legally identified as a limited company and commercially described as both a manufacturing/processing machinery business and a trade company. Its stated products, factory, production lines, and manufacturing history support a combined manufacturing-and-trading profile rather than a purely trading operation.

CertificationsThe supplier states that it has CE certification for most popular products, indicating product-level certification coverage. However, supplier management-system certification is explicitly listed as NIL, so the evidence supports CE certification claims but not certified management systems.

R&D capabilityThe supplier reports four years of R&D engineer experience, more than five technicians, and accumulated design and manufacturing experience in agricultural machinery and components. This supports some technical development capability, but there is no evidence of patents, new-product development records, or dedicated innovation systems.

Production capacityProduction capability is supported by five production lines, a 6,510.57 m² manufacturing plant, reported output of about 300 containers exported to 30 countries, and a one-month stated lead time in both peak and off-peak seasons. The slices also report more than 80 workers in one company description, while another record lists 58 employees; this inconsistency limits confidence in the exact workforce size but does not negate the evidence of operating production capacity.