Gear drive vs hydro

[N80]

With a hydro, you can go.24 mph at PTO speed, as well as .20 or .30 or 3. all at PTO speed and never touch a gear shift lever!

Gotcha. That is very nice. But the more I think about it, the amount of additional precision over a low geared, gear tractor still seems pretty trivial for most common tasks requiring a PTO and negligible for those without. But, technically it is an advantage to be considered along with the others, particularly the aspect of less operator effort.

 

[Reg]

Gotcha. That is very nice. But the more I think about it, the amount of additional precision over a low geared, gear tractor still seems pretty trivial for most common tasks requiring a PTO and negligible for those without. But, technically it is an advantage to be considered along with the others, particularly the aspect of less operator effort.

Yes, it offers a finer speed resolution independent of PTO speed - so what ?
If 8, 12, 16, 24 or 27 don't do it for you then "non finite" probably won't either.
I doubt that there is a significant population of people with enough (whatever) to do the tasks at all - for whom the claimed "benefit" of hydro is worth the money.
Given that approx that amount of $s could be used to move up a whole tractor engine size.
I wouldn't, for example move DOWN an engine size for this arguably marginal benefit.

Sales blurb being what it is, etc.
Features and Benefits - marketing 101, done that.

 

[N80]

Given that approx that amount of $s could be used to move up a whole tractor engine size.
I wouldn't, for example move DOWN an engine size for this arguably marginal benefit.

That was THE primary issue with me. I like manual transmissions. I wanted something simple and that would be easy to work on. But the main thing that led me to a gear drive tractor was the hp/$ issue. Granted, a lot of folks place too much emphasis on HP, but as things turned out, I needed, and still need all the hp my tractor has to give and within my budget, opting for HST would have had a significant impact on available HP.

And now that my model tractor is available in HST, it is even easier to see this in action. The price of an L4400 HST starts getting close to that of an M5040 which is a lot more tractor than the 4400.

 

[john_bud]

Do you guys ride in the bucket while doing this?

Sure! All the time. I use a long shovel handle tied to my leg to press on the HST peddle, steer and adjust the loader bucket while I ride in it thru the trees cutting them with my chainsaw. Doesn't everybody?

jb

 

[N80]

Sure! All the time. I use a long shovel handle tied to my leg to press on the HST peddle, steer and adjust the loader bucket while I ride in it thru the trees cutting them with my chainsaw. Doesn't everybody?

jb

Well that pretty much ends the gear vs hydro argument. If you can work from the bucket WHILE MOVING with and HST, than that's it. Discussion over. HST wins!

 

[Reg]

That was THE primary issue with me. I like manual transmissions. I wanted something simple and that would be easy to work on. But the main thing that led me to a gear drive tractor was the hp/$ issue. Granted, a lot of folks place too much emphasis on HP, but as things turned out, I needed, and still need all the hp my tractor has to give and within my budget, opting for HST would have had a significant impact on available HP.

And now that my model tractor is available in HST, it is even easier to see this in action. The price of an L4400 HST starts getting close to that of an M5040 which is a lot more tractor than the 4400.

Ignoring (for the moment) the sales escalator,,,,
Lets see now; L4400 with HST vs M5040 with gears.
Starting FROM the L4400 with gears that got me in the door (here comes the sales escalator) for $x more I could go to an L4400 HST, the benefit of which is arguable - evidence; TBN "discussions".
OTOH, for $x+y (where y is small) I could go to an M5040 with gears.

SO much MORE TRACTOR !!! (not just HP)

Errr, how much MORE for HST on the M5040 ?
and why wouldn't I go instead to the next {Ummm, never mind}

 

[N80]

Errr, how much MORE for HST on the M5040 ?
and why wouldn't I go instead to the next {Ummm, never mind}

No HST on M5040 as far as I know. But a M6040 (no HST either) is not much more than a 5040.....

 

[deere755]

Thanks for all the replies. I should have been more clear on a few things. I am going to keep the 755 for mowing, tilling, blade work, etc. My son has been using my 755 for wildlife plots as a side business. He planted nearly 20 acres last spring. This included plowing, disking, tilling and planting. All together he probably went over close to 50 acres counting all the tillage he did, some did their own tillage and all he had to do was plant, while others he did it all. First of all we need a bigger tractor for what he is doing if he is going to do this again this spring. I was thinking for the type work he is doing gear drive would work just fine as he just set the cruise on the hydro and set back and drove. He is in pretty wide open spaces. Gear drive is also cheaper which is a plus as I am planning on making him help pay for it. My real question was on that many acres doing heavy tillage would the gear out last a hydro or would they be the same. If they are the same we may buy a hydro if we could get a great deal on one. If gear is the way to go for heavy tillage we will go gear.

 

[texasjohn]

My summary is

hp loss with HST is very small.. if this is a problem, wrong tractor for you
yes, you can run high RPMs for PTO speed yet infinite creep from 0 mph.
Personally, my legs and arms are much less tired using HST all day.
HST is extremely reliable, reported failures near or at zero

For me, HST is most beneficial when lifting 2800 lbs concrete culvert with FEL and seeking to set it precisely within .25 inches on a ground location while avoiding bounces and hydraulic surges. Extreme slow speed and ease of operation allows me to focus on ground conditions, tilt, are the wheels on the ground or is a rollover beginning... and to drop load/correct before it all goes topsy turvy. This is what I mean by precision....

 

[N80]

I don't think its a durability issue necessarily. I'd guess most larger HST tractors are up to the task. But I personally don't think the HP issue is trivial. I'm not talking about lost horsepower between two tractors with the same HP. I'm talking, again, about how much HP you get for the money. And if heavy tillage (which is what he is concerned about) is the issue, then horsepower IS important on multiple levels. First, tillage taxes HP and second, more HP gets you bigger implements to cover more ground in less time. So if money is any issue at all, then you get more HP in a gear tractor for your money.

If money is not an issue then getting the biggest tractor that offers HST would probably be a reasonable choice.

 

[Baby Grand]

This is how I chose:

Divided my tractor's PTO HP into the difference in PTO HP (for my model) between gear & hydro. Multiplied that number by what the tractor cost (less loader, attachments, options, etc) eg: ((26.5-25.0)/26.5) x $18785 = $1063. Viewed this way, that 妬nsignificant lost PTO HP actually costs a lot.

Given that both model's engines put out the same HP, where does that lost 1.5 HP go? It goes into heat, which isn't always a good thing. Where did that 1.5 HP and heat come from? From the fuel tank.

What productivity do you get for that lost 1.5 HP? That's where the ease of use may make the hydro a winner. In my case, it didn't, partly because I opted to get the Kubota GST with shuttle shift. The GST has 12 fwd speeds instead of 8. Neither the gear shift or the fwd/rev shuttle require the clutch to be depressed, so left foot and clutch gets lots less wear and tear. However, this clutch pedal is still there. I use it for starting from a stop, shifting on the fly and when precision positioning is needed. I think Deere has a similar transmission available.

I知 comfortable using a clutch and actually prefer selecting when the gear change occurs. I can anticipate and downshift or upshift before the change of speed is actually required, smoothing operating transitions. All of my cars have been standard shift, so for me it痴 familiar and natural that my tractor should be similar.

Just my spin on the question.

-Jim

 

[jake98]

So, it sounds like you're saying that your shifting is smoother than infinately variable? I think you can compare the hydro to a snowmobile variable belt thing.

I'm curious about the PTO hp, were you guys saying you get less at pto with hydro? I'm gonna have to check that...

Jake

 

[Baby Grand]

So, it sounds like you're saying that your shifting is smoother than infinately variable? I think you can compare the hydro to a snowmobile variable belt thing.

I suspect (having never driven one) that the HST is smoother, but I can "feather" the clutch so the transition is very smooth, too.

As for the comparison between HST & variable belt/CVT, I would think that the fluid drive to mechanical drive analogy is probably pretty close.

 

[jake98]

The infinately variable part is what makes the difference. I didn't like it the first ten minutes that I used one. I think a manual trans with syncro would be more fun to use, but I didn't know they had that when I bought mine. I'm not much on researching when money's burning a hole in my pocket. Looks like I won't have that problem for a while...

Jake

 

[R W]

Would not own a tractor with a hydro drive.

 

[jake98]

My first hydro experience was with my 75 JD 410 Backhoeloader. that has gear trans and a reverser. Clutch for gear and range changes but reverser lever for forward and reverse, no clutch needed. This is a large old backhoe. Still have it and like it. It even has Park. The book says it digs 14 some feet. aint gonna get me doin that...

 

[jake98]

Come to think of it, my V Twin has hydro. It loses a little something going down hill, gains speed. What the heck, V twins are for kids anyway, right?

Jake

 

[N80]

I would like to hear from a dealer regarding repairs. I'm not talking about which type needs more repairs, I'm talking about comparing a common gear transmission failure vs a common HST failure. Which costs more? It might be that HST is cheaper to work on, I have no idea.

But that was part of my decision to get a gear drive. Not so much that it would be cheaper to fix, but that probably any tractor shop could repair it. And even more importantly, that my B-I-L and I could probably fix anything that went wrong on my tractor. He has a complete shop, with overhead hoist and all that. He does not do complete engine rebuilds but does pretty much everything else. He lives right next door to my property so that was a major consideration. And since most of his experience is with older tractors, I don't think he would be willing to or know how to work on an HST at all.

And even if he isn't around, I imagine if my tractor breaks down 10 years from now, any local trctor shop should be equipped to work on it.

 

[jake98]

I just read in some thread that they had 0 failures to report. Reminded me of when my Allison started spitting fluid. I asked the supposedly best trans shop around and they said, "we don't know, we've never seen one break yet.." was kind of like a good and bad feeling all at once. I had the best bad trans you could get...they put them in schoolbuses!!

ps I think it was actually the torque thing made by GM or whoever.. jm

 

[WilliamBos]

Not that I want to add to the extra liability side, (is there a forum here for that?), but with the hydro, you don't have to jump on and off, you can leave the brake on and in low range you can move a few feet without more than one finger on the pedal... or you can drive all over with the brake on if that suits you.
Jake

and what is a wet brake job on a hydro gonna cost???