Tazewell Visit Suggestions

[Bob999]

Just a comment about power comparisons between the 1845 and 1850 and power generally in a slope mower.

My experience is with the 1845. In my experience it takes all of the power available to run a mower and work on a steep slope--that is it takes the full 45 hp to run the mower and move very SLOWLY up a 30+ degree slope. My expectation would be that the 1850 would behave similarly becuase it has a larger mower, is heavier, and is designed to work on even steeper slopes.

Granted if you are working on level ground or modest slopes and not using the PTO then my 1845 has lots of excess power--it is quick or it will easily spin the wheels if trying to use a bucket.

One other point--I think one of the design issues with slope machines is the moment arm effect when working cross slope on steep slopes. The mower, bucket, or other attachment is well out in front of the machine and the greater load that is out front when working a cross slope the more of a tendency of the load to twist the front of the tractor down the slope. I think the PT design limits lift to limit the amount of moment arm--that if more weight were allowed then the tractor would not be capabale of safely operating on very steep slopes.

 

[ToolcatWonka5610]

Snowridge hit it right, the 1850 is a mower first, and a utility tractor second. But, when I started comparing specs, The lift capabilities were a match for a 35hp tractor (not lift height, which is a bummer). And yes, I personally feel the lift arms could be stronger. and longer.

But I have pushed my tractor hard. and the only weak link has been the rollover. I attribute this to the 65HP pushing, but it could be also attributed to the traction you get with dualies. The arms themselves have had no issue. That may change as I am going to upgrade the rollover this summer, but that is TBD. If I break the arms, there is a great machineshop at the end of the street and I may just upgrade the PT front end..

Terry has warned me against this as he says the 1850 has thinner steel, rear weight than the 1445/1460.

But the 65HP at the wheels, it really does make a difference.

I wish it had greater lift capacity since it is an all around tractor for me. The extra HP is going mainly to the PTO to drive the larger mowers.

Ken

Ken, we would also use this machine for all around uses so thats why the 1200lbs lift is a bit small. I understand it's a Mower first but they couldn't at least increased the Lift to 1500lbs on the 1850. We're also thinking of the 96" Flail Mower instead of the the 90" Rough Cut.

There is nothing weird about it. It is sold as a slope mower, not as an all around machine. It you need an all around machine, it is probably not the best option.

SnowRidge I'm not saying that we don't like the lift capacity I just think for the 65hp machine your getting the lift could be better than 1200lbs. You could probably reinforce the Lift Arms, though.

You wanted a picture of the Power Trac showroom. You got one.

You didn't specify ground level, now did you? Besides, I gave you a bonus. I threw the PT factory in for free.

SnowRidge I swear your turning into MossRoad

 

[ponytug]

I would second Bob's comments about the moment (i.e. Torque) that gets generated by having a heavy weight out in front of the tractor.

After you drive an articulated tractor, I suspect that you will agree that you can get more done/unit time with one. So getting the full load in one lift may be less important than you think. Then again, if it is a full pallet of pavers, that is a different story.

If the 1850 is only a little more expensive, I wouldn't think twice, and I would get it. As others have pointed out, you can always throttle the engine down, but you will have the HP when you need it on steep slopes.

All the best,

Peter

Just a comment about power comparisons between the 1845 and 1850 and power generally in a slope mower.

My experience is with the 1845. In my experience it takes all of the power available to run a mower and work on a steep slope--that is it takes the full 45 hp to run the mower and move very SLOWLY up a 30+ degree slope. My expectation would be that the 1850 would behave similarly becuase it has a larger mower, is heavier, and is designed to work on even steeper slopes.

Granted if you are working on level ground or modest slopes and not using the PTO then my 1845 has lots of excess power--it is quick or it will easily spin the wheels if trying to use a bucket.

One other point--I think one of the design issues with slope machines is the moment arm effect when working cross slope on steep slopes. The mower, bucket, or other attachment is well out in front of the machine and the greater load that is out front when working a cross slope the more of a tendency of the load to twist the front of the tractor down the slope. I think the PT design limits lift to limit the amount of moment arm--that if more weight were allowed then the tractor would not be capabale of safely operating on very steep slopes.

 

[SnowRidge]

I am going to add my two cents to the moment arm discussion. Even though my PT-425 is a toy compared to the big slope mowers, I experience the same tendency to want to crab downhill when mowing across steep slopes. More than once, I got in a difficult situation with the mower wanting to mow down (literally) instead of around an Xmas tree.

When I switched from mowing the plantations with a finish mower to the significantly heavier brush mower, the tendency was amplified. When in an excess of zeal I welded a lot of heavy reinforcement onto the cracked brush mower deck, its tendency to insist on turning downhill increased alarmingly.

A Power Trac can mow across slope at amazing angles perfectly safely (operator wise), even those without the dual wheels, but that ability doesn't extend to steering precision. I ended up straddling a young tree more than once, until I learned that I just couldn't cut as close to the trees on a steep side slope as I could on flat ground or a moderate slope.

These machines are different. You really can't think in terms of conventional tractors when dealing with them. Keep in mind, too, that hydraulic drives and hydraulic PTOs are very inefficient compared to conventional drives and PTOs. That extra horsepower is needed to overcome the inefficiencies inherent in an all hydraulic machine.

 

[MossRoad]

The 65hp Compared to the 55hp in our JD 5310 would be nice

You cannot compare the two machines HP to HP. The JD has 55 PTO HP. The PT has 65 engine HP. To figure out its PTO HP you have to use some hydraulic calculators, plug in the pump PSI, the GPM, etc... to arrive at the PTO HP that you can expect. It will be quite less than you think.

 

[ToolcatWonka5610]

You cannot compare the two machines HP to HP. The JD has 55 PTO HP. The PT has 65 engine HP. To figure out its PTO HP you have to use some hydraulic calculators, plug in the pump PSI, the GPM, etc... to arrive at the PTO HP that you can expect. It will be quite less than you think.

Moss, the 5310 is 55 Engine Horsepower. PTO Horsepower is around 50. I should know, I've used it for a year and a half

 

[MossRoad]

Another that kind of bothers me is that the 1850 is 65hp with basically the Lift Arms of a 30hp tractor (1430). Only 1200lb lift rating on a 65hp tractor? That seems weird to me.

As others have mentioned, the added HP is there to drive you up the slopes and spin the mower at the same time. They did not want to increase the lift capacity, most likely because you could lift a heavy enough load on a slope to tip the tractor over. By keeping the lift lower, they can reduce the tendency of people to overwork their machines (as most of us have done on occasion).

Mowing is the most laborious activity you can put the PT through as you are moving the entire weight of the tractor AND spinning the blades through resistance. You ever use one of those air resistance exercise bikes? The faster you pedal the harder it gets. You need the HP to keep the blades spinning through the grass.

 

[SnowRidge]

And while you are there, ask them to show you one of these ...

 

[ToolcatWonka5610]

I just think it could be a bit better, maybe 1500, 1600lbs. You have to remember this will be our all around tractor. We'll be using for every job it can handle (mowing grass lawns with it is still undecided, though). Since it has a wider Rough Cut Mower and can handle steep slopes, this will be a replacment for our JD 5310 (except for Backhoe work). And I'm pretty sure it's a lot better hill climber than the 5310. Only way we could get up a steep slope is if it had the Loader attached, Trany in 4WD, and the Tires weighted.

 

[ToolcatWonka5610]

And while you are there, ask them to show you one of these ...

Ah, so thats what their mining tractors look like.
Wow thats quiet a machine! 13,000 lbs Max Lift Capacity!!!
I'm going to look that up right now!

 

[SnowRidge]

I just think it could be a bit better, maybe 1500, 1600lbs. You have to remember this will be our all around tractor.

With all due respect, Power Trac isn't building or marketing that machine as an all around tractor. They don't even call it a tractor. Remember, beefier lift arms and stronger hydraulics would raise the price. The higher the price, the less competitive Power Trac is in the slope mower market.

 

[dgl24087]

Moss, the 5310 is 55 Engine Horsepower. PTO Horsepower is around 50. I should know, I've used it for a year and a half

Actually, the JD 5310 is 64 engine HP AND 55 pto hp.

 

[MossRoad]

Moss, the 5310 is 55 Engine Horsepower. PTO Horsepower is around 50. I should know, I've used it for a year and a half

Every 5310 I can find on the internet has a 55HP PTO. Also, the Nebraska tractor test lab report indicates it has 55HP at the PTO. Here's a link to their page. Click on the link for the 5310/5320. It is a PDF file.
TTL test reports/JD Deere

The reason I knew this is because I researched the 5310 back in 2001 when I was tractor shopping. The 5310 was too big for our needs, but one of the best bangs for the buck at the time. It was classified as a farm utility tractor, not a compact tractor that we were looking for. Very nice machine.

You aren't going to get comparable PTO HP out of the PT. My guess is it will be close to 40 PTO HP in the best case. And the JD will be able to out pull the PT, too when it comes to brute force. If you hooked the two tractors together back to back, the JD would pull the pt all over the place. The two machines are for completely different purposes and are hard to compare.

Also, compare the 1845 and the 1850. While the 1850 has 20 more HP, it also has 3" taller tires. That gears it up, which means less power to the tires in pulling situations VS 3" shorter tires if the engines and drive pump are the same.

You need to know these things before you make a purchase. I've read time and again people purchasing a PT then not being happy. Just be sure you know what you are getting in to if you are wanting the PT to take over many of the duties of your 5310.

 

[ToolcatWonka5610]

Whoops! I was thinking of the JD 5300! Ah! I'm getting all mixed up. Your right, 64 Engine Horsepower so you get the idea of how big this machine is. But the engines are on a different size frame, Powering all hydraulics, and running 8 equal size tires instead of 4.

2 reasons why we want the 1850;
1.We need a machine that can do some serious Slope Climbing and Mowing. The 1850 is perfect for that.
2.With the state of the economy job availabity and job size has gone down but is still good. The only things that we use the 5310 for that is actually right up it's alley is Backhoe work. Every other job the 5310 is too big for (size, weight and Loader lift wise). 1200lbs lift will do but I just thought it could be better but it's ok.

 

[woodlandfarms]

There is not such thing as the right tractor in my opinion. You have compromises you must work through with all machines. So make a list of what is important and work back from there.

On the 1850, lift is a big issue to me, and one that is quite frustrating for me. 1200lbs is not much. Especially when you factor in the size / weight of our bucket. I bought heavier duty than what PT had, but Heavier duty means heavier. In my 60" bucket I can get about 2/3rds full of dirt or rock before I am out of lift range.

With a forklift, I think I got something like 15 sheets 1/2" of plywood before I capped out.

I had a pallet of roofing shingles, and I would say it was two wide by two or three deep by 5 high and that was it.

And it is only 6 feet, so when you dump into a pickup truck (over the rail of my 88 F-150) you have to tilt back up before you can drive away, or risk damaging the side bed of the truck.

But, I did some of this alongside a smaller 26 HP Kubota, and while it could lift higher, it had to lift less, and I could do things twice as fast. And when it cam time to unhook implements...

 

[J_J]

Carl,


Do you have three 55 gal plastic drums or something equal. If you have the drums, fill them with water, which has a weight of 8 lb per gal. That gives you 1320 lbs. Now, drain 15 gal from the drums, and that gives 1200 lbs. Put the drums in your bucket before adding water. Now try and lift with engine rpm up high, and joy stick back full. If it does not raise, then your pump is weak, or your cylinders are bypassing some, You would know if the relief valves were relieving. You might check and reset them. If you want to see just how much you can lift, just remove enough gal, and keep tab of water removed. When it starts to lift, then you will have a good estimate of your real lift capacity. I did something similar, and found out that my steering and lift pump was weak, by about 50 %

 

[Bob999]

Carl,


Do you have three 55 gal plastic drums or something equal. If you have the drums, fill them with water, which has a weight of 8 lb per gal. That gives you 1320 lbs. Now, drain 15 gal from the drums, and that gives 1200 lbs. Put the drums in your bucket before adding water. Now try and lift with engine rpm up high, and joy stick back full. If it does not raise, then your pump is weak, or your cylinders are bypassing some, You would know if the relief valves were relieving. You might check and reset them. If you want to see just how much you can lift, just remove enough gal, and keep tab of water removed. When it starts to lift, then you will have a good estimate of your real lift capacity. I did something similar, and found out that my steering and lift pump was weak, by about 50 %

I THINK that the 1200 lb lift capacity is the rating at the quick attach. To put it another way I THINK that the useful load of the bucket is 1200 less the weight of the bucket.

 

[J_J]

Bob,

You will know how much you can lift with the bucket in use at the time.

 

[woodlandfarms]

Don't have the drums at the moment but they are on the list. Good idea, will give it a try...

 

[ToolcatWonka5610]

Thats something we should try after we get our 1850.