because your pumping fluid though tiny ports in an HST motor. Lots of restriction and heat.
I see your in MD. We do an open house @ Abbottstown, PA every year where they do service schools that show you how an HST works with torn down equipment.
We do an open house @ Abbottstown, PA every year where they do service schools that show you how an HST works with torn down equipment.
Why do HSTs consume so much power? I would think a geared trans would use more given the gears meshing.
CVT is not HST
Hydrostatic CVTs:
Hydrostatic transmissions use a variable displacement pump and a hydraulic motor. All power is transmitted by hydraulic fluid. These types can generally transmit more torque, but can be sensitive to contamination. Some designs are also very expensive. However, they have the advantage that the hydraulic motor can be mounted directly to the wheel hub, allowing a more flexible suspension system and eliminating efficiency losses from friction in the drive shaft and differential components. This type of transmission is relatively easy to use because all forward and reverse speeds can be accessed using a single lever.
It's a minimal loss so while he argument that gears put more power to the ground is technically true, the practical argument is pointless.
We can go to YouTube and watch the 10-12 hp tractors built years ago pulling single bottom plows...because the all gear drive is that much more efficient.
If you have ever owned a hydro you would know instantly. I had a TC45DA with a hydro. Dig the buccket in the ground or get in soft earth. The hydro will get to a point of stop and whine. My gear drive 55 will grind those big tires til there is no more clearance and do it with little effort. On the hydro I wore ear muffs because of the tranny noise, not the diesel engine. My 4110 Deere sub compact with mower / loader has a hydro and it is convenient. ( Same stopage with the loader ) Same old story... you pay for convenience, one way or another.
If you have ever owned a hydro you would know instantly. I had a TC45DA with a hydro. Dig the buccket in the ground or get in soft earth. The hydro will get to a point of stop and whine. My gear drive 55 will grind those big tires til there is no more clearance and do it with little effort. On the hydro I wore ear muffs because of the tranny noise, not the diesel engine. My 4110 Deere sub compact with mower / loader has a hydro and it is convenient. ( Same stopage with the loader ) Same old story... you pay for convenience, one way or another.
Agent Blue said:If you have ever owned a hydro you would know instantly. I had a TC45DA with a hydro. Dig the buccket in the ground or get in soft earth. The hydro will get to a point of stop and whine. My gear drive 55 will grind those big tires til there is no more clearance and do it with little effort. On the hydro I wore ear muffs because of the tranny noise, not the diesel engine. My 4110 Deere sub compact with mower / loader has a hydro and it is convenient. ( Same stopage with the loader ) Same old story... you pay for convenience, one way or another.
because your pumping fluid though tiny ports in an HST motor. Lots of restriction and heat.
A couple of years ago I was visiting back and forth with a guy online that was making some prototype hydrostatic vehicles for commuters. He'd thought he had stumbled upon the Holy Grail of vehicle transmissions, because the hydrostatic drives were infinitely variable, and as a result they could take advantage of the narrow "power band" of smallish diesel engines.
He matter-of-factly stated that CVTs were the most efficient types of transmissions available. What he failed to notice, were all of the inefficiencies of hydrostatic propulsion. Pumps have a finite amount of efficiency, and they send the fluid on to a hydraulic motor which has all of the same caveats. Additionally, there's the heat to not only contend with, but any heat built in the system is being generated at the expense of efficiency because some of the engine output has to be being used to produce that heat. If someone installs a hydrostatic system because the efficiency of a CVT is what they're after, it makes no sense. Any "efficiency" the CVT would have is offset by adding up all of the inefficiencies the individual components bring to the table.
Long story short, I simply asked him how long vehicles have been around....and how long hydros have been around. And why the oh-so-obvious hydraulically-driven vehicle wasn't already on the showroom floors 50 years ago or so....