Hydro vs Power Reverser

[Red Horse]

Hey guys-looking for an opinion. After freezing my butt off plowing in the last two storms, I'm thinking at my age maybe I should spring for a Curtiss Cab for my 3320. Then again, if the right opportunity presented itself, should I spring for a cab tractor?

Having said that would I get another hydro or go for a power reverser? I've had a 755 and the 3320 hydro and they have been trouble free. But I hate the slow loader hydraulics-at least with P'Reverser you could throw it in neutral, hit the throttle and improve your loader cycle time.

Sure would be nice if Deere could engineer a driveline disconnect on a Hydro like on a big machine so you could speed up loader operation but I guess that is wishful thinking.

Any opinions?

 

[kennyd]

I guess I don't understand-the throttle is independent of the hydro controls...you can be sitting still and have the throttle all that way up.

 

[kjung17]

I am a big fan of the reverser tranny. I guess I don't understand the slow hydraulic statement. Set the hand throttle to desired operating rpm for hydraulic function. Select range for appropriate ground speed. Do the rest with the hydro.

 

[Red Horse]

Guys- 10-4 on running the tractor at higher RPM to get the desired loader response and using less hydro-pedal. That to me though is not a good alternative. If you are used to running TLB's or loaders etc, you have a drive line disconnect button so your loader speed is independent-that's what I'm talking about. Now I understand there is a new hydro option that has a foot throttle and a forward /reverse lever on the instrument panel-like a power reverser-but guess what?? They put the brake pedal on the right side and no individual brakes!!! Not something I would ever want.

 

[jenkinsph]

Red Horse,
I am familar with this joystick switch to disconnect the drive train but it isn't needed on a hydro tractor anymore. Raising the rpm's on the hydro tractor is likely better for the engine anyway. This doesn't seem to increase fuel consumption much either. I might add no worries about letting your finger off the button and running into a dump truck either. I did that about twenty years ago. It was my dump truck too.

 

[jeffinsgf]

I think you may be running your machine improperly. If you read the manual, I'm almost sure it says to operate at full throttle, or nearly full throttle all the time. This will give you the hydraulic performance you want. Control ground speed with the hydro pedals.

I have a PowerReverser. There are times when I prefer it to a hydro, but they're few and far between and they most certainly do not include hard core loader work. I got a deal on a new machine that had been on the floor too long to suit the dealer. If not for that deal, I would have gone hydro. Five years later I sit back and look at the $1000 I saved and wonder if it has been worth it. I would like a hydro better, but not enough to trade.

 

[jcmseven]

The 3000 series have independent implement pumps. The cycle speed on the loader would be independent of the tranny type so going away from hydro in the same tractor would not get faster cycling. As for the tranny itself to each his own but here in the mountains, almost no one goes prt over hydro. The auto hst of which you speak was a rare John Deere flopand I hear not continued.

John

 

[Leroy454]

If you want to get a John Deere factory cab tractor in the 3020 or 4020 series, the E-Hydro is the only option available. Having used a 4720 cab tractor for loader work, I really like the hydro. It makes loader use so fast.

 

[Red Horse]

The 3000 series have independent implement pumps. The cycle speed on the loader would be independent of the tranny type so going away from hydro in the same tractor would not get faster cycling. As for the tranny itself to each his own but here in the mountains, almost no one goes prt over hydro. The auto hst of which you speak was a rare John Deere flopand I hear not continued.

John

John, Not quite sure I understand your point. I do believe the PS and implement pumps are on the same drive and they are engine speed related in terms of output- for example my loader (300CX) has a lift cycle time of about4+ seconds at 2000 RPM and about 7 seconds at 1000 RPM.

And as for other suggestions (Jeff's) that I could get the results I want by running the engine at high RPM and regulate ground speed by running in A range or with just less hydro pedal pressure, for sure I could. However, IMO, high RPM's equate to wear-piston travel or however you want to describe it. And there is no need for it. Ive got a 500 lb weight block, ballasted tires and the thing loads just fine at say 1600 or so. Again, in my opinion, some sort of driveline disconnect with the ability to override the hand throttle would be a nice feature.


I do think a power reverser would give me that option but I thank you all for your comments- and Leroy, as you point out, its a moot point because if I did go for a cab tractor, hydro is the only option.

thx

 

[jcmseven]

I may be the one who does not understand the question well. I cannot see why just not setting the throttle a few hundred RPM higher would not solve the problem. I understand the reservation about running the engine faster than needed for other things to get the loader speed you would want but my thoughts on this are:

1. One does not use the loader all the time and adjusting the throttle up for certain uses seems pretty easy to do.
2. These engines run well and are meant to run fairly high RPM's. My experience with the 3 cylinder Yanmar is that the economy is actually a bit better at near max throttle than when running slower throttle and I seriously doubt it would significantly hurt the longevity to run it a bit faster
3. Even with the RPM trade off, the E hydro, in my opinion, has revolutionized the JD compact tractor and in my area it is quite rare to see one without it. My friend and neighbor has had both a 4410 and now a 4320 with ehydro and he retired the first to get the second with over 5000 hours on it. His new machine has over 2000 hours on it, I think, and he has run them both at near FT when doing loader work. I would say 5000 hours is pretty good service both from the tranny and the engine and about all he does with his is loader work.

John M