Hydro vs Standard Shift?

normde2001 · Aug 14, 2003

I guess I was thinking about Yanmars "powershift" vs their "geardrive" trans. It doesn't have all these drawbacks you refer to, except for the expense part.

"From: roger_scotty
Date: Tue Feb 26, 2002 10:28 am
Subject: Re: What is a powershift tranny?

A powershift is just a normal gear drive
transmission with an aux. automatic (fluid driven) clutch
pack. It is similar in operation to a shuttle shift
except that it has three forward speeds instead of just
one. It is not kin to an automatic, torque
converter, or hydrostatic type of transmission at all. They
are different and all involve fluid coupling. The
powershift is direct drive."

chrisjbell · Aug 14, 2003

Welcome to the site! Checking here before buying will save you lots of headaches...

If you're a "weekend warrior" type without much tractor experience, get hydro, especially if you'll be getting close to fences or buildings. Geared has advantages for many applications but for most of the work it sounds like you're doing hydro should be fine.

It is far more forgiving - I remember that every time I see the small gouge my FEL left in the garage siding. Even though I've driven tractors for many years I don't do it often enough to be considered "expert" and I'm guessing if I'd have had a gear drive it would be a rather large hole... /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

GAKubotaFan · Aug 14, 2003

Go with the hydo. I love it on my B7800. On the weekends at our deer camp I wish the JD 2020 had it. Once you use it you want to back. Unless I was doing a lot of heavy dragging or pulling, I would go with the hydro. Go to your dealer and ask how many have traded their hydro back in and got a gear drive?

_RaT_ · Aug 14, 2003

1. Durability
Well, thats perhaps is more speculation on your part, my local dealers would argue with you to a considerable degree about the durability issue. The hydrostatics have been found to be very durable. I certainly inquired about this prior to even considering a hydrostatic. Secondly, they really are not more expensive to replace then both the clutch and dual clutch packs on todays shuttle tractors. Two Kubota dealers in my area have not replaced a HST yet so a definitve cost had not been established. He did say that they do not rebuild the unit, they would get a new unit from the factory. His estimate for the new unit was about $2500. Our new hydraulic dual clutch pack in a NH 2120 was $3200 installed. Had we actually damaged the transmission which does happen on some of the JD 4000 series due to the aluminum shift forks, the cost goes up more. That cost can easily exceed $2500 not including installation.

2. Loss of power to the ground

OK, this is true, no doubt. It's small, it may not be of any issue. I should think of more importance would be that in a heavy pulling situation like you would encounter when pulling a set of rippers through the ground hour on end, would be the heat generated by hydros and be a drawback. A manual would be probably be a better choice if this is what you do a considerable amount of.

3. Difficult to get constant speed #'s

As you and I have discussed before, about the only time this would be an issue would be when pulling a seeder or perhaps a sprayer. With my cruise control and digital speed readout, providing I'm not climbing a hill, the speed is dead on, cruise control is so easy to use. The gear will slow down going up a hill as well and will also need compensating. Farming applications may benefit from geared in this application but it's getting to be less of an issue.

4. More expensive to fix.
See durability. This is not necessarily true. Establishing a value here is difficult.

5. More expensive initially

A little bit. On a $20,000 tractor, expect about $1000 more then shuttle shift. The actual cost varies because dealers will work ther price to move more of what they have. In my area, HST is hardly more since it's the dominant transmission in stock.

6. Speed when using the loader

Bring em on baby. Lets see a JD 4410 with power reverser vs my L3830HST. No problem. Both work very well, I just know from experience, I'm faster on my HST.

7. One is not better then the other.

Absolutely, no question. I own both HST and a manual and use a shuttle quite a bit. They all have their benefits.

One thing about HST that is often overlooked by folks who don't use HST is their ability to instantly change speed. A real bonus on rough terrain. Their performance here is superb and for the most part, unmatched by any transmission I have used. They not only slow down immediately as your foot relaxes pressure, but the inherent design of HST brakes the tractor simultaneously as well as getting you to the new slower speed. I cannot tell you what a huge benefit this is when mowing areas less then smooth. On a manual, your choice is to lift off on the accelerator which will decrease speed but not nearly as responsively and in doing so, decreases the PTO speed. Other options include slipping the clutch or clutching and braking.

Rat...

rockyridgefarm · Aug 14, 2003

Yeah, what rat said.

The cruise control is std. with the eHydro, for good reason, Without it things would get pretty choppy mowing a bumpy pasture. I know.

Every bump moves your foot on the pedal, cusing a lurch that moves you foot on the pedal....

_RaT_ · Aug 14, 2003

Rockyridge, that is not the case for me. For me it's second nature to use the hydro pedal on rough surfaces to instantly speed up or slow down as is necessary and no cruise control. It is a seat of the pants feeling you develop overtime. Having operated a hydro now for two years, I have found it incredibly effective in controlling the jarring bounces the tractor throws at you as travel the uneven terrain. I use it this way while mowing at about 3.7 MPH. To tell you the truth, I rarely ever use the cruise control even though its use is so incredibly easy. Even on the roughest terrain, my foot stays rock steady on the pedal. It's analogus to using a Bobcat Skidsteer. Until your familiar with it though, your in for a real experience unlike a HST compact. Rat...

Will_C · Aug 14, 2003

Some excellent points and an interesting thread. I have used all types of tractors, and I agree, use should determine transmission type. I would hate for my BX to not have a hydro tranny. It is used for loader work and finish mowing, with constant back and forth and speed variances. I have done a little farm work in my time, and I could not see where a hydro would be a benefit raking hay, towing silage wagons, discing fields, etc.
I have spend many hours on backhoes with shuttle shifts, and that is just the ticket for that machine. I suspect the reason why hydros have all but taken over the CUT market has as much to do with what the majority of us do with our tractors, as operator ability. My brother drives a GMC dumptruck everyday, and handles the 10 speed non-synchronized transmission just fine. His B2400 has a hydro, though /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Will

Bird · Aug 14, 2003

I have bounced enough for my foot to bounce on the pedal, but very, very rarely. I always had my heel on the floor and toe on the pedal, so it took something pretty drastic to make my foot bounce on the pedal. And I agree with you, the HST was great for everything I did with my own compact tractor, whether mowing, tilling, box blading, or FEL work. Of course for hay cutting and baling, I was using bigger geared tractors and that was fine, but even for that I would have preferred HST. For raking the hay we were also using bigger tractors, but one day when a tractor broke down, my B7100 pulled a hay rake all day long, in fact, it started out full of fuel and ran out once (no fuel gauge and my friend and neighbor was driving it because I was on the biggest tractor with the baler), but it didn't take me 10 minutes to refuel, bleed the injectors, and get it going again.

slowrev · Aug 14, 2003

Maybe the cost is in the Kubota thing. I have a friend that had his IH444 ( 40 HP 3900 LBS) dual stage clutch repaired ( all new/rebuilt parts for Under $1,000 at an IH dealer. This included labor. If We take the clutch pack in it is $500.00-$700.00. We would have had to split the tractor and remove/install the clutch ourselves.

gordon · Aug 14, 2003

Yea what rat said! HST is the winner hands down. Only place that a gear tractor would win out is in crop farming.

But for the average cut owner the hst is the ticket.

But I did get a good laugh about the gear tractor out preforming an hst doing loader work.

Something that hasn't been mentioned or I overlooked is safety. Take your foot off the pedal and instant stop. So if you do have a brain freeze, lift your foot. That simple.

Gordon

Typhoon · Aug 14, 2003

I have experience with both hst and gear. To me, the difference is IMMENSE! hst is the winner hands down in my book, for ALL applications, esp if you have a front end loader.. Too many reasons to list. Just my opinion. Make sure and drive both! Good luck!
-Brad

MossRoad · Aug 14, 2003

One thing no one mentioned is that the Hydro is a fuel demon in comparison. 

I'd like to try to explain why hydros generally use more fuel that gear tractors. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

The reason HYDROs use more fuel than gears (in general) is because(one reason, at least) the engine has to run at a higher RPM to deliver full power to the hydraulic pump(s). The hydraulics run better with the high engine RPMs. They are very snappy and have lots of power. If you slow down the engine RPMs, the hydraulics become sluggish. There are some exceptions to this. There is a certain TBN member that has a 56HP Kubota turbo deisel in his Hydro EF-500 that is averaging 0.536 GPH fuel usage /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif That's incredible, even for a gear tractor, let alone a hydro. My guess is that as the years go by, more of the big 3 manufacturers will embrace this technology in CUTS so that the fuel usage will become a non-issue.

Let's say I put a hundred hours on my HST tractor this year. I only use about 1 gallon per hour. Now let's say I have the same tractor with GEARs and I only use 0.5 GPH in fuel(this is a completely hypothetical example, so don't quote the numbers). Now let's say fuel costs $1.50 per gallon. So I spend $150.00 per year on fuel for my HST and I spend $75.00 for my GEAR tractor. The $75.00 more that I spent on the HST spread out over the course of the year more than pays for itself in many ways that I don't want to go into; let's just say I like my HST and would not give it up to save $75.00 per year in fuel.

So, while higher fuel usage could mean big $$ to someone that puts lots of hours on a tractor each year, it may not be that important to the CUT owner that only puts a hundred or two hours on a CUT each year. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Inspector507 · Aug 14, 2003

rtimgray,
My TC18 Hydro has cruise, so I'm sure a lot of the other NH units do too. The "rocking" pedal is not too hard to get used to. The NH pedal is just right for my foot. What was hard for me, was learning to NOT push in the clutch. Don't need it /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Jerry

MossRoad · Aug 14, 2003

Welcome to TBN! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Just my opinion, but I really like HST over gears for my needs, which are FEL work, mowing, snow removal and occasional brush hogging, to name a few. If we cannot make up your mind, try renting a machine with GEAR and doing some tasks for a day. Then repeat the same tasks with a rented HST machine. This may help make up your mind one way or the other. It is important to compare apples to apples, so be sure to do the same tasks with each type, if possible.

Good luck in your tractor search.

DKinWA · Aug 14, 2003

I've run both, but bought a TC40 gear with the shuttle shift because I prefer it over the hydro. I use my tractor a lot to load my dump truck and to fill the box completely, I have to run the bucket all the way up to maximum height. To do this, I usually set the idle around 1500-1800 rpm and feather the throttle and clutch to speed up the lift and dump cycle. Usually what happens is that I pick up a load from the pile and get to the truck before the bucket is high enough to clear the side boards. When this happens I just push the clutch in a bit and coast while pushing down on the throttle to speed the lift cycle. By then it's a matter of letting off the throttle and clutch to pull all the way up to the truck and dump the bucket.

Now after having said this I don't know for sure that you can't do the same thing with a hydro, but the one I've used you couldn't. I'll also say that it's quite obvious that either one would work quite well for your needs. I'd just pick the one that you're most comfortable with and let the fun begin /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

MossRoad · Aug 14, 2003

I've run both, but bought a TC40 gear with the shuttle shift because I prefer it over the hydro. I use my tractor a lot to load my dump truck and to fill the box completely, I have to run the bucket all the way up to maximum height. To do this, I usually set the idle around 1500-1800 rpm and feather the throttle and clutch to speed up the lift and dump cycle. Usually what happens is that I pick up a load from the pile and get to the truck before the bucket is high enough to clear the side boards. When this happens I just push the clutch in a bit and coast while pushing down on the throttle to speed the lift cycle. By then it's a matter of letting off the throttle and clutch to pull all the way up to the truck and dump the bucket.

Now after having said this I don't know for sure that you can't do the same thing with a hydro, but the one I've used you couldn't. 

In my operator's manual for my IH2500B(50PTO HP HST with FEL) it specifically says to run the thing at almost high throttle settings all the time to obtain maximum control of the hydraulics and drivetrain at all times. This is an important item to point out. Most HST tractors need to be run at high throttle all of the time. This provides pressure to the driveline and hydraulics and also provides proper lubrication.

Anybody our there care to share what the operator's manuals for other brands of tractors with HST say about engine speed? Thanks in advance.

_RaT_ · Aug 14, 2003

Good comments Dave. I use a Kubota L4850 for occasional loader use. The shuttle it has is a fantastic transmission. For my HST tractor, I usually find myself using about 1800 to 2000 RPM on the engine and medium range. At this speed, the hydraulics are snappy, the speed is good and the torque is at about max. The same pretty much applies to the L4850. You are correct though, while up against the dump truck, it is a simple thing to depress the clutch and run up the throttle to speed up the loader lift and dump. However, I typically already have the load up and ready to dump with the tractor providing the ground is not sloped. The one advantage I find with loading the truck with HST is the ease of feathering right to the truck without slipping the clutch and the ability to back out in medium which is about 7 mph at full throttle. With the L4850, I must shift to 4th to get to a speed that is somewhat less then that and then reshift to 2nd or 3rd when loading. All in all, they both work quite well for loader use. Sometimes I think were picking the fly poop out of the pepper when comparing these two transmissions. Rat... /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

CountryBoy · Aug 14, 2003

( I suspect the hydro has grown so much in the cut market due to first time buyers. )
I have been operating tractors since about 1966,the old Farmalls,Allis Chalmers with the hand operated clutch,the Ford 8N/Olivers and even my old Mitsubishi Beaver III. I have run corn pickers balers on these WVa hills.I bought a John Deere 4400 hydro and after owning this hydro for 3 years I would not settle for anything but a hydro,infinite speed control and wonderful in a tight place.I mow on hillsides and it is great not to have to reach for the gear shift and not have to be pushing the clutch etc.
Just my humble opinion.

chrisjbell · Aug 14, 2003

One thing no one mentioned is that the Hydro is a fuel demon in comparison. 

OK, so we've gone into the TBN version of the "Chevy vs. Ford" discussion (or "holy war" if you'll excuse the expression /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif).

But with a CUT we're talking about a machine with a tank that'll run for many hours under load and burn only a few gallons of fuel. These things don't have 40 gallon fuel tanks like the big machines - fuel is probably one of the least expensive operating costs to consider.

So yeah, there are issues about initial cost, power transfer, repair costs, but those turn out to be mostly moot for what most of us use the tractors for (shuttle shift, which can make a machine work much like HST is also an additional cost up front, plus more expensive to fix than straight gear). It really comes down to individual usage patterns.

Best advice I've heard is to rent machines with the types of gearing you're considering (and if you can rent the actual model you're looking at, even better). Then decide. Rental on a tractor is a couple hundred bucks a day, give or take depending on where you are, and is well worth the effort to ensure you wind up with your dream machine.