Low HP flail mower

[SI2305]

Some additional info,

I have been busy these last few days working in my woods and I have found that more mature trees survived than I had feared. I think some of this is new growth on tall trunks. But that growth has helped supress some of the super-dense vegetation deeper in the woods. It is certainly easier to move through the middle of the woods than the edges. At any rate, thanks to all for your input and I always look forward to any additional insight.

Thanks

SI2305

JD 2305
200CX, LX4, 60" Grader blade, 60" LandPride finish mower that replaced our old lawn mower, middlebuster, home made grass rake for long field grass collection, and now a specialized trailer to move heavy logs

 

[greg_g]

Close, and I don't want to appear as trying to talk you out of a 5 footer. You may have to go that width just to compensate for offset. But consider the Yanmar has a powershift tranny as opposed to your hydrostat. The powershift is basically a gear-type transmission with a hydraulic clutchpack. In the case of your Deere, it's an accepted fact that hydrostats (of any manufacture) sacrifice efficiency for convenience. In my view, that offsets any horsepower advantage the 2305 may be perceived to hold over the 1601D.

Also consider you have what John Deere euphemistically calls a "limited Cat 1" rear lift. You'd best take some measurements to make sure what you buy is actually going to fit AND that the tractor can safely lift it. I say this because I'm pretty sure "limited Cat 1" means you actually have a Cat 0 hitch with Cat 1 pins. The arms may not spread wide enough to attach a Cat 1 implement without striking the tires in turns, and the toplink bracket might be too low. As for the hydraulics, they are rated on paper to lift ~1400#, but that's from a dead drop. The actual 24" lift is rated at less than half of that.

//greg//

 

[IslandTractor]

I'm going to be a little contrarian here. I have a rotary mower and a flail mower, and while their use may overlap some they are no substitutes for each other. The rotary mower is just a lot tougher. If I run over a 2" stick and hit it wrong, it can fly up and jam the flail mower. A rock the size of a softball will get caught in the flail mower and break some flails. High summer grass -- like 3 or 4 feet -- will tend to wrap around the rotor and jam the flail. All of those things the rotary mower will handle without blinking (although I do try to look out for rocks). In heavy brush you have to be able to knock stuff down to mow it, and the rotary mower will generally take as much force in reverse as I can generate without spinning the tires (although I have over-done it a few times). I would never back in hard with the flail, I know it just won't take it.

This time of year, and in the fall, when the greenery is thin and brittle, the flail does well. In high summer I have to go so slow and so high that the flail just isn't worth it. It's faster to do one pass with the rotary mower and knock everything down to six inches or so, and then a second pass with the flail to put a nice finish on.

The original poster mentioned wanting to have a shorter overall length to be more nimble. I find the thing that makes mowing easiest for me is to remove the front end loader. Without something sticking out in front of the steering wheels it's a lot easier to get into tight spaces, and the tractor rides better without the extra weight.

I agree with most of this. I initially went from rotary plus finish mower to a single flail to both maintain pasture and clear brush of various density. The flail did the job without question but I also noticed that it wasn't as efficient or fast as a plain bush hog in thick brush. The reason is not that the flail cannot handle the brush but rather that the flail reduces the brush to fine mulch as it moves whereas the rotary cutter just breaks it up into medium size chunks. After mowing with the flail the ground is truly clean whereas after the bush hog it looks like a battle zone. However, it takes more time and energy to use the flail in thick brush so sometimes it is better to just hit brush with the rotary first and then maintain the area (and further reduce the bush hog droppings) with the flail. Also, while a flail is not delicate, it is not quite as robust or tank like as a decent medium duty rotary cutter so it does require more attention and maintenance when used in brush hogging.

One more point. When you back into thick brush with a flail, the brush is literally in your face as the flail is cutting only about three feet back from your seat. The mowers don't contact the upper branches which splay out and reach into the operator station frequently before the flail makes contact with the stem/trunk and starts to disintegrate the brush. When backing a rotary cutter into thick brush the action is about six feet or more behind you so don't have to maintain the constant vigilance to avoid being poked in the face by sapling branches or bulky bushes.

If I could only have one mower I'd keep just my Caroni TM1900 but I have found the addition of a Woods BrushBull to be complementary for initial brush clearance. The tag team approach has been a win win. Fewer repairs to flail blades and more relaxing and faster and ultimately cleaner brush clearing.

As an aside, if I were in the OP's position I'd stretch and get the 60" flail as the hedgerow mowing will be an very inefficient task using the 48. I would accept that sometimes I'd need to go slower because of the extra width. In theory the extra width and slower travel speed should tend to cancel each other so you'd get about as much area mowed in a given time period.

 

[SI2305]

greg-g

My assumption regarding the tranny is that I just have to slow down to get the flail up to speed. You are right in assuming that part of my thinking is that to get offset I will need extra width. Just curious about your thoughts. My 2305 has much smaller rear tires, theoretically providing better torque than the larger ones of the Yanmar. I have absolutely no numbers to back me up, but it just makes sense. About the hydro tranny--I thought those numbers were PTO numbers, indicating a more accurate availability of usable HP as opposed to engine HP that does not account to transmission losses.

Either way, I suspect that the numbers in the end are very similar and this could act as a useful "test case."

Regarding the "Limited" category, this attribute drove me crazy with my LX-4. Then I got Pats Easy Change and it effectively extended my bottom links by about 3-4 inches. What a HUGE difference those couple puny inches made in my ability to carry, operate almost any machinery. No longer did my LX-4 drag on the ground. No longer did I continue to grade with my grader blade in the upper position. Now my CAT 1 actually acts like a CAT 1 should. I would never have believed it until I actually did it myself.

Thanks for your thoughts, they will be on my mind as I consider this major purchase.

Thanks

SI2305

JD 2305
200CX, LX4, 60" Grader blade, 60" LandPride finish mower that replaced our old lawn mower, middlebuster, home made grass rake for long field grass collection, and now a specialized trailer to move heavy logs
Today 01:16 PM

 

[aczlan]

If I could only have one mower I'd keep just my Caroni TM1900 but I have found the addition of a Woods BrushBull to be complementary for initial brush clearance. The tag team approach has been a win win. Fewer repairs to flail blades and more relaxing and faster and ultimately cleaner brush clearing.

Good point. We are looking at replacing our 5' bushhog with a 6' one. Perhaps I will look for a 6-7' flail instead and keep the 5' bushhog for rough work.

As an aside, if I were in the OP's position I'd stretch and get the 60" flail as the hedgerow mowing will be an very inefficient task using the 48. I would accept that sometimes I'd need to go slower because of the extra width. In theory the extra width and slower travel speed should tend to cancel each other so you'd get about as much area mowed in a given time period.

I agree 100%

Aaron Z

 

[IslandTractor]

Good point. We are looking at replacing our 5' bushhog with a 6' one. Perhaps I will look for a 6-7' flail instead and keep the 5' bushhog for rough work.

Aaron Z

That is exactly what I have. 75" flail and 60" Woods BrushBull 600. Nice combo. I could mount a bigger rotary on my 41hp DK but this one came along used via CL for a price I could not resist. As it's use is only for thick brush having it smaller is actually an advantage for maneuvering and I can operate at a comfortable brush clearing travel speed and keep my RPMs well below PTO speed.

 

[SI2305]

Island Tractor,

Thanks for the contrary opinion. It makes me wonder where a flail fits in with my collection of mowers. At some times, the most useful application is to get those hedges mowed and cleared. I don't really want to get rid of my other mowers, but I want to make certain I am getting this piece of equipment for the right reasons. I understand your comments on the toughness of rotary cutters. Mine can certainly handle a tremendous amount of punishment. This weekend it will see some serious action clearing woods if I can get fallen trees out of the way.

Thanks

SI2305

JD 2305
200CX, LX4, 60" Grader blade, 60" LandPride finish mower that replaced our old lawn mower, middlebuster, home made grass rake for long field grass collection, and now a specialized trailer to move heavy logs
Today 01:16 PM

 

[leonz]

Good point. We are looking at replacing our 5' bushhog with a 6' one. Perhaps I will look for a 6-7' flail instead and keep the 5' bushhog for rough work.


I agree 100%

Aaron Z

Hello Aaron,

I found a couple of John Deere model 370's for sale just now on tractorhouse.

A model year 2000 370 flailmower and a model year 2010 370 flailmower on tractorhouse one is for sale by buck brothers and the other is for sale by Baxla equipment.

The mowers width of cut is 71.5 inches my dads JD25A was a 7 footer.

 

[SI2305]

OK, I am officially jealous now

SI2305

 

[greg_g]

Just curious about your thoughts. My 2305 has much smaller rear tires, theoretically providing better torque than the larger ones of the Yanmar.

Tire size is completely unrelated to PTO output, I'm curious as to how you came up with that association. Anyway. I consider John Deere CUT and SCUT horsepower ratings with a massive grain of salt. There's a significant difference between flywheel horsepower, PTO horsepower, and drawbar power when the latter two go through a hydrostat (as opposed to a conventional gear train). My JD3720 is advertised to have 35 PTO hp, but after owning it for over a year - I feel that's at best a very optimistic number. The tractor I traded for the John Deere had a calculated 39 PTO hp, which on paper is only 4 more than the 3720. But the John Deere struggles - and I don't use the word lightly - struggles with PTO implements (chipper/bush hog/flail/ etc) that the other tractor took in stride. The difference is the hydrostat. Old tractor; geared. John Deere; hydrostat.

So for purposes of this discussion, you too might consider taking John Deere's 2305 PTO horsepower rating with a little salt. Again, I'm only playing devils advocate. It's your money. I'm just tellin' you stuff that I'd consider before spending my own for something down in 2305 territory.

And keying on your PEC comments, I agree they're fine devices. But if you consider the geometry, they lowered the amount you can lift with the rear hitch. I think the 2305 rear lift is rated for a max 681 pounds at the standard 24 inches. But by adding PEC, you've extended that reach by an additional 3 inches. That change in geometry reduces the amount of weight you can effectively lift without compensatory front counterbalance. Short version; it means you have to shop for lighter rear implements.

//greg//