Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro's and con's

[Soundguy]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

<font color="blue"> Our 20 year old MF 1030 Hydro only has 2,100 super heavy duty hard work hours ......Should I be worried if it will be working in the year 2050 as well as it is now
</font>

1985? That's still a newish tractor. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif Tack 40 years on that and compair it to my 2n /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

20 years.. 2xxx hours. Report back when your hours are up around good diesel 'well worked' 4000 to 6000 hours, and 35+ years... I reserve judgement till then.

And yes.. I hope/expect my tractor to outlive my automobile by a great deal.. perhaps even a multiple...

Soundguy

 

[SkyPup]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

You'd like my 1966 BMW 2000CS with the high performance four banger, the 40mm Weber dual sidedrafts, the Bosch points and condenser and the four speed Autobahn transmission, it only has 48,000 ultra high speed kilometers on it when I imported it from Austria in '72.

I'll get back with you on the MF hydro around 2040 or so and let you know how well it's doing! /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[thcri]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

[quote
I like gears /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif )</font>


If you like gears them buy them. Don't let anyone tell you what to buy. I bought Hydro because that is what I like and even if I did have to spend some more money on it that is fine. I like hydr. Some people out there like gears and that is fine. Do what you like, it's your butt on that tractor and your leg that will be lifting to run the clutch.

murph

 

[Varmintmist]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

I went gear with SS for a couple reasons, $ and $ were two of the biggest /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I never ran a HST tractor though I have operated a lot of hydro equipment. I think that either will cover most of the jobs we do with them so it is more $ and will it do the job.

For me, going HST within my budget would have dropped my HP down to the level of the tractor I was trading because it was to small. That wasnt going to work.

With the 12x12 shuttle and full sync trans on the 3510 I can vary the gear while moving, within the selected range, and that gives me a lot of control without changing rpm.

It might take me 1-3 full seconds to pull into a pile with loader work, IF the pile is compacted and I have to range down. If I dont, I dont stop so I dont know how HST would be faster. Now, my hands are busy on the range selector, reverser, and gear shift, but I used to run grader, and this is only 3 sticks, peice of cake /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Lets say for arguments sake that the HST is faster. I can argue that since I was able to spend more on HP and ability, I am still able to produce more work with a gear machine.

I have a buddy that loves HST and says he will never go back. He went to a NH 24 HP Boomer cupholder tractor FROM a JD A. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif There is a bit of difference in the newer gear transmissions than in the real old ones. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[Cactus]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

Just my experience so far.
I have 1400 hard hours on my JD 4400...I have timbered lots of logs ,close to 100,000 board feet on these steep WVa hills. I have been through 2 sets of R-1 tires in the last 2 years ( all 4 tires loaded) from spinning on the rocks/frozen ground and the mud. I have pulled logs that the only way I could get them moving is to back up and go forward fast and hard and yank the chain 2 or 3 times to get the log to break free and I have pulled hard enough to make the tractor try to stand on its back wheels ( finally I bought a Farmi Winch /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif). I never popped a relief or had any types of problems as of yet. How long the hydro will last I do not know...but I have not had any type of problem with it as of today or any indication of a problem. If it failed tommorow I would not hesitate to rebuild it and test it again.

 

[dknarnd]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

First thing I would like to say is I am very familiar with the search (and spell check) functions of forums since I spend lots of time on different ones. I did a search and found allot of discussion on this topic but thought I would ask again just because it always brings up new and different opinions and reasons why people like what they like.

One thing I don't understand about the HST is why it is not suited for draw bar operations? Why is it not good for actual soil preparation work with a plow and discs? I understand that heat build up is bad, do HST machines have a transmission temperature gauge on them?

Cactus...good post, I was wondering how it would work doing some good old fashion yanking on a chain. Pulling felled trees is one of the tasks I do.

The most continuos work I use a tractor for is rotary cutting about 25 acres of rough hillside. Currently using a 5' cutter and want to move up to a 6' cutter so I want to have a minimum of 35 PTO HP. Other than that I will be doing some small acreage food plots so I need something that will be able to break up hard stone filled soil that hasn't been farmed in 40 years, that is why I ask about pulling a small plow. I am not opposed to HST because I know how useful they are on lawn tractors but to maximize my $ for the HP I may stick with a standard.

On the other hand since I am managing with a 5' cutter now maybe if I stay with a smaller (and less $) HST machine with the 5' cutter I am hearing that my cutting time may be faster although I doubt that because there are no obstacles to manuver around.

 

[DKinWA]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

I used to prefer gears, but now it really doesn't matter to me as long as it's comfortable to drive and operate. If I was to replace my gear machine tomorrow, I'd look at both gear and hydro and would pick the one I'm most comfortable on. To me, there aren't enough differences to make one stand out over the other anymore.

 

[Richard]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

Yeah everybody...but WHOSE hydro is better?

(ok I'm ducking now that I fueled the fire)

heh heh heh

/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[JerryG]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

<font color="blue"> Get the one that fits YOUR JOBS the best. </font>
Bob, I think that was what I was meaning. As in YOU or YOURS.

 

[dknarnd]

Re: Hydrostatic vs. Manual pro\'s and con\'s

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Yeah everybody...but WHOSE hydro is better?

(ok I'm ducking now that I fueled the fire)

heh heh heh

/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif )</font>

Actually I was going to go there next /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif Are there differences between manufactures? A cruise control option has to be standard, I can't stand having my feet on pedals for any length of time.