NC Mow
New member
Hello TractorByNet guys & gals,
I'm considering 3 approaches to purchasing a new riding lawn mower/garden tractor, and I'd appreciate seeing information from those of you whom have bought the CC XT3 GS, especially with experiences after 1 year of ownership/use. I have seen some hopeful new reviews/posts, but nothing after a few days or weeks. There must be some reason: either the XT3s are wonderful and there's nothing to complain about, or your experience with them just isn't long enough yet. So: Anyone?
Oh: the 3 approaches:
1. Spend nearly $10k to get a new Kubota GR2120 with 3 cyl diesel, driveshaft transmission and driveshaft mower deck. Yeah: who's got $10k to blow on a mower? So while ideally this would be the mega great buy that would probably last the rest of my life, the wife would shoot me.
2. Spend around $3.7k on the CC XT3 GS. However, that doesn't appear to include the mower deck, so even with a local dealer discount, that's bound to run in the $4k neighborhood, with tax. Thinking anything without belts has got to be an improvement on the complex machinery involved with a riding lawn mower (but I do believe it still has belts for the mower deck drive).
On all the online riding lawnmower forums, all I hear are complaints for everything from Craftsman to John Deere to MTD (which is probably the largest manufacturer of non-commercial makes), and of the hundreds, if not thousands of complaints I've read online about the majority of makes, it appears the belts and electrical systems seem to be some of the main culprits, having to do with transmission problems and starting (which of course is a non-belt issue). Therefore, the rationale of spending more to get a new machine with at least a driveshaft transmission, which doesn't solve issues that are sure to come up with the mowing deck, which appears to be belt-driven on the XT3. But better than a bottom of the barrel big box machine.
3. Which brings us to the POS big box choices. If you spend $967 for a Craftsman riding lawnmower and get Sears' 3 year or 5 year continuing maintenance plan (yeah, I know: IF Sears will even be around that much longer), then you will have spent around $1,500+/- for a riding lawn mower that Sears will have maintained for you at your house for about 5 years (assuming it will continue working that long, even with enhanced maintenance). Cost per year: $300+/-. Need to EXPECT maintenance issues with this option. Knowing that this is a POS and that you will have trouble, which is why you double-down with the maintenance plan. I did this about 20 years ago. Beat the heck out of that YardMan (bought at Sears). Had the maintenance guy out to the house about every 3 months. He sharpened blades, replaced batteries, tightened belts and kept it running. Sure, I had to pay for some of the things I abused. Not a big deal. But Sears kept it running. Once again: all-in around $300/year total cost, let's call it $400 including the parts I had to pay for. Okay. Note: I have no idea what the condition of that mower is now. I had the machine and house I was in back then for about 4 years before I sold the whole thing. But that mower did work, with Sears excellent at-home service plan.
Now let's compare with the wonderful Kubota (which the macho in me really wants, who wouldn't?). But you gotta be realistic financially. I don't mow yards for a living, so that really doesn't make a lot of sense. I have about 3 acres of gently sloping NC pristine mountain meadow and partially forested ground cover (full of roots and stumps which are going to take their toll). But let's examine the cost per year, if that machine lasted me 20 years (may last longer, I really don't know): Let's say I got a deal on the mower deck and ended up paying $10,500 including tax. Okay. Now let's add something for yearly routine maintenance and once in a while new parts because I ran over a stump or something = $525/year for the capital investment + another $500/year for dealer maintenance and parts (would probably be more, but let's go with that = $1,025/year over a 20 year machine lifespan. And the same machine, aging each year, until it gives up the ghost in a couple of decades.
Now let's compare with the elcheapo option 3: $400/year. In other words, I could get a new POS riding lawnmower every 5 years (4 over 20 years) and be spending on average, about $400/year+/-. Let's say I'm off. Call it $500/year. Alright. Versus $1,025/year for the pleasure of having that wonderful beast of a Kubota. Does that make sense? When Sears eventually goes under, due to WalMart pressures in the marketplace, I suppose we'd have to reassess that. But right now? I dunno.
So then, there's Option 2. Does that make any better financial sense? I'm not sure. Will that $4k initial investment with the driveshaft tranny mean I'm going to have less financial/time pain with something that stopped being an IH decades ago, and that MTD has altered (cheapened?) over the years? Does that driveshaft for the transmission = overall better reliability with what I am assuming is a belt-driven mower deck? Probably not. And the electrical system? And the engine? But if we're talking about a beefy Kohler, isn't that some insurance against engine issues? And the fact that CC even decided to make the XT3 a driveshaft trans model? Isn't that some sort of engineering commitment to improved reliability? Why else would they have done that? Who else has a driveshaft trans for under $4k? So why would they do that, unless they wanted to make schmucks like me believe it would be a more reliable mower that would last longer and have less trouble. So: here I am. Would any of you kind folks who know a lot more than me about this subject, who have bought and are using the XT3 please chime in and enlighten me? Is the XT3 GS truly a better machine with less maintenance? Or is this some corporate ruse designed to fool us into thinking that, when it really isn't?
I am hoping that CC's engineers simply managed to get the white shirts at their company to allow them to produce a better mousetrap. Really. I'd like to think that improved quality stands for something again, and that by improving the products they make, they will capture greater market share because that's the right way to do it for the long haul. Tell me. Am I fooling myself? Or is the XT3 really a better (more reliable) machine?
Merry Christmas and Happy Mowing.
I'm considering 3 approaches to purchasing a new riding lawn mower/garden tractor, and I'd appreciate seeing information from those of you whom have bought the CC XT3 GS, especially with experiences after 1 year of ownership/use. I have seen some hopeful new reviews/posts, but nothing after a few days or weeks. There must be some reason: either the XT3s are wonderful and there's nothing to complain about, or your experience with them just isn't long enough yet. So: Anyone?
Oh: the 3 approaches:
1. Spend nearly $10k to get a new Kubota GR2120 with 3 cyl diesel, driveshaft transmission and driveshaft mower deck. Yeah: who's got $10k to blow on a mower? So while ideally this would be the mega great buy that would probably last the rest of my life, the wife would shoot me.
2. Spend around $3.7k on the CC XT3 GS. However, that doesn't appear to include the mower deck, so even with a local dealer discount, that's bound to run in the $4k neighborhood, with tax. Thinking anything without belts has got to be an improvement on the complex machinery involved with a riding lawn mower (but I do believe it still has belts for the mower deck drive).
On all the online riding lawnmower forums, all I hear are complaints for everything from Craftsman to John Deere to MTD (which is probably the largest manufacturer of non-commercial makes), and of the hundreds, if not thousands of complaints I've read online about the majority of makes, it appears the belts and electrical systems seem to be some of the main culprits, having to do with transmission problems and starting (which of course is a non-belt issue). Therefore, the rationale of spending more to get a new machine with at least a driveshaft transmission, which doesn't solve issues that are sure to come up with the mowing deck, which appears to be belt-driven on the XT3. But better than a bottom of the barrel big box machine.
3. Which brings us to the POS big box choices. If you spend $967 for a Craftsman riding lawnmower and get Sears' 3 year or 5 year continuing maintenance plan (yeah, I know: IF Sears will even be around that much longer), then you will have spent around $1,500+/- for a riding lawn mower that Sears will have maintained for you at your house for about 5 years (assuming it will continue working that long, even with enhanced maintenance). Cost per year: $300+/-. Need to EXPECT maintenance issues with this option. Knowing that this is a POS and that you will have trouble, which is why you double-down with the maintenance plan. I did this about 20 years ago. Beat the heck out of that YardMan (bought at Sears). Had the maintenance guy out to the house about every 3 months. He sharpened blades, replaced batteries, tightened belts and kept it running. Sure, I had to pay for some of the things I abused. Not a big deal. But Sears kept it running. Once again: all-in around $300/year total cost, let's call it $400 including the parts I had to pay for. Okay. Note: I have no idea what the condition of that mower is now. I had the machine and house I was in back then for about 4 years before I sold the whole thing. But that mower did work, with Sears excellent at-home service plan.
Now let's compare with the wonderful Kubota (which the macho in me really wants, who wouldn't?). But you gotta be realistic financially. I don't mow yards for a living, so that really doesn't make a lot of sense. I have about 3 acres of gently sloping NC pristine mountain meadow and partially forested ground cover (full of roots and stumps which are going to take their toll). But let's examine the cost per year, if that machine lasted me 20 years (may last longer, I really don't know): Let's say I got a deal on the mower deck and ended up paying $10,500 including tax. Okay. Now let's add something for yearly routine maintenance and once in a while new parts because I ran over a stump or something = $525/year for the capital investment + another $500/year for dealer maintenance and parts (would probably be more, but let's go with that = $1,025/year over a 20 year machine lifespan. And the same machine, aging each year, until it gives up the ghost in a couple of decades.
Now let's compare with the elcheapo option 3: $400/year. In other words, I could get a new POS riding lawnmower every 5 years (4 over 20 years) and be spending on average, about $400/year+/-. Let's say I'm off. Call it $500/year. Alright. Versus $1,025/year for the pleasure of having that wonderful beast of a Kubota. Does that make sense? When Sears eventually goes under, due to WalMart pressures in the marketplace, I suppose we'd have to reassess that. But right now? I dunno.
So then, there's Option 2. Does that make any better financial sense? I'm not sure. Will that $4k initial investment with the driveshaft tranny mean I'm going to have less financial/time pain with something that stopped being an IH decades ago, and that MTD has altered (cheapened?) over the years? Does that driveshaft for the transmission = overall better reliability with what I am assuming is a belt-driven mower deck? Probably not. And the electrical system? And the engine? But if we're talking about a beefy Kohler, isn't that some insurance against engine issues? And the fact that CC even decided to make the XT3 a driveshaft trans model? Isn't that some sort of engineering commitment to improved reliability? Why else would they have done that? Who else has a driveshaft trans for under $4k? So why would they do that, unless they wanted to make schmucks like me believe it would be a more reliable mower that would last longer and have less trouble. So: here I am. Would any of you kind folks who know a lot more than me about this subject, who have bought and are using the XT3 please chime in and enlighten me? Is the XT3 GS truly a better machine with less maintenance? Or is this some corporate ruse designed to fool us into thinking that, when it really isn't?
I am hoping that CC's engineers simply managed to get the white shirts at their company to allow them to produce a better mousetrap. Really. I'd like to think that improved quality stands for something again, and that by improving the products they make, they will capture greater market share because that's the right way to do it for the long haul. Tell me. Am I fooling myself? Or is the XT3 really a better (more reliable) machine?
Merry Christmas and Happy Mowing.
