no other company has a CVT in their compacts like NH does. as a mater of fact it is has a patten on it. So nothing will ever be like it. The transmssion on the comacts has been in testing for years. Nh has tractors with 10,000 hours of use and no problems on the CVT. they are much, much more efficient than a gear or hydro trans. you dont loose any power, and have many more options that you can set depending on the job at hand.
CVT newbie..
- Thread starter AKfish
- Start date
- Views: 7330
OP
AKfish
Super Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
- Messages
- 5,419
- Location
- Alaska
- Tractor
- JD 5115M; JD 110 TLB; JD 4720; Ford 9N; JD X300R
Is there some detailed info available that spells out what NH has designed for the Boomer series with the CVT?
Just point --- I'm happy to bust brush for those hard birds!!
Appreciate it.
AKfish
tommu56
Elite Member
The cvt we have at work have sliding plates that hook in the groves in the sides of the disk.
So it is a positive drive as appose to cvt like a snowmobile with the flat plates on the side.
and they are in the 100 200 hp range.
tom
So it is a positive drive as appose to cvt like a snowmobile with the flat plates on the side.
and they are in the 100 200 hp range.
tom
OP
AKfish
Super Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
- Messages
- 5,419
- Location
- Alaska
- Tractor
- JD 5115M; JD 110 TLB; JD 4720; Ford 9N; JD X300R
Thanks for the added info. Everything I've been able to find on the CVT (based on links, etc. here on TBN) it seems to be a simpler, more efficient transmission design than both the gear and HST transmissions.
That said, folk's are referring to the CVT tranny as "costing or adding thousands to the price of the tractor"! Where's the simple in that...??
AKfish
BAGTIC
Silver Member
The CVT used in the NH and all the AGCO brands (MF, etc) is the same design as the one used in the Fendt and made by the same manufacturer.
Unfortunately every brand name creates its ow trademark name for what is essentially the same transmission. Deere claims its IVT is 'different' but apparently it is the electronics part of the system that is different. Mechanically they all work on the same principal.
I suspect that is 10 years ALL top of the line models will be CVT regardless of brand name.
THe DAF system had nothing in common with the new CVT tractor transmissions.
Unfortunately every brand name creates its ow trademark name for what is essentially the same transmission. Deere claims its IVT is 'different' but apparently it is the electronics part of the system that is different. Mechanically they all work on the same principal.
I suspect that is 10 years ALL top of the line models will be CVT regardless of brand name.
THe DAF system had nothing in common with the new CVT tractor transmissions.
Well I did run a new NH3045 around a parking lot. Very exacting speeds. However you do have to flip a left hand lever front and back to switch directions, though no clutch. Suddenly changing directions is not as easy as hydro. I think you need to consider where you will use your CUT most. I see a lot of areas where in CUTs the hydro would be more desirable. Add in the extra expense and I think it will be very individualized. Though not real hard, turning around and looking back and hitting the shuttle arm could be a bit more of a challenge vs just rocking your foot.
The head mechanic did mention that if you cook the CVT the unit itself costs a cool 10,000$. I know hydrostat pumps are around 4K on Kubotas...but that is a lot of money.
Somewhere at another post it was pointed out that the efficiency factor in regards to energy savings isn't very impressive in little tractors but important in the big boys.
The head mechanic did mention that if you cook the CVT the unit itself costs a cool 10,000$. I know hydrostat pumps are around 4K on Kubotas...but that is a lot of money.
Somewhere at another post it was pointed out that the efficiency factor in regards to energy savings isn't very impressive in little tractors but important in the big boys.
Nope. All 3 companies(Deere, CNH, AGCO) build their own transmission. At the ownership level(Deere, Fiat, AGCO) they build their own engine(Deere, Iveco, Sisu), you really think they will pay someone else's margins on the transmission? The Deere and CNH IVT's are probably close in design and identical in concept, but the AGCO is different. At least insofar as the hydraulic system. AGCO uses both a variable displacement pump and motor where as everyone else (to my knowledge) only uses a variable displacement pump. This, along with a control system to take advantage of the hydraulics, boosts the power transmission efficiency. That's on top of the fuel efficiency that all IVT's provide to begin with. How much I don't remember, but you have to realize a couple of percentage points is huge at this point in the industry.
Sidenote: ZF is one of the few third party vendors for IVT's and Funk was picked up by Deere almost a decade ago.
Gary Fowler
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Messages
- 11,917
- Location
- Bismarck Arkansas
- Tractor
- 2009 Kubota RTV 900, 2009 Kubota B26 TLB & 2010 model LS P7010
CVT drives are nothing new. We had a MM combine with belt drive CVT back in the 1970's. It worked just like the diagram by widening one side while closing the other side of a set of pulleys via hydraulic pressure. The combine had a gear transmission with the infinitely variable belt drive. WHile not a total CVT from engine to wheels, it used the same principle but the belt drive was exposed next to the transmission. The transmission was 3 forward and 1 reverse and used the CVT as infinitely variable within each gear while keeping the engine at full throttle all the time, you could go from creep to wide open in any gear with just a push on the hydraulic lever. Never had a minutes trouble with it and belt was still good when we parked up the combine many years later. It took all the torque that a 318 CI V8 engine could deliver and would spin those 23.1" wide tires with ease.
Mcfly89
Member
Alexander Graham Bell patented the telephone too...does that mean that he is the only one who ever built a telephone or a device like it? umm, last I checked, no. To say that nothing will ever be like it because it is patented is foolish and erroneous.
