any downside to hst?

[AutoUnionTypeC]

Time VS money.... I'td be a good bet that an HST equipped tractor will outwork a similar GEAR equipped tractor in typical homeowner use. That is, it will get the jobs done faster, using my time more efficiently. That time can then be spent doing important things, like catching bugs with the kids. The few extra $$ spent on fuel and maintenance are far outweighed by the massive time savings the HST offers me for the tasks I do.

Good point, I've a family too. Just four for me though, Dargo.

Nevertheless I'm of the mind that skill would be able to negate most if not all the time savings. Obviously this comes down to personal preference and I was just throwing mine out into the mix.

Regards, J

 

[Bob_Skurka]

I'm of the mind that skill would be able to negate most if not all the time savings.

Actually I would seriously argue that even the most skilled operator of a shuttle shift equipped tractor will not be as efficient as moderately skilled HST operator when it comes to many tractor tasks. Loader work and mowing on varied terrain with obsticals to mow around are two common tasks that come to mind where HST is clearly superior in efficiency. I realize that there is a level of personal preference and some folks simply prefer the gear tractors while others prefer HST, but from an objective outlook, HST is clearly more time efficient for many of the common tasks that smaller tractors are used for. This would not be true for agricultural tractor uses like plowing, in that case, gear is superior for many reasons.

 

[JerryG]

Bob,
I wish that you lived close enough to me to where you could bring your tractor and work with me for a day.

 

[Redneck_Randy]

I went with the shuttle shift because I feel more in control of the tractor and I don't like running the motor at a constant RPM like you have to with HST's. Sure wished NH offered a DA class Boomer with shuttle shift.

 

[JimR]

Jim ask your neighbor what transmission he has. The 91hp 5525 has a 24 speed PowerReverser and the 95 hp 7720 has an IVT. JD doesn’t offer an HST in anything larger than a compact and never has. A person could believe that either one of these manual transmissions were a HST by the way in which they operate.

Jerry,

His tractor has the IVT transmission in it. He told me it was a HST. I looked at the specs on it. It is a very interesting setup. It even has a park position.

 

[JerryG]

Jim,
It is in no way an HST. Go to the John Deere site or Fendt site and read up on it. The Fendt site actually give a better description or I think that it does.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Jerry,

His tractor has the IVT transmission in it. He told me it was a HST. I looked at the specs on it. It is a very interesting setup. It even has a park position.

I got to drive one at a field demo last summer. They ARE NOT HST. It is a mechanical transmission. They are, as the name implies, infinately variable in their power delivery, but are not hydrostatic. Deere has had several "powershift" transmissions, all being mechanical as opposed to hydrostatic in nature. Their only hydro's are available on compacts and lawn tractors. No big AG tractors.

 

[Woodbeef]

The tranny in that 95 hp Deere is a CVT type of gear box,not HST like Bob stated already. It is actually the ZF-ECOMMII type. IH had a true Hydro in their tractors in the 60s and 70s up to 100 hp or so I think it was. Renault/Claas has a Hydro tractor now in the 80-90 hp range for municipal use.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

My lawn mower is hydro (Deere 265, 1991 vintage) I like it a lot. On my full sized tractors, I still prefer gear drive for one reason. THEY'RE ALL THREE PAID FOR! If I was to buy a new tractor today, I might go hydro. Back when I was buying new equipment, hydro's were still a risky venture. I ALMOST bought an IH Hydro 70 back then. I was still farming, still plowing every spring. They just weren't the hot set-up for that. For general utility work, they're sure convenient. The technology has improved considerably through the years too.

I'm also on that list who don't like the whining from hydros. Maybe I need one WITH A CAB!

 

[dieselsmoke1]

Like many others here I've had both. Put a few hundred hours on hydros and many thousands on gears. I enjoyed gears and if I were still farming would consider nothing but gears of some sort, however now I'm mowing and grading.

No doubt hydros lose about 10% of HP to the drawbar compared to gears, that's pretty well documented. That's not quite the same as saying "it pulls 10% less".

Loader or grading operations for example, for those intermittent moments when you need every ounce of horsepower converted to drawbar, the hydro will require you to do this at a speed 10% slower than a gear driven. However, when the load lightens up, with a skilled operator the hydro is off and gone while the gear driven operates at a constant speed or clutches to shift. "Any" tractor that i would want has enough power to turn the tires if needed.

Evaluate your needs and get whichever fits. There's not a wrong choice.