Asian belt driven 2 wheel tractors vs gear/pto driven european style

[jcraftenworth]

Well I've been trained from the ag industry and also from bcs promotions that "gear drive and pto" is the most efficient and durable. But, after watching many asians working their diesel machines with large flywheels and belt pulleys on youtube, it seems like they get the job done pretty well. it seems like ptos are less popular there, and all the machines and implements are on belt power systems. Did they just get started on that system a long time ago and now they have so many machines and attachments for the machines that they became the standard? Cheaper and easier to stick with that system than to change over to the "more durable" gear drives and ptos?

What's the upsides and downsides to the belts? Loss of efficiency, need to change belts? how much power is lost? but on the upside, seems like as long as they got a belt handy, then the only thing that they've got to worry about is keeping the main engine running and serviced. Plus, diesel kubotas and yanmars are pretty dang durable. They don't have to do transmission oil maintainence, clutches, powersafe clutches, hydrostatic pumps, damaged/bent ptos, or tranny rebuilds. Even though those things aren't common or constant worry for bcs machines and gear driven tractors, I guess it's kinda nice to mainly just maintain the main engine, keep some spare belts on hand, and not worry about too many repairs or issues beyond that. They must be fairly dependable machines, I can tell from watching videos those guys are farming a lot more than my 1/2 acre and bcs

 

[CalG]

Simplicity is it's own justification.!

I would have one of those Asian two wheel tractors if the opportunity presented it's self. But I'm not going to import one just for myself.

 

[farmerboybill]

The biggest advantage of belt drive is shock absorption. If something hard is hit, the belt will stretch and slip, protecting more expensive parts. This is why the chippers and flail mowers have belts in the driveline, protecting the PTO shaft and such. If you look at the side of a combine, you'll see many belts. They're a simple affordable way to transfer power and protect other components..

That said, direct drive with slip clutches is more efficient in transferring power. With a two wheel tractor, you want the most efficient way to transfer power because you always want to have the best balance of weight and maneuverability. I'd rather have an 11 hp engine transferring all its power than a heavier 15 hp engine transferring most of its power. Those Chinese units look awful big and clumsy compared to an Italian machine. They get the job done, but I wonder how pleasant they are to run.

 

[CalG]

The efficiency theme does not ring true for me at all.

When pulling a trailer or other "traction engine" application, weight is much to be desired. I would prefer to have a 15 hp doing 10hp worth of work on most days, and the full 15 hp and it's weight enhanced traction on the heavy pulls.

I don't think we are talking garden tillers here.

google "Two wheel tractors" for examples.

 

[devkrev]

 

[CodeMonkey]

The biggest advantage of belt drive is shock absorption. If something hard is hit, the belt will stretch and slip, protecting more expensive parts. This is why the chippers and flail mowers have belts in the driveline, protecting the PTO shaft and such. If you look at the side of a combine, you'll see many belts. They're a simple affordable way to transfer power and protect other components.. .

When I worked the parts counter, we had a lot of people come in for belts during harvest season.

They do slip, and once they start slipping a lot, there is no amount of tightening that will remedy that, and generally you then have to replace all of the belts at once if they have any amount of real wear. I've even seen pulleys crack from the heat.

Yes, my flail mower has belts, and I can often hear them squeal a little when I engage the PTO.

There are good reasons for both direct drive and belts in different applications.

 

[farmerboybill]

The efficiency theme does not ring true for me at all.

When pulling a trailer or other "traction engine" application, weight is much to be desired. I would prefer to have a 15 hp doing 10hp worth of work on most days, and the full 15 hp and it's weight enhanced traction on the heavy pulls.

I don't think we are talking garden tillers here.

google "Two wheel tractors" for examples.

Do you drive nails with a 3 pound sledge hammer?

It is better to have weight brackets and add weight where and when it is needed, and to take the weight off when it is not. Add weight to the front for heavy rear attachments, add weight to the wheels for heavy pulling, take all weight off for mowing and rototilling. Running a big engine that wastes power through an inefficient power delivery system just makes an unhandy tool that is unpleasant to use.

 

[jcraftenworth]

Do you drive nails with a 3 pound sledge hammer?

It is better to have weight brackets and add weight where and when it is needed, and to take the weight off when it is not. Add weight to the front for heavy rear attachments, add weight to the wheels for heavy pulling, take all weight off for mowing and rototilling. Running a big engine that wastes power through an inefficient power delivery system just makes an unhandy tool that is unpleasant to use.

Could be, I'd have to use one to say how easy or hard they are to operate. I think there is more weight in the engine and frame, but they have long handles for leverage, although the asians tend to be shorter than caucasians. I would think taller and bigger people could handle them even better.

Now on the 4 wheel side, ag operators have opted to drive nails with a sledge hammer, and opted for buying larger and larger tractors to the point where the american makers quit making small utility tractors, ceding the market to kubota, yanmar and other asian makers.