Buying a first Tractor; HST or not?

[cowboydoc]

Rat,
You obviously don't know about farming to even ask that question. I'm pretty much out of patience with this thread as I'm sure you are yourself. Suffice it to say that with spraying crops you have to have it exactly right. If you don't you will stunt your crops at best and kill them at worst. Not to mention that when I spray Banville it's $125/gallon so suffice it to see I'm not really looking to waste any of it. I setup my tractor for the exact groundspeed to match the per acre application. It is absolutely a necessity. When planting as well no you can't even be off one little bit at all. In contrast to your tractor my tractor have an exact ratio for each gear related to ground speed and rpm's. You also most certainly maintain the same ground speed planting with regard to throttle and gear control as well. Why do you think all of the new technology with GPS farming and the computers in tractors to track exactly what depth you sow at, EXACTLY the width between seed plantings, exactly what depth you work the ground at, exactly what amout of spray you put on, etc. Farming is extremely precise.

Seth you most certainly do control ground speed with a gear tractor, precisely.

 

[EdKing]

<font color=blue>Thanks for the education, but a sportscar is not a tool. It is like an antique or a painting worth what you are willing to pay for it. </font color=blue>

I guess we should go out and get Yugos with automatic transmissions, they get you from point A to Point B without all the unnessary frills./w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

 

[cowboydoc]

Seth,

I'll tell you where an automatic is more money and is a piece of junk and that is in a diesel pickup. Just ask anyone that drives one and they will tell you the same thing. A manual will outlast the automatic by a 3 to 1 ratio. But I suppose that doesn't count either because it doesn't fit your mold either.

 

[Ozarker]

I've stayed out of this because I don't have a lot of experience with tractors and didn't even consider transmissions when I was looking. But I do have experience with diesel pickups. I put about 250,000 miles on a 82 Chevy 4X4 with a 6.2 Diesel and a overdirve automatic transmission. I don't have it anymore because my kid ran it out of oil and spun a bearing. I didn't want to spent 4 grand on a new engine.

The military has a few hundred thousand Chevy Diesels in PU's, Blazers and ambulances. All with automatics. And the Hummer is a GM 6.5 diesel with an automatic transmission.

Junk??? Don't say that to Swartzenegger.

 

[cowboydoc]

Let me clarify. Put a real diesel engine in front of an automatic. The 6.2 litre engine is nothing more than a converted gas motor that makes less than 200 hp and less than 300 lbs. of torque. Don't ever tow with one and don't ever do any work with these new ones and you probably won't have any problems. Alot of guys that do get the automatics are spending between 2 and 4k on brand new trucks to get their auto transmissions beefed up and coolers, gauges, etc. added so they aren't left stranded somewhere. There was a reason Chevy never sold any diesels before the Duramax was brought about. It was a gutless wonder that produced no power and no torque, relatively speaking to the new ones. Chevy, Dodge, and Ford all now make over 275hp stock and around 500 ft. lbs. of torque. Stroll on over to the Chevy diesel, Ford diesel, or Dodge diesel boards and just see how well those boys like their automatic transmission. Sorry this is one place where it's not my opinion but fact. Most people that drive a diesel will tell you that the automatics are not going to hold up like the manuals do. The 3:1 ratio is straight from the big 3 automakers with regards to service to manual and automatic transmissions in any of them. Allison is just having a fit because their transmissions are not performing anywhere close to where they thought they would. They are completely tearing down and inspecting any transmission that comes in right now to find out what the problems are. Ford has just developed a new 5 speed auto as well to try and keep one behind these monster diesel engines. This information and all the more you care to read about it is available at any of the sites like this one for the big 3.

 

[Ozarker]

"Let me clarify. Put a real diesel engine in front of an automatic. "

You mean likr the AM General tractor that the military has been using to haul tanks all around the world for 20 years? Or do you mean the automatic tank itself? Maybe you mean the RT loaders and forklifts that have been in use for over 30 years. How about the automatic road graders or maybe the 20 ton cranes. All the Cat doziers seem to do well with automatics. I guess maybe they don't really do any "real" work.

And it was the 350/5.7L Oldsmobile that was the diesle conversion that flopped. The 6.2L (6.5L now) introduced in the PU's in 1982 (cars in 1983) was a real diesel engine and I never had any problem towing a car hauler or anything else wherever I wanted to. And yes, it had a problem with the 4 speed automatic. Couldn't keep a front seal in the pump. But that was a problem with that transmission accross the board and the fix was a steel retailer to hold the seal in place. It was applied by GM in 1985 I think.

If you don't like automatics so be it. But you're blowing smoke now and about to back yourself into a corner. Real construction equipment, with real diesel engines, has been using hydraulic transmissions for 30 over years.

 

[cowboydoc]

Blowing smoke hardly. The 6.2 litre diesel engine was most certainly a converted gas engine. If the 6.5 litre was such a great engine how come ford and dodge outsold chevy by about a 15:1 ratio?

Now are we talking about car automatics or are we talking about truck, tank, etc. Let's stick to the facts. I said a pickup automatic not a tank automatic. Believe me for my truck I'd love to have an automatic if the things would hold up and not hunt gears all the time but they don't. But I guess all the other guys on these truck forums are just blowing smoke as well. And the fact that the Army is using the 6.5 litre boy that sure is a bell ringer that it must be something special!!! Get real the Army goes with the lowest bid period. Why don't you pull the Army service records and see how well that engine has performed. Not very well and they are severely underpowered in most of the applications that they are in. Oh and by the way no the Army doesn't use the same transmission either that is put into the regular line of pickups like you had. The hummer has an Allison automatic. Let's see what would I rather in the hummer if I had it a 300 hp powerstorke, cummins, or duramax with 525 plus torque or an anemic 210 hp 300 lb. torque 6.5? The engine was a joke and still is. If it wasn't Chevy sure as heck wouldn't have spent millions developing the Duramax.

Now I'm blowing smoke but let's see how many of the guys out there that actually have to pay for their own trucks are running the 6.5 litre? You won't see the 6.5 litre application in one single commercial outfit or truck besides a Chevy. All and I do mean all of them either run the Ford powerstroke, a cummins, or a cat motor. There is not one, no not even one commercial application for the 6.5 litre motor outside of Chevy. Heck even Chevy doesn't use the 6.5 litre in their real trucks they use a Cat or a Cummins. Wonder why that is?

I'm not blowing smoke. The 6.2 litre is a converted gas motor period. The 6.5 litre was a designed diesel motor but it's performance and reliablility is pitiful. Ask smoe of the guys that own them how many times they've had to replace the fuel pump and why so many trucks pass them going up hills. That's the truth and no opinions there at all. The fuel pump in those was so pathetic that Chevy issued a recall on them and then gave people like a 125,000 mile warranty. Why was that because Chevy was such a good company. NO it was because there was a class action suit against Chevy and they were forced to do it!!

Now with regard to real equipment and real hydraulic applications that's a totally different story and I won't say one word about them being bad. I haven't even EVER said one word about an hst being a bad choice or even a bad transmission just that a gear TRACTOR is not a bad choice and has many great applications. My skidsteer is all hydraulic and there's no reason to have it any other way. I wouldn't even argue for a manual in it. If it weren't for the fact that the Chevy transmission keeps falling apart behind the Duramax I would have bought it when it came out. It's a great design. Automatic downshifts, speed control on hills, five speed, etc. but they keep falling apart. If Ford's new one that is supposed to be the next greatest one comes through as they say it will perform I'll buy a brand new one of those or if Chevy gets theirs fixed I may trade for one of those. The cab of a Chevy beats all the others hands down.

Lastly this conversation wasn't about construction equipement in general it was about tractors. For most of the applications you mentioned the hydro is just fine and no reason to even or has there ever even been a gear availability in them. You guys keep twisting these posts around into something that was never said.

 

[SethO]

Richard,

Let's forget about transmission, how abour using 'BAR" to do some plowing.

You have a nice setup there.

Seth

 

[bgott]

The 6.2 is not a converted gas engine. They didn't put the 6.2 in cars, either. The 6.2 and 6.5 are in a lot of commercial vehicles, I've worked on both in box vans. The first injection pumps on 6.5s were junk, if you have one with a green tag on it you have the updated pump and they are known to be dependable. I know few people that run the 6.5 in wreckers around here that have 3 and 4 hundred thousand miles on 'em and they've had no problems out of the engines whatsoever. They run the snot out of wreckers around here so they aren't easy miles. The transmissions are another story.

 

[Ozarker]

<font color=blue>The 6.2 litre diesel engine was most certainly a converted gas engine. </font color=blue>

Converted from what?

Sorry Cowboy but it was the <A target="_blank" HREF=http://members.tripod.com/~A350Diesel/v8-1.html>5.7L Olds Diesel</A> introduced in 1978 and avaliable in passenger cars until 1985 that was a converted gas engine.

The 6.2 was the first <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.62-65-dieselpage.com/>Duramax</A> introduced in the 1982 GMC and Chevy C/K trucks.

Why do the Fords and Dodge diesels outsell the GM? I don't know. Ford has always out sold Chevy in trucks. Maybe GM is still suffering bad feelings from the 5.7L diesels. Who knows? Dodge doesn't build a diesel. They buy engines from Cummins