CUT vs PT

   / CUT vs PT #41  
The low range on the PT is letting up on the treadle. I have pushed and pulled some very large hunks of cement (over 1000 lbs each) by using my forks sliding on the ground. This way I was not lifting but using the machine to move by sliding the heavy objects. Works very well.
All machines made of steel will have a price increase as they use up their inventory.
PJ
 
   / CUT vs PT #42  
That's one of the problems with wanting a particular product, but realizing you might be getting more bang for your buck on a different thing. You would be questioning your decision for a long, long time if you were not completely at ease with your decision to purchase before you sent the check. It puts you in a dilemma, for sure. The only way out is to compare them side by side with your rear end in the driver's seat, make your pro and con list for both and put them to the test. I know it is painful. I had to do the same thing. Fortunately, I was able to sit on a Power Trac and see it operate before I made my decision to eliminate my other choices of tractors. I really can't help you here, as I have no experience with any of the larger models. All I can tell you about is my personal experiences.

As for the pulling power, it is a lot different than a tractor with high and low ranges. Here's why(in my simlified view of things).

A conventional tractor has an engine that powers a transmission, that powers a range box, that powers the differential, that powerss the axle that turns the tires. If we hold the engine at constant speed, put the thing in high gear in high range, off we go zooming down the road at 15MPH. But if we try to push into a dirt pile in high gear in high range, the thing goes blahhhh and dies. Not enough torque to do the job. So we flip to medium range and now we can go down the road at 7.5MPH, we can push into the dirt pile a little, but it really strains and won't push so well. So, we put it in low range and our top speed is only 3.75 MPH, but we push that old dirt pile right over the wife's flowers. Oops. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

The PT has no range selector. It won't pull a stump out of the ground at idle. It also won't go down the road at 15MPH. It is, however, set for a happy medium for the majority of jobs that it is designed to do. As Paul said, if you barely step on the pedal, that is where you get maximum torque to the wheels. As you increase the pedal, you get more speed, but less torque. To compare, you would have to get a conventional tractor of equal weight, traction etc... and test them side by side. My guess(and it is only a guess) is that the PT will outwork a conventional tractor of equal proportions on most jobs. But without the low, low gearing, if you tied them tail to tail, the conventional tractor will probably pull the PT around the barnyard a time or two. I'd like to see that. Wouldn't you?
 
   / CUT vs PT #43  
I agree with MossRoad except for one thing. I think if the Power Trac and the CUT are equal horsepower and equal weight, the PT will hold its own in pulling power. PTs, however, are generally a bit lighter than similarly powered CUTs.
On my 1845, I have turf tires (A set of bars is on the way.) In good traction conditions, I have good pulling power. In mud, the performance isn't as good, but I can get most jobs done.
If pure pulling power is a real requirement, a PT is probably not the answer. (A crawler probably is the answer, but that's off the other end of the scale.)
I wish I could give you a test ride on my 1845. It easily outworks our 2240 John Deere. It mows as well or better, its buckets won't lift quite as high, but bucket work is faster due to the maneuverability and fwd/reverse treadle. Post hole auger has down pressure and easy precise placement, the new post driver has precise placement, the tiller is the same width, but easier to position near fences, etc. And you can use every one of those attachments in any hour's work, as well as the front hoe and lifting boom, because changing implements never takes more that a single minute.
Can't help with the financial analysis. For my own work, I can easily justify the PT and its implements becuse it gets so much done in my limited time.
 
   / CUT vs PT #44  
Like I said, Charlie, it would be fun to have a work off with to similar machines, wouldn't it? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
   / CUT vs PT
  • Thread Starter
#45  
Well, Century 3040 package i can get weighs about 3700# without loader and the PT 1445 weighs 3900# per each product web page. Now I don't really intend to pull many tractors around, but i do have plenty of very stubborn stumbs and large boulders that I would like to drag for landscape purposes. Could a PT 1430/1445 do this???

Come on some of you 1430, 1445, 1460 owners /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif. What is your opinion. which machine would win in a game of CUT vs PT tug-o-war /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Tractorlympics is in Greece this year right?
 
   / CUT vs PT
  • Thread Starter
#46  
PJ,
i promise I will do some more reading on hydraulics this weekend, but I thought the power of a hydraulic motor was directly related to rate of flow of the fluid. More flow, more torque. If there is not sufficient resistance, this equals more speed. If there is sufficient resistance, you eaither slow down and pull/push the resisting object or your wheels stop/spin.

I am relatively intelligent /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif, but extraordinarily ignorant /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif and most times satisfactorily bliss /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif.
 
   / CUT vs PT #47  
I believe that a tractor will have more torque in low range than the PT units and would pull the PT anywhere it didn't want to go.
 
   / CUT vs PT #48  
Most formulae I have seen relate torque to pressure, and speed(rpm) to flow. The product of torque and speed divided by a constant gives power. Similarly, power can be calculated by multiplying pressure by flow rate and dividing by a different constant,
There has been a lot of discussion in past TBN threads comparing power delivery and function of hydrostatic and gear tractors. A search of the archives will get you more than you want to read. It seems generally agreed that hydrostatic systems are less efficient than gear systems, but generally more convenient to operate. If the power of the system is the only variable, a gear machine may overpower an HST machine, but the maximum available torque has to be available at the best traction combination, so results may not be predictable.
Incidentally, the 1430 is a very much smaller and lighter mahine than the 1445. The 1445 is bigger and heavier than my 1845, with the same engine. Blackwell just got a 1460, which is top of the line in power and weight. I suspect it would pull most CUTs all over the place, but there's always something out there with more power, more traction, or both.
And I want one. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
   / CUT vs PT #49  
Actually, flow is directly proportional to RPM's (since we're talking about hydrualic motors), and pressure is directly proportional to torque. (Think about this and it'll make perfect sense.) Since HP is a function of torque X rpm X some constant that I don't remember, HP for a hydraulic motor will be a function of flow X pressure. Hope this helps...

Dave
 
   / CUT vs PT #50  
<font color="blue">I thought the power of a hydraulic motor was directly related to rate of flow of the fluid. More flow, more torque. </font>

Don't forget about the force behind the flow. Think of it this way...

8GPM flow at 1000PSI vs. 8GPM at 3000PSI. Which one will do more work?
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

KUBOTA L2350 TRACTOR (A51243)
KUBOTA L2350...
24 Foot Wells Cargo Enclosed Trailer (A50324)
24 Foot Wells...
2015 Infiniti QX60 SUV (A50324)
2015 Infiniti QX60...
2017 DODGE RAM 5500 HEAVY DUTY SERVICE TRUCK (A51243)
2017 DODGE RAM...
2001 GMC W4 CRANE TRUCK (A51222)
2001 GMC W4 CRANE...
2021 FORD F450 TOW TRUCK (A50505)
2021 FORD F450 TOW...
 
Top