How does an HST compare in pulling power with the same tractor and a gear trans?

[4570Man]

Just look at professional tractor pullers. You need a level of spinning and digging to get down to the "good ground".

There’s a lot of difference in pulling tractors and regular tractors.

 

[LouNY]

The only hydros I can put a direct correlation to would be the IH 656 gear and hydro and the IH Hydro 100 and a IH 986.
I ran all 4 of these in the same time frame the geared tractors would outpull the hydros any and every day of the week.
On light duty jobs or light road hauls (empty wagons) the hydros were faster.
For pto work the hydros were a touch better in that you could find the perfect gear for the pto horsepower.
For light duty the hydros were as nice or nicer.
When you made them work on drawbar loads the fuel economy of the hydros was terrible compared to the gear tractors.
For chopping corn pulling a chopper and wagon the hydo version was as good or better till you got 2/3s of a load or into soft ground were you needed the drawbar pull,
then the hydros would fall flat.

As far as tractor pulling even when new the hydros couldn't hold their own even in the stock classes.

Those examples may be a bit bigger then these new compacts but I'd believe the comparison to be valid.

 

[WranglerX]

My HST can scrub all 4 tires in low range (4 WD) and dig holes and bury its self..... My pulling power out does it weight factor to cause traction....

Whats to compare?

Dale

 

[Aquamoose]

Point “A” to point “B” at one speed - geared tractor

Point “A” to point “B”, pick up a load of gravel, back up to point “C”, go to point “D” and start spreading the load between point “D” and “E” then back it up carefully between & around point “F” to park it at point “G” - HST tractor

 

[k0ua]

Point “A” to point “B” at one speed - geared tractor

Point “A” to point “B”, pick up a load of gravel, back up to point “C”, go to point “D” and start spreading the load between point “D” and “E” then back it up carefully between & around point “F” to park it at point “G” - HST tractor

I never heard it put like that, but it makes sense to me!..

 

[Waffles]

I used a 33 HP NH and LS that are virtually the same.

I tested both in a mid range gear that put them at equal speed. The HST would bog down and stop when working up steep hills. The gear didn't even notice the hill and could almost idle up it.

They are both have the same max pull force in low range as they are traction limited, even on flat concrete.

HST will do the same work, just slower than gear.

I still bought HST since I don't have enough hands and feet to: steer, shift, brake, clutch, operate loader, change throttle while navigating my constantly changing terrain.

 

[Industrial Toys]

In one sense, HST uses HP.

I don't think the question is a very valid one. Too many apples to oranges comparison. Take the same tractor model, same tires and same application, and if available in both hydro and gear, you could probably make some valid comparisons. It would have to be unbiased, as often people just defend what they have.

You almost certainly have more control over your traction with an HST, but it has other disadvantages not related to traction.

 

[K5lwq]

In one sense, HST uses HP.

I don't think the question is a very valid one. Too many apples to oranges comparison. Take the same tractor model, same tires and same application, and if available in both hydro and gear, you could probably make some valid comparisons. It would have to be unbiased, as often people just defend what they have.

You almost certainly have more control over your traction with an HST, but it has other disadvantages not related to traction.

I agree with this. I am afraid though we may never know. Kinda like how many licks to get to the center of a tootsie roll pop. :licking:

 

[k0ua]

I agree with this. I am afraid though we may never know. Kinda like how many licks to get to the center of a tootsie roll pop. :licking:

Depends on whether you "crunch" or not....

 

[LouNY]

In one sense, HST uses HP.

I don't think the question is a very valid one. Too many apples to oranges comparison. Take the same tractor model, same tires and same application, and if available in both hydro and gear, you could probably make some valid comparisons. It would have to be unbiased, as often people just defend what they have.

You almost certainly have more control over your traction with an HST, but it has other disadvantages not related to traction.

The only hydros I can put a direct correlation to would be the IH 656 gear and hydro,
the same manufacture, the same frame, the same size rubber, both gas engines,
they were doing the same work on the same farm day in and day out for well over 20 years.
Then the hydro puked and the replacement hydro never worked right.

the geared tractors would out pull the hydros any and every day of the week.
On light duty jobs or light road hauls (empty wagons) the hydros were faster.
For pto work the hydros were a touch better in that you could find the perfect gear for the pto horsepower.
For light duty the hydros were as nice or nicer.
When you made them work on drawbar loads the fuel economy of the hydros was terrible compared to the gear tractors.

I would say that those tractors were your apples to apples comparison.
I put a lot of hours on both of those tractors working them daily.

Also I believe that both of those models have Nebraska test data available if anyone cares to read up on them.