Hydro vs Standard Shift?
- Thread starter Mikek101
- Start date
- Status
slowrev
Elite Member
What kind of tractor is he using that has that noisey of a transmission ? But then again it is better than the Smokey Mtn Man dillema. Remember....
JerryG
Super Member
We all have different strange things about use. Maybe one of mine is that I am not going to own a tractor that you have to run at near full throttle all of the time and listen to the noise. I do understand why several times member here have talked about hearing protection. That is one of the reasons that I won't own a hydro.
Typhoon
Gold Member
I run my TC29 at low throttle all the time and its hydro. I consider my tractor to be very quiet for the most part. But like you said, everyone is different and has different items that they consider to be most important. I have been bucking and limbing trees and pulling them out of the woods, (being in very tight spots, on steep inclines, in mud, etc) and the hydro has saved my butt many times. I actually have more experience with gear tractors (its what my dad had) and they have their strong points too, but for maintaining my 50 acres, the hydro reigns champion in every catagory. Again, just my opinion. And I don't have to run mine at high rpm's at all. I run at high rpm's when doing loader work, or when mowing, or pulling a heavy load. But just getting from point A to point B, I run it at low rpm's all the time. And my transmission is virtually silent. You cannot hear it unless you listen very close.
Good luck! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Good luck! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 52,238
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Well, thats perhaps is more speculation on your part, my local dealers would argue with you to a considerable degree about the durability issue. The hydrostatics have been found to be very durable )</font>
Given that a hydrostatic drive is just packed full of seals and o-rings... I can't see how they can stand end to end in durability over time. Take a 50 year old geard tractor up against a 50 year old hydrostat.. I think you would find a higher 'death rate of the hydrostats, after 'x' years. Deffinately speculation on my part... but is a hadged guess. What is the oldest hydrostat tractor we have to compair to? a cub from the 70's? hard to establish good numbers there, when people have 1939 9N's banging around on original trannies, and input shaft seals.... 65 years and going... In the short term.. i agree that the hydrostat is going to be an even contender, except possibly in ground engaging implimints, and a few select other areas... but i think as you add time as a factor... I think the mortality rate of the materials involved will peak out higher than the gear units...
Another point about that is operation vs. good operation. A 60 year old gear tranny with a shot input shaft seal will leak like a seave.. but if ya keep dumping the oil in every day.. the tractor chugs right along.... let a handfull of seals/ orings fail in a hydrostat, and i imagine the tractor wouldn't be able to move... etc. Again.. not bashing the hydros...
Soundguy
Given that a hydrostatic drive is just packed full of seals and o-rings... I can't see how they can stand end to end in durability over time. Take a 50 year old geard tractor up against a 50 year old hydrostat.. I think you would find a higher 'death rate of the hydrostats, after 'x' years. Deffinately speculation on my part... but is a hadged guess. What is the oldest hydrostat tractor we have to compair to? a cub from the 70's? hard to establish good numbers there, when people have 1939 9N's banging around on original trannies, and input shaft seals.... 65 years and going... In the short term.. i agree that the hydrostat is going to be an even contender, except possibly in ground engaging implimints, and a few select other areas... but i think as you add time as a factor... I think the mortality rate of the materials involved will peak out higher than the gear units...
Another point about that is operation vs. good operation. A 60 year old gear tranny with a shot input shaft seal will leak like a seave.. but if ya keep dumping the oil in every day.. the tractor chugs right along.... let a handfull of seals/ orings fail in a hydrostat, and i imagine the tractor wouldn't be able to move... etc. Again.. not bashing the hydros...
Soundguy
Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 52,238
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( the winner hands down in my book, for ALL applications,)</font>
I simply think that is incorrect.. I don't think we have the technology yet that will allow for the same level of power transfer and extremely low loss ratio of gear to gear, as a coupling, as opposed to a fluid coupled drive... there just has to be more loss in that system at our present level of hyd technology. Given two identical tractors, edentical engines, rpms, etc.. The Gear model has to transmit more power to the ground impliment than a hydro can.. simple math... I don;t agree with 'all' applications. Seems to mee that lugging a plow up and down a pasture for xx hours is gonna build some decent heat inthat hydrostat, that otherwise wouldn't be present iont he gear tranny..... again, has too.. that energy loss in the fluid coupling goes somewhere...( is turned into heat ).
Soundguy
I simply think that is incorrect.. I don't think we have the technology yet that will allow for the same level of power transfer and extremely low loss ratio of gear to gear, as a coupling, as opposed to a fluid coupled drive... there just has to be more loss in that system at our present level of hyd technology. Given two identical tractors, edentical engines, rpms, etc.. The Gear model has to transmit more power to the ground impliment than a hydro can.. simple math... I don;t agree with 'all' applications. Seems to mee that lugging a plow up and down a pasture for xx hours is gonna build some decent heat inthat hydrostat, that otherwise wouldn't be present iont he gear tranny..... again, has too.. that energy loss in the fluid coupling goes somewhere...( is turned into heat ).
Soundguy
Rat-
"picking the fly poop out of the pepper"
My wife thought that was hilarious /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Getting back to tractors, I really don't think either transmission really has anything over the other. As much as I like my gear tractor, I wouldn't write off a hydro if I went tractor shopping tomorrow.
"picking the fly poop out of the pepper"
My wife thought that was hilarious /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Getting back to tractors, I really don't think either transmission really has anything over the other. As much as I like my gear tractor, I wouldn't write off a hydro if I went tractor shopping tomorrow.
stvman
Gold Member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2000
- Messages
- 252
- Location
- NewHampshire
- Tractor
- A very tired Case 580 (looking to downsize)
I think the area of the country you are in makes a big diffrence in long term value of a tractor. I can only speak for the northeast but hydros here sell easily 4 to 1 over gear at most of the dealers I talk to. Some will not even take a gear in trade.
I wish I preferred gear I like to save money. But for me there is no comparison I would gladly put 1000.00 a year in the bank over the life of the tractor to pay for any potential problem for the privelage of having hydro.
As far as complexety and o-rings failing over time My dad has a 16 year old Toyota van with an automatic trans 475,000 miles, never touched still going strong. If I had to place a wager on the future my money would be on hydro. Steve...
I wish I preferred gear I like to save money. But for me there is no comparison I would gladly put 1000.00 a year in the bank over the life of the tractor to pay for any potential problem for the privelage of having hydro.
As far as complexety and o-rings failing over time My dad has a 16 year old Toyota van with an automatic trans 475,000 miles, never touched still going strong. If I had to place a wager on the future my money would be on hydro. Steve...
_RaT_
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2000
- Messages
- 5,909
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Northern CA.
- Tractor
- Kioti 3510-SE HST
If we read all the comments Jerry we will find that you don't have to run a hydro at full RPM, no, no more then a gear tractor. Is there any reason this is so hard to understand as it seems to be mentioned quite often? I run mine at 1700 to 1800 RPM for most uses like many others except when mowing, then its about 50 to 100 RPM less then full 540 PTO RPM. When you mow with a gear tractor and mow, its running at the same RPM to acheive the same PTO RPM. Is this a common thought that hydros are run at full or near full throttle? Curious, nothing could be further from the truth. My experience is that I can operate it at the same RPM as my gear tractor. The higher the engine RPM the faster I go and if using the PTO, the faster it goes. At about 2000 RPM, I'm at the peak of the torque curve. Attempting to straighten out the misunderstandings, but it's not easy here. Rat.... /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 60,385
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
<font color="blue"> Some Hydro's have been known to suck air and quit pulling on certain grades of slopes </font>
So have some engines, starving them of oil lubrication. It is important to know the operating limits of a machine before using it. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
So have some engines, starving them of oil lubrication. It is important to know the operating limits of a machine before using it. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
- Status