I am looking to purchase a 790 with gear shift. I will mainly be bushoging, mowing and landscapping with it. I really like the shuttle shift over the gear, is there an advantage to either one. I would like to get a quick connect backhoe. Whats your advice? Thanks in advance for your help.
hydrostat/shuttleshift/gear which is best
- Thread starter CHENO
- Start date
- Views: 2585
Yankee
Gold Member
An endless debate, and there is no best ...
Hydro pros:
. Fastest forward/reverse
. Safest on hills (as opposed to shifting)
. Easiest to operate
. Infinitely fine speed control
. Separates PTO speed control from ground speed control
Hydro cons:
. Noisy compared to gear trannys
. Can creep on hills when stopped
. Robs PTO power compared to gear
. Costs more
Gear pros:
. Power!
. Predicable speed (important for certain Ag. jobs)
. Doesn't require continuous operator input (note that both hydro and gear may have cruise, however)
. Least expensive
. Very tough
Gear cons:
. Many variations, from crashbox to syncro to powershift - need to understand what you're buying
. Clutching (need varies by type)
. Mechanically more complex (though long life is proven)
. More complex to operate
. Can freewheel on hills when shifting
Shuttles are "just" a gear variation, ranging from simple reverse levers (still requiring clutching) to power shuttles that automatically engage a tranny clutch. Pros to power shuttles in particular are that they are as easy to use for *some* tasks as hydros. Cons are the same as other gear types.
"Best" depends on preference and usage. Most acknowlege that hydro and power shuttles are both good for loader use. Hydro usually gets the edge for mowing, particularly when trees are present. Gear (any type) gets the nod for ag use, both for power as well as for measurable application of consumables like fertilizer. Of course, most large ag tractors are only available gear anyway.
I think few these days would have any interest in a fully manual, unsynchronized transmission.
Hydro pros:
. Fastest forward/reverse
. Safest on hills (as opposed to shifting)
. Easiest to operate
. Infinitely fine speed control
. Separates PTO speed control from ground speed control
Hydro cons:
. Noisy compared to gear trannys
. Can creep on hills when stopped
. Robs PTO power compared to gear
. Costs more
Gear pros:
. Power!
. Predicable speed (important for certain Ag. jobs)
. Doesn't require continuous operator input (note that both hydro and gear may have cruise, however)
. Least expensive
. Very tough
Gear cons:
. Many variations, from crashbox to syncro to powershift - need to understand what you're buying
. Clutching (need varies by type)
. Mechanically more complex (though long life is proven)
. More complex to operate
. Can freewheel on hills when shifting
Shuttles are "just" a gear variation, ranging from simple reverse levers (still requiring clutching) to power shuttles that automatically engage a tranny clutch. Pros to power shuttles in particular are that they are as easy to use for *some* tasks as hydros. Cons are the same as other gear types.
"Best" depends on preference and usage. Most acknowlege that hydro and power shuttles are both good for loader use. Hydro usually gets the edge for mowing, particularly when trees are present. Gear (any type) gets the nod for ag use, both for power as well as for measurable application of consumables like fertilizer. Of course, most large ag tractors are only available gear anyway.
I think few these days would have any interest in a fully manual, unsynchronized transmission.
beenthere
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
- Messages
- 18,527
- Location
- Southern Wisconsin, USA
- Tractor
- JD_4x2_Gator, JD_4300, JD_425, JD_455 AWS, added JD_455, JD_110, JD_X485(sold)
For what you are doing, I'd recommend HST.
But it is your call. If you were doing field work, like plowing and discing long distances, then gear.
But for close work like you mention, then HST.
Yankee
Gold Member
I came "that" close to buying a 790 once. I didn't because my circumstances changed, and tractor buying was put off for a while. I agree, it's a very good machine.
RoyJackson
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2001
- Messages
- 23,144
- Location
- Bethel, Vermont
- Tractor
- John Deere 4052R Cab,, Deere 855D UTV, Z920A Zero Turn Mower and assorted implements
As a 790 owner, I can attest to the robustness of this machine. I also know and work within it's limitations.
This is, for all intents and purposes, a very old design. The hydraulics aren't as strong as newer designs...but do keep you out of trouble since the 790 is a pretty light tractor (MFWD with no loader, it weighs about 2200 lbs). The axles are strong, but there have been cases where the front axles gears went out under heavy load while pulling in reverse.
The gear shift is actually pretty quick between 1st and Reverse, once you get the hang of it (bit of a learning curve if you've never operated non-synchro transmissions).
If your acreage is between 2 and 10 acres, the 790 will be a good fit (10 is kind of pushing the limit though).
Mowing is OK, but if you have a lot of trees, you'll be doing a lot of clutching (keep your foot off the clutch unless you're shifting though) I use my 790 to finish mow an acre (wasn't bought to mow, but that's one task I use it for). I have a 60" mower (which came with my previous tractor), but a 72" would be a better fit. Mowing has been the only time I've considered trading up for a reverser transmission...but my 790 has been paid off for over a year now and I just can't see going back in to debt for a relatively minor advantage in reversing.
Brush cutting with a 60" cutter is a snap. One advantage of a gear transmission is the ease of engaging the cutter. With a clutch, you can feather in the initial spinup of those big blades...can't do that with most of the hydro transmissions. Brush cutting tends to be mostly straight line work (for me, anyway) so not a lot of shifting. The 790 will work best with a 60" cutter.
As far as landscaping (meaning a lot of loader work), the 790 does OK. Hydros may be a bit faster but that depends on how big a hurry you're in. You will want ballast on the 3ph when you use the loader. Ballast box is best, IMHO. Remember, loaders are loaders, not so hot being diggers. A toothbar will help with many tasks, but I wouldn't want to dig a pond with a loader (some guys on TBN have though).
The 790 has 24 PTO HP so you can use a pretty substantial chipper if you get one (mine is a Woods 5000 Chipper/Shredder rated for 5" branches).
Good luck with your choice...
This is, for all intents and purposes, a very old design. The hydraulics aren't as strong as newer designs...but do keep you out of trouble since the 790 is a pretty light tractor (MFWD with no loader, it weighs about 2200 lbs). The axles are strong, but there have been cases where the front axles gears went out under heavy load while pulling in reverse.
The gear shift is actually pretty quick between 1st and Reverse, once you get the hang of it (bit of a learning curve if you've never operated non-synchro transmissions).
If your acreage is between 2 and 10 acres, the 790 will be a good fit (10 is kind of pushing the limit though).
Mowing is OK, but if you have a lot of trees, you'll be doing a lot of clutching (keep your foot off the clutch unless you're shifting though) I use my 790 to finish mow an acre (wasn't bought to mow, but that's one task I use it for). I have a 60" mower (which came with my previous tractor), but a 72" would be a better fit. Mowing has been the only time I've considered trading up for a reverser transmission...but my 790 has been paid off for over a year now and I just can't see going back in to debt for a relatively minor advantage in reversing.
Brush cutting with a 60" cutter is a snap. One advantage of a gear transmission is the ease of engaging the cutter. With a clutch, you can feather in the initial spinup of those big blades...can't do that with most of the hydro transmissions. Brush cutting tends to be mostly straight line work (for me, anyway) so not a lot of shifting. The 790 will work best with a 60" cutter.
As far as landscaping (meaning a lot of loader work), the 790 does OK. Hydros may be a bit faster but that depends on how big a hurry you're in. You will want ballast on the 3ph when you use the loader. Ballast box is best, IMHO. Remember, loaders are loaders, not so hot being diggers. A toothbar will help with many tasks, but I wouldn't want to dig a pond with a loader (some guys on TBN have though).
The 790 has 24 PTO HP so you can use a pretty substantial chipper if you get one (mine is a Woods 5000 Chipper/Shredder rated for 5" branches).
Good luck with your choice...
Nitro-Fish
Silver Member
I just got rid of a 790 and it was a great little tractor. If you are not going to be using it for alot of loader work you will be fine; you may be fine even with loader work, I had mine for 5 years & I got pretty good with the gear tranny & loader work!. The only reason I sold it was to get something with more loader capacity, I had performed the relief valve shim & had the tires filled (even had rear ballast for some tasks) so it had pretty decent capacity, but I was going to need about twice what the 790 was able to do. The tractor is a very easy to operate design & everything is laid out pretty well, if it wasn't for needing more loader capacity I would still have it.
BTDT2
Silver Member
Hydrostat! The more power the better
arrabil
Veteran Member
Nice writeup Yankee.
RobertN
Super Member
I think that is one of the best overviews on the subject that I have seen in my 10 years here(well, 12 if you count the original version of this site, which was all Kubota)
Yankee
Gold Member
Thank you, gentlemen, but I'm just paying it forward, as they say. Some of this is fresh in my mind because I've been looking at power shuttles lately. Summarizing things helps me as much as I hope it helps others.
