Hydrostatic vs Non

[john_bud]

I have to chuckle, this discussion has been ongoing and still boiling for years and years.

I know what I like and why. Doesn't mean anyone else has to like the same thing... all personal preference.



And with that said, hst is still better. :silly: except for where gears are better.

 

[SPYDERLK]

Much of what you describe for loader work can now be done with the newer HST setups without the need to change ranges....they do it for you.

Also, many of them have setting for constant ground speed, and most also have cruise control, which accomplishes much the same thing.

>>>> I totally don't get your comment about needing all the machine's available power when digging into the pile....I can fill my bucket completely without using even close to it's available power and traction.<<<<

I have both hydro and gear machines, so I'm not against either type, but for the average weekend warrior, it's almost no contest....they'll be more efficient, and happier with a hydro. After reading a lot of comments, I'm convinced that a many of the people who say they prefer gear have never actually owned, or used, something similar with a hydro tranny.

Not that you mentioned it, but when I see people claim an HST setup will cost more in maintenance over the long haul I have to sort of chuckle....if filters and fluid every couple of years is a big deal, I guess I'm not that cheap. On the other hand it seems like more machines get new clutches than rebuilt hydros over time.

Perhaps you would get it if you used the machine a little harder. My 7520 with 4 loaded AGs and counterweight weighs more than 12K# and I need every bit of available traction frequently when using the loader. I cant use near all the power at that weight.... Even with the extra 2 tons added by a full lift push condition.
larry

 

[GManBart]

Perhaps you would get it if you used the machine a little harder. My 7520 with 4 loaded AGs and counterweight weighs more than 12K# and I need every bit of available traction frequently when using the loader. I cant use near all the power at that weight.... Even with the extra 2 tons added by a full lift push condition.
larry

You didn't read very carefully. My reply was that I didn't understand how someone could need all of the available power their machine had when digging into a pile, so I said:

"I totally don't get your comment about needing all the machine's available power when digging into the pile."

You just said you can't use all the power you have because you're limited by traction.

Those two statements agree with one another.

I'm not sure how I could work my machine any harder than filling full buckets as fast as possible....maybe have the pile push back out of spite? I'll have to look into that...

 

[b3wizzard]

Hey, john_bud, thanks for your reply. I wish I would have known more than I know now, (sound familiar?) when I retired in the mountains of North Carolina!
I'm still learning, as I hope we all are, but it's always beneficial to learn from those who know more than me; and that's what I've been doing since I've been
here. I called the certified John Deere dealership in Newland, NC, a few days ago, and talked to a man who taught me quite a bit. (at least about J.D.'s).
He told me that the model I bought from Lowe's in Marion, is built by Deere especially for Lowe's, and is cheaper, ($1800), and certainly not meant for anything
but light duty; flat, normal size lawns, and will go out in about two years! Brutally honest for an employee. Basically he was saying that you get what you pay for.
I asked him about the HST vs. Manual transmission, and he said that the cheaper manuals had plastic gear teeth! That blew my mind! He also said that more
tractors will be HST and manuals will be phased out eventually; at least as far as Deere is concerned. It seems to me that without product knowledge, one could
be turned totally against the brand of John Deere, or any other brand. Someone is dropping the ball, in so far as salesmanship is concerned; which naturally is hard
to find in places like Lowe's. To make a long story a little shorter, what I gained from our conversation, is that even though I will pay more, in the long run quality
will prevail and a good investment will be made.

 

[b3wizzard]

Hey, john_bud, thanks for your reply. I wish I would have known more than I know now, (sound familiar?) when I retired in the mountains of North Carolina!
I'm still learning, as I hope we all are, but it's always beneficial to learn from those who know more than me; and that's what I've been doing since I've been
here. I called the certified John Deere dealership in Newland, NC, a few days ago, and talked to a man who taught me quite a bit. (at least about J.D.'s).
He told me that the model I bought from Lowe's in Marion, is built by Deere especially for Lowe's, and is cheaper, ($1800), and certainly not meant for anything
but light duty; flat, normal size lawns, and will go out in about two years! Brutally honest for an employee. Basically he was saying that you get what you pay for.
I asked him about the HST vs. Manual transmission, and he said that the cheaper manuals had plastic gear teeth! That blew my mind! He also said that more
tractors will be HST and manuals will be phased out eventually; at least as far as Deere is concerned. It seems to me that without product knowledge, one could
be turned totally against the brand of John Deere, or any other brand. Someone is dropping the ball, in so far as salesmanship is concerned; which naturally is hard
to find in places like Lowe's. To make a long story a little shorter, what I gained from our conversation, is that even though I will pay more, in the long run quality
will prevail and a good investment will be made.

 

[SPYDERLK]

I totally don't get your comment about needing all the machine's available power when digging into the pile....I can fill my bucket completely without using even close to it's available power and traction.

Perhaps you would get it if you used the machine a little harder. My 7520 with 4 loaded AGs and counterweight weighs more than 12K# and I need every bit of available traction frequently when using the loader. I cant use near all the power at that weight.... Even with the extra 2 tons added by a full lift push condition.
larry

You didn't read very carefully. My reply was that I didn't understand how someone could need all of the available power their machine had when digging into a pile, so I said:

"I totally don't get your comment about needing all the machine's available power when digging into the pile."

You just said you can't use all the power you have because you're limited by traction.

Those two statements agree with one another.

I'm not sure how I could work my machine any harder than filling full buckets as fast as possible....maybe have the pile push back out of spite? I'll have to look into that...

You have misquoted yourself. I addressed your connected pair of sentences expressing the platforms adequacy for your use. If used a little harder you would soon reach a point where traction was inadequate to accomplish the task. Adding weight would help at that point. Even with a heavy platform with aggressive tread it is not unusual to use all traction. Finally, after increasing traction, power would be the limiter. The pile, or anything else, always pushes back. Its out of Physics, not spite.
larry

 

[GManBart]

You have misquoted yourself. I addressed your connected pair of sentences expressing the platforms adequacy for your use. If used a little harder you would soon reach a point where traction was inadequate to accomplish the task. Adding weight would help at that point. Even with a heavy platform with aggressive tread it is not unusual to use all traction. Finally, after increasing traction, power would be the limiter. The pile, or anything else, always pushes back. Its out of Physics, not spite.
larry

Larry, this is still nothing more than a reading comprehension issue. I didn't misquote myself at all...I only cited the pertinent part.

I said I didn't get his comment about needing all of the available power when digging into the pile. <break>

I then said that I don't run out of either power OR traction (traction being something he didn't address, because it's MY situation, not his). See that now? I didn't say my situation was the same as his, just that I didn't get how he could be using all of the available power.

You then tried correcting me to point out that in most cases machines run out of traction before power when digging into the pile. Great....that's why I said I didn't get how he was using all of his available power.

If I'm hitting the pile, and filling the bucket full in one shot, I'm not sure how I could work the machine any harder....at least it wouldn't be any more productive. I did add 1,400lbs of weight to the 3pt (more if you add in the hydraulic top link), so I have lots of rear wheel traction...maybe that's the difference, I don't know.

The pile can't push back...that whole Newton's law stuff that most folks put that under the "physics" category. Resistance to movement isn't pushing back.

 

[mike35549]

I have used both quite a bit. If you are getting a tractor with a bucket for general use around the house, hunting land etc just general use get an HST, you can thank me later. If you are farming row crops get you a regular geared tractor.

 

[k0ua]

I have used both quite a bit. If you are getting a tractor with a bucket for general use around the house, hunting land etc just general use get an HST, you can thank me later. If you are farming row crops get you a regular geared tractor.

That just about sums it up nicely.

 

[radios1]

here's some good info. https://agriculture.papemachinery.com/blog/choosing-a-transmission-hydrostatic-vs-manual also, a gear transmission does better climbing hills in high gear..