Hydrostatic vs Non

[Bluegill2]

Well, I'll just come out and say it - it's my dad that is so anti HST and it's one of those things I'll never stop hearing about. Might not seem like much, but some of you may understand.

As a kid I bush hogged 60 acres of his fields every other year with an old ford geared tractor. I can remember some situations where the ground was rough and I had to lower the rpms to stop from abusing the tractor, but then you would lose PTO RPMs as well.

I have a gravel driveway, so I need to be able to go pretty slow sometimes, yet have enough power to move the snow.

Thoughts?

Those old geared Fords like the 8N were just geared too high for most jobs. These newer geared tractors have plenty of different ground speeds to work with. I rarely use 1st and 2nd, because they are too low for most stuff.

 

[hiker88]

Those old geared Fords like the 8N were just geared too high for most jobs. These newer geared tractors have plenty of different ground speeds to work with. I rarely use 1st and 2nd, because they are too low for most stuff.

yea; I think it was an old 8n. It had a 6 volt system. You could go out in the dead of winter and crank that thing for 20 minutes and it would just keep turning over until it started. I think it only had a 4 speed transmission. I remember my dad got it as junk, installed the rear PTO himself and we ran it for 20 years. It was about 5000 lbs I think, but even in first gear there were times where you couldn't go slow enough without getting nearly bucked out of the seat.

To think I was 15 or so years old running that thing around with a huge bush hog on the back - no seat belt or ROPS. Things were a lot different then.

 

[kdm0811]

Well, I'll just come out and say it - it's my dad that is so anti HST and it's one of those things I'll never stop hearing about. Might not seem like much, but some of you may understand.

As a kid I bush hogged 60 acres of his fields every other year with an old ford geared tractor. I can remember some situations where the ground was rough and I had to lower the rpms to stop from abusing the tractor, but then you would lose PTO RPMs as well.

I have a gravel driveway, so I need to be able to go pretty slow sometimes, yet have enough power to move the snow.

Thoughts?

If you are going too fast, just ease up off the pedal. The engine stays the same speed and the tactor moves slower (because you have an infinately variable gear ratio within the HST).

I think your dad needs to investigate it further.

 

[dave1949]

Aside from the higher initial cost, many people would argue the other points are wrong. Many mechanics have said that they fix/repair/replace more parts on gear transmissions than HST....clutches get fried, gears get abused, etc. There just isn't that much evidence that HST systems have higher maintenance costs associated with them. Some HST systems whine more than others, but in many, it's most noticeable when the RPM is too low for what you're trying to do..that's the only time I really hear mine.

I gave an honest pro and cons to the OP. YOU would argue.

I've never bought any hydraulic filters specifically for my gear transmission. That's an on-going maintenance cost.

There are plenty of threads about HST problems in all brands, they do fail, the sensors surrounding them fail, they are more complex. You don't get the ease of HST use for nothing.

Compared to a gear transmission, all HST's whine, that would be the salient point in a comparison.

If I have to burn extra fuel to make an HST happy and/or not whine, that is hardly a plus.

Fried clutches are pure operator error or people don't adjust them periodically. A five minute job that requires no parts.

We owe the OP valid comparisons such that he can make the right decision for himself. I don't care which he chooses. His Dad's opposition to HST has made him question a popular choice, he is trying to evaluate the situation.

 

[Dr_Zinj]

Mine's HST. Love it when I have something chained up that I need to "rock it" to get it moving. Also works well planing off a little at a time with the loader

 

[Bluegill2]

yea; I think it was an old 8n. It had a 6 volt system. You could go out in the dead of winter and crank that thing for 20 minutes and it would just keep turning over until it started. I think it only had a 4 speed transmission. I remember my dad got it as junk, installed the rear PTO himself and we ran it for 20 years. It was about 5000 lbs I think, but even in first gear there were times where you couldn't go slow enough without getting nearly bucked out of the seat.

To think I was 15 or so years old running that thing around with a huge bush hog on the back - no seat belt or ROPS. Things were a lot different then.

The 8N had no High/Low range and 1st gear just wasn't low enough. Newer tractors have High/Low which makes them much mo better.

 

[GManBart]

I gave an honest pro and cons to the OP. YOU would argue.

I've never bought any hydraulic filters specifically for my gear transmission. That's an on-going maintenance cost.

There are plenty of threads about HST problems in all brands, they do fail, the sensors surrounding them fail, they are more complex. You don't get the ease of HST use for nothing.

Compared to a gear transmission, all HST's whine, that would be the salient point in a comparison.

If I have to burn extra fuel to make an HST happy and/or not whine, that is hardly a plus.

Fried clutches are pure operator error or people don't adjust them periodically. A five minute job that requires no parts.

I didn't argue at all, I just said that many people with a lot more experience than I have say otherwise. Seriously, a $15 filter every year or two is a factor worth even thinking about? I don't know about all brands, but my HST doesn't require extra fuel to be burned, it just requires that you don't lug the engine...don't do that (which is bad anyway) and the HST doesn't whine at a level almost anybody would complain about. Heck, gear transmissions make noise too, so it's not exactly all or nothing.

You are right about helping the OP, and that's what I was trying to do. I have both gear and HST, and like both, so I'm not against either kind. Some references for what I was referring to...a bunch of folks with a ton of experience (certainly more than me):

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...ssion-vs-hst-transmissions-3.html#post3419997

Been working on tractors for 34 years and I sold tractors for 7 years in New England and in this area of the country Hydro rules. We very reluctantly took gear tractors in trade as they would become lawn ornaments, had to pretty much give them away. The hydro's are pretty bullet proof, never had to repair one.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...ssion-vs-hst-transmissions-9.html#post3425457

Kind of back to the original question - the gear transmission is easier to work on. Have had brother-in-law's gear drive Kubota apart multiple times to replace broken parts - no gears yet, just shift linkage pieces breaking - and 2 guys can have it pretty well completely lying on the floor in a couple hours. Finding where the broken pieces end up is the biggest time killer. Have not yet had to tear into our hydros. Unless you feather the lurch (wear), the loading is abrupt whereas the hydro takes time for the swash plate to move so the load on the power train is automatically feathered.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...ssion-vs-hst-transmissions-9.html#post3425684

I've been following TBN threads since 2001 and there just isn't any significant number of HST transmission failures. There was an L48 that had a bad control valve recently but the actual hydro pump/motor package was apparently OK. I figure keeping the hyd fluid full, fresh and clean is job #1, probably next is avoiding overheating from using it in an abusive manner.

There are a lot of hydrostatic systems in equipment these days... powersteering, drivetrains on combines, payloaders, the list goes on and on. Hydro was newfangled technology in the 1960's but today it's totally mainstream and very reliable. As a drivetrain, it's one choice available, has its good and bad points. Reliability is actually more a strong point in its favor.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...sion-vs-hst-transmissions-11.html#post3448882

My tractor score is now 11 HSTs and 5 gear-drive units, 4 purchased new. I wrenched on all of them, including clutch replacements and HST rebuilds. For my use here in the mtns, I prefer HSTs by far, but I do not plow fields.

To the OP's question, I am very confident that HSTs are very reliable, and potentially more reliable
than foot-operated dry clutch gear tractors.

 

[k0ua]

I have owned 5 tractors, 2 gear 3 HST.. I am never going back to a gear. Hydro is safer on Hills, not the other way around. Hydro's whine a little.. Little hydro tractors whine a lot. Big hydro tractors whine very little. There is an extra filter to buy every 400 hours. Big deal.. There is NO clutch on mine to replace or wear out or adjust.. Hydrostats have a better repair track record than gear/clutch tractors. Hydrostats are much easier to operate for all operators, but especially for new or inexperienced operators. Hydrostats allow for infinite ground speed. Hydrostats eat some power. They will not put as much to the ground or the PTO as a Gear machine. In loader operation hydrostats are much less fatiguing on the operator, and allow you to concentrate on the loader not the transmission. If you want the maximum horsepower delivered to the ground buy the gear. If you want convenience, reliability, and safety of operation buy the hydro. Oh and to answer your question, expect to pay about $1000 more for the hydro, but you will get it back when/if you trade it in. (this has been a paid political announcement, worth exactly what you paid for it)

James K0UA

 

[arlen4720]

I agree with everything the previous 2 posters say. There simply is nothing wrong with the reliabilty of the hydro transmission. Skid loaders are a good example of an application that absolutely tortures the transmission, and they hold up well. John Deere's biggest CUT, the 4720 has 66 engine HP, and a hydro tranny is the only way it comes. The lower HP ones come either gear or hydro.
The hydro is easy to operate, and safer for most applications. It is great for backing up, your not reaching for brakes, clutch,shifter....just turn around and feather the pedals.
I would go so far as to say that for a utility tractor, you would be crazy if you didn't like a hydro better.
Now plowing the back 40...I would rather have gears, no sense in throwing away 5-10% in fuel with no benefit whatsoever.

 

[Sysop]

The hst will do fine for what you need. Unless you are going to be working on steep hills. Then you should get a shuttle shift.

Why is HST not good for steep hills? I actually purchased HST specifically because I have steep hills. Increased weight, increased speed control, it always remains "in gear" and never "free-wheels".

The 8N had no High/Low range and 1st gear just wasn't low enough. Newer tractors have High/Low which makes them much mo better.

HST has multiple ranges as well. When needing precise control to move around slowly, HST is the way to go. You can't go as slow on a geardrive system without slipping the clutch, and it will never be as smooth as HST at small precise movements.