Hydrostatic vs Non

[mjstef]

FYI Caterpillar small wheel loaders are now hydrostatic. By going to hydros they decreased engine speed from 2400 to 1800 rpm, improved cycle time, and claim an overall 25% fuel savings. Small means the largest one is only 37,000 pounds and 182 HP. Mediums and large are still power shift - hydro technology not yet up to that size capability.

I have a friend in Peoria Illinois whose job is to try and break transmissions at Cat. I know this is out but it's NOTHING like a CUT Hydro. It allows independent control of ground speed and engine speed for efficient operation of hydraulically powered tools. You can hear the variable engine speed in this video...... CAT 938K Wheel loader working - YouTube

 

[jenkinsph]

I can't figure out why people think a hyro is better for loader work. I don't want to hear the motor wound out tight all day and it has to be to make the loader work fast. I have spent 25 years running heavy equipment and the only hyro's in heavy eq. i have run are rollers and skid steers and Bobcat has a foot feed for the throttle which is nice. Watch this guy load this truck. Notice the engine is only wound out when needed, not all the time like it would be with a hydro. You can get this type of operation with a Gear shuttle or a Power Shuttle, NOT a hydro unless you going for the hand throttle every few seconds. EXPERT OPERATOR KOMATSU WA430-6 WHEEL LOADER LOADING 17 CBM DAF TRUCK - YouTube

The hydro vs. non hydro discussion here is related to small tractors not dedicated purpose wheel loaders. Most of the larger wheel loaders have a button on the joystick to release the transmission from gear as you approach the truck allowing you to rev the engine to raise the loader. While this works well for this application most small compact and ag tractors don't have this feature. Most wheel loaders while set up very well for their intended purpose don't work well with a brush mower either.

Most users in a non commercial environment don't need to have the hydro machines wound up tight all day either. Mowing is about the only thing I do with the throttle set at high rpms'. The auto throttle on my Deere CUT works well enough for most jobs and allows the engine speed to vary as needed. My point is that it isn't necessary to run a hydro tractor at full rpms all the time.

 

[Gary Fowler]

I have both gear and hydro and each has its place. I think the best transmission any tractor can have regardless of size is a power shift. I had that on my old Yanmar and I could work circles around a similar sized New Holland with HST transmission when we were digging out a dried up pond and transporting the spoils about 100 feet. The NH had to downshift to L range (only has H and L with rabbit and turtle in each) to dig, then stop to put in H to travel while I just power shifted to 1st to load and back to 4th to travel. I never had to touch the clutch as it is all hydraulically controlled.

I don't know why there is not Powershift transmissions in CUT tractors as they are really the best of both worlds. NEXT to a Powershift, an HST seems to be best for everything but tillage work and bush hog work on large pastures. For those activities, I prefer gear drive. For cutting the lawn grass it has to be HST in a Zero turn mower.

Both gear and HST have strong points for use, but for the average CUT owner who can only afford one tractor with todays choice of only gear or HST, I suppose HST is the winner.

 

[jenkinsph]

Gary,
I have to agree that in some cases the powershift would be a great choice. I have been moving lots of dirt this past week and a powershift would have been the perfect transmission for this job. Making long pulls in low range with the box blade and then having to change to high range to get back to the starting point over and over all day. I did manage to move about 800 yards this way and am ready to dig the pipeline as of yesterday.

Like most people on the forum I can't afford to have every machine with the perfect set up for all the jobs I do so I compromise.

 

[arrow]

Both gear and HST have strong points for use, but for the average CUT owner who can only afford one tractor with todays choice of only gear or HST, I suppose HST is the winner.

I'd have to agree along the same lines as most cars are automatics. People don't care about "power loss". They didn't with automatics. I think cars became automatics with the advent of more and more woman drivers when in 1970, laws were passed to allow woman to drive. Convenience is king as is less stocking chaffing. As our arms and legs get shorter and shorter through lack of use, we need stuff that happens more automatically. At one time, Tyranosaurus had 8' arms but as his head got bigger and bigger, he didn't need arms of such lengths. The same thing is happening to us. So hydro or gear... you decide.

 

[k0ua]

I'd have to agree along the same lines as most cars are automatics. People don't care about "power loss". They didn't with automatics. I think cars became automatics with the advent of more and more woman drivers when in 1970, laws were passed to allow woman to drive. Convenience is king as is less stocking chaffing. As our arms and legs get shorter and shorter through lack of use, we need stuff that happens more automatically. At one time, Tyranosaurus had 8' arms but as his head got bigger and bigger, he didn't need arms of such lengths. The same thing is happening to us. So hydro or gear... you decide.

Now wait a second here!.. are you saying my head is too big and my arms are too short!:shocked:

 

[jenkinsph]

I think he is saying that some body parts get shorter if they aren't used. I thought their being short caused them not to get used enough. I need to figure this out.

 

[TripleR]

Gary,
I have to agree that in some cases the powershift would be a great choice. I have been moving lots of dirt this past week and a powershift would have been the perfect transmission for this job. Making long pulls in low range with the box blade and then having to change to high range to get back to the starting point over and over all day. I did manage to move about 800 yards this way and am ready to dig the pipeline as of yesterday.

Like most people on the forum I can't afford to have every machine with the perfect set up for all the jobs I do so I compromise.

No real disagreement as I operate both, but to me changing ranges is little to no different to me than changing gears and the HST+ narrows the gap even more. I'm a little long in the tooth, so I use my sons' experience and input as sort of a means to gauge my advice or opinion. When I put one in the M8540HDC and another in the L5740HSTC, they will pretty much do bucket for bucket, but the one in the 8540 is going to be much more tired at the end of a long day. Now if they did that for a living the results might change, but few of us are professionals.

 

[adventure bob]

HP is prbly not a good decision point neither is use. A JD 8rt with 245HP designed as a row tractor, i.e. dragging BA ground implements all day has a hydro on it.

 

[arrow]

I thought their being short caused them not to get used enough. I need to figure this out.

Never in a selective process world. I haven't used my height much and I'm getting shorter. And James, not at all am I saying your head is too big and your arms are too short, There is a test however: The next time you go out with friends and your pockets seem farther away when its time to pay up and then you use your head to think: "but I didn't order any drinks", then you know you are being effected.