L39s are arriving!

[JimMorrissey]

Yeah, HST would be nice. However, the loader and any hydraulic quick-attach implements get full hydraulic flow with GST. I'd guess there are some other good engineering reasons why they went GST on this machine. I'm just going to have to get used to it.

About 10-12 years ago I used to regularly use a geared JD 770 (fathers). Being that I didn't know anything different, it never crossed my mind that changing gears manually was an issue. Now, after having two HST driven machines...I'm spoiled. I'll have to get the "leather" back in my palms. -I'm hoping I'll come to prefer the GST. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[_RaT_]

Jim, I don't think it's so much that you need to hope you will prefer GST over HST, you will simply accomodate it and it will work very nice especially on a machine that heavy, with that much power requirement in terms of hydraulic flow and all the added weight/traction you will have on the rear. Personally, I don't think the L39 would have performed very well as a HST especially since it has the same engine I have on my L3830. The L48 has one problem that I simply could not get used to, either not enough power or to few ranges. Medium was to slow and high was to high. Sure in medium or low you had enough power, it was the time it took to do things. I suppose the best of both worlds would be either more hydro ranges or a electric downshift like NH has or simply more diesel to make up the difference. There is no question in my mind that the right hydro, on the right size tractor with adequate HP is significantly faster at loader, manuvering, and tight quarters control, but the L39 would not be a candidate for it. I think the L48 with a considerably more powerful engine is a good example. Even it would have probably benefitted from GST. On the otherhand, my L3830 is a sterling example of how to best set up HST. It is simply fantastic. Enjoy your L39

 

[SkyPup]

Jim, I absolutely love the GST on the L39, it is even slicker than the GST on my L3130. You'll get used to it fast, just remember it is basically an automated manual transmission, just use the shuttle shift allot for Forward-Neutral-Reverse. I just use the F-N-R lever, hardly ever the clutch. It sure beats the living daylights out of an HST! /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

I've got 35 hours on ours now and I'll post some pics of me removing a stump as large as a Volkswagen Beetle with the BT1000 backhoe, it is extremely powerful and versatile. The pics are amazing.... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Attached is a comparison of our L-3130 with the L39, the straight FEL boom on the L39 took the most getting used to. I sure does have some terriffic breakout force! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[_RaT_]

"It sure beats the living daylights out of an HST!"


Uh oh, I knew the reports about the L39 were to good to be true. Knowing that this is not possible. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[SkyPup]

Rat, I've had a MF HST hydrostatic transmission for over twenty years now and the new Kubota GST 12F-8R tranny is much better for me. I like the precise control of the throttle and gear selection for the project at hand. HST give great control too, but not as good as the GST for me. In particular I DO like adjusting the GST foot throttle to the load instead of operating at a constant throttle on the HST. I also prefer selecting the proper gear (12 forward and 8 reverse it is difficult NOT to have a good gear for the job).

Also, the fuel economy is enhanced too, I put 16.5 hours of operation on less than 1/2 tank of the L39 this past weekend (of course I am still breaking it in so have been operating the BH at ~1,300 rpm). But it is giving me outstanding fuel economy, as does the 3130 GST too.

To each his own, but I much prefer the manual transmission with the associated ease of the GST.

 

[slowzuki]

Hydro tranny is completely separate from the implement pump, separate from the steering pump too for that matter.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Yeah, HST would be nice. However, the loader and any hydraulic quick-attach implements get full hydraulic flow with GST. )</font>

 

[_RaT_]

" I've had a MF HST hydrostatic transmission for over twenty years now"

Interesting, have you had any issues with it. I am so unfamiliar with MF and it's products. Thats a fairly old tractor with HST and you should be able to provide some insight on how well MF's HST have held over the years. Kubotas GST is very nice, I have used one and found it worked well. I typically operate my L3830 at about 2000 RPM, on this engine (same one as the L39), that is just purring along, very quiet and smooth. This engine mates very well to either GST or HST. For the weight of the L39, I think with this small engine, GST is the better choice.

I talked to the mechanic at my local JD/Kubota dealer and he said the new GST's are holding up very well inspite of all the electric solenoids. I asked which transmission he preferred, GST or HST and he proceeded to tell me that he hated HST with a passion. Said he would never own one and cursed them. I asked why, were you experiencing mechanical issues with them? He said the Kubotas HST were bullet proof short of running it out of oil but he just always had gears. (sounds like a familar tune around TBN). So, again I ask or say, then GST is what you would go with and he looked at me, head tilted and said, I'm a full fledged convert. I would only go HST with Kubota given the choice. That certainly made me feel a little better about the longevity of HST since all this guy does is the major repair work for the dealer. You are correct though, it is personal choice and I find that just having a shuttle shift so much nice then the old mechanical shift. Add GST to that mix and you really have a nice setup. I really like the design of the new L39, even it's lower profile is great. When I had the L48, I never could get accustom to the HST and very low gearing for both Low and Medium range. My L3830 HST adequately addresses that.

 

[ByronBob]

Whats a package like this cost?? Just a ballpark. 25? 30?

 

[SkyPup]

I've had virtually zero problems with the Hydrostatic transmission on our 1985 MF 1030 except for the price of the hydraulic filters!

I was thinking of selling it but it works 100% perfect so I'm keeping it. It's been simple to maintain, just changing out the hydraulic fluid and the filters and sometime adjusting the engagement adjustement mechanisms to insure full disingagement and no creep.

What I don't like is operating at a constant rpm when you don't need to, it wastes fuel.

 

[SkyPup]

35K for ours.