Looking at used 1850's - its Charlie's fault!

[Bob999]

sounds logical but can you elaborate?

Unless the area you are mowing is very smooth large decks have a tendency to scalp. The larger the deck the greater the tendency to scalp. If you look at 5 and 6 foot decks on commercial quality mowers used by lawn services (Toro for example) you will see several anti scalp wheels on the mower deck. PT 6' decks--at least when I bought--have only one anti scalp wheel and it isn't particularly effective.

So--I found the 6' PT deck that I bought with my 1845 didn't give the cut quality I wanted. I purchased a Lasco articulated deck--basically 3 25" decks linked together with semi autonomous floatation for each. The result is very little scalping.

 

[MossRoad]

Unless the area you are mowing is very smooth large decks have a tendency to scalp. The larger the deck the greater the tendency to scalp. If you look at 5 and 6 foot decks on commercial quality mowers used by lawn services (Toro for example) you will see several anti scalp wheels on the mower deck. PT 6' decks--at least when I bought--have only one anti scalp wheel and it isn't particularly effective.

So--I found the 6' PT deck that I bought with my 1845 didn't give the cut quality I wanted. I purchased a Lasco articulated deck--basically 3 25" decks linked together with semi autonomous floatation for each. The result is very little scalping.

Heck, our 60" deck on the PT425 will scalp on relatively mild berms along our driveway. Look at it this way. The deck is 60" wide. I have my blades set up for a 3" high cut. If there is a 3.1" dome within a 60" area and I go over the center of it, I'm cutting dirt. Now widen that out to a 90" deck. If there is a 3.1" dome in a 90" area and I go over the center of it I'm cutting dirt. You are more likely to scalp with a larger solid deck than a smaller solid deck. The wider the deck, the more beneficial an articulating deck becomes apparent.

 

[wasabi]

Unless the area you are mowing is very smooth large decks have a tendency to scalp. The larger the deck the greater the tendency to scalp. If you look at 5 and 6 foot decks on commercial quality mowers used by lawn services (Toro for example) you will see several anti scalp wheels on the mower deck. PT 6' decks--at least when I bought--have only one anti scalp wheel and it isn't particularly effective.

So--I found the 6' PT deck that I bought with my 1845 didn't give the cut quality I wanted. I purchased a Lasco articulated deck--basically 3 25" decks linked together with semi autonomous floatation for each. The result is very little scalping.

Thx I get it now. I wondered how you got PT deck to articulate...but it is Lasco equip..

 

[wasabi]

The 1845 has enough power to handle the steepest hills I have the courage to mow.
Going straight up with the mower running must be done very slowly on the steepest parts, and it bogs if it is really steep and the grass heavy.
With single tires, it is a tossup whether I run out of power or traction first.
I've never had to abandon a job because of lack of power.

That being said, I'd prefer an 1850. Around my place, I'd probably find a lot of functions where the bigger machine would be clumsier, but I'd adapt. I drove to Tazewell to buy a 1430. Terry just stood and watched as I rationalized the step up to the 1845. Had I realized that it really was too big for my lawn and I needed to buy a separate lawnmower, I would probably still not have bought the 1850 because of the higher price. But for mowing pastures it certainly would be better. If my 1845 were beyond repair, I'd look for an 1850, particularly since my collection of attachments would fit.

Need a mower. Extra power might be nice, but not essential. Wider footprint too...I can live with more up and down if necessary to be safe. After a couple of first rough go's we'll mostly be facing orchard grass, weeds, fescue etc., not bush hogging. Cost's matter. Considering these comments, ones about 1850 having too much power for the arms and JJ's - "buy the power you need", I'm reconsidering possibility of single wheeled used 1845.

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

'sabi
One thing not mentioned much. Sedgewood and I have 2001 machines with the 72" rough-cut mower. Twice this year, I ordered new front tires from PT and they sent the size that is on the back of the mower. I finally talked it through with Terry, and he didn't remember the 72" rough-cut deck as having the big front casters that are on ours. Those wheels are apparently only used on the 90" deck now. The deck has two large casters in front and two rear anti-scalp wheels. I don't think they've made a 72" rough-cut like ours for some years. Mowing with that deck and draft control, I have next to no scalping on our pastures, cutting at about a 4" height. Certainly an articulated deck would be better for my lawn, but I got a 48" Exmark for that.
If you go for an 1845, I hope you find a rough-cut 72 with it. It has stump jumper hubs with short hinged blades, so is really three-wide brush hog. With the thinner high-lift blades that Sedgewood and I both put on, it does almost finish mower smoothness, but you can still drive into heavy brush and mulch it.

 

[wasabi]

'sabi
One thing not mentioned much. Sedgewood and I have 2001 machines with the 72" rough-cut mower. Twice this year, I ordered new front tires from PT and they sent the size that is on the back of the mower. I finally talked it through with Terry, and he didn't remember the 72" rough-cut deck as having the big front casters that are on ours. Those wheels are apparently only used on the 90" deck now. The deck has two large casters in front and two rear anti-scalp wheels. I don't think they've made a 72" rough-cut like ours for some years. Mowing with that deck and draft control, I have next to no scalping on our pastures, cutting at about a 4" height. Certainly an articulated deck would be better for my lawn, but I got a 48" Exmark for that.
If you go for an 1845, I hope you find a rough-cut 72 with it. It has stump jumper hubs with short hinged blades, so is really three-wide brush hog. With the thinner high-lift blades that Sedgewood and I both put on, it does almost finish mower smoothness, but you can still drive into heavy brush and mulch it.

I was just looking at some old threads on that...really like the blade innovations. My impression is the (older) PT finish decks are virtually the same as the rough cuts. Do you know if the spindles can handle conversion to rough cut blades and stump jumper hubs or is that another whole kettle of fish?

 

[woodlandfarms]

Need a mower. Extra power might be nice, but not essential. Wider footprint too...I can live with more up and down if necessary to be safe. After a couple of first rough go's we'll mostly be facing orchard grass, weeds, fescue etc., not bush hogging. Cost's matter. Considering these comments, ones about 1850 having too much power for the arms and JJ's - "buy the power you need", I'm reconsidering possibility of single wheeled used 1845.

To me a single wheeled 1845 is pretty close to a 1445. I know there are differences, but why get a single 1845 (Charlie?).

Also. my complaint about the 1850 being too much for the front end... No one else that owns 1850's has had the same complaint.

I don't think you can miss with either. I bought mine used along with ksimolo. We both love our machines.

Carl

 

[wasabi]

To me a single wheeled 1845 is pretty close to a 1445. I know there are differences, but why get a single 1845 (Charlie?).

Also. my complaint about the 1850 being too much for the front end... No one else that owns 1850's has had the same complaint.

I don't think you can miss with either. I bought mine used along with ksimolo. We both love our machines.

Carl

ya, i agree. 45 hp or better is essential. Otherwise i'd go back to looking at 1430. 1850 or 1845, dualies or not is what i want. I like the brakes and tilt seat feature. Traction (and ability to use dualies) seems a combined function of wheel diameter and motor specs. May upgrade if the unit I find is not up to par. As for extra lifting power, i have it with the 2445.

 

[wasabi]

To me a single wheeled 1845 is pretty close to a 1445. I know there are differences, but why get a single 1845 (Charlie?).

Carl,

I like the 1445 too. don't know for sure but guess perhaps the older pt '45s were single before dualies were offered? At any rate some of the older '45 machines have smaller wheel motors that won't support dualies. They seem to come on the market for less $ and I'm not averse to upgrading motors and/or wheels if needed. at any rate, i've got the PT bug again and sometime between now and next spring, i'm looking to find, acquire and upgrade a used pt to a meaner, cleaner pasture mowin machine...

I'd upgrade wheel motors and put dualies on the 2445 but don't like the center of gravity being so high

 

[Bob999]

The 1445 (or perhaps the 1460) with the optional turf tires would seem to be an option if you don't need to work cross slopes of more that 30 degrees (I think both of these machines will work 30 degree slopes--that would have to be confirmed with PT). They are less expensive than the 1800 series tractors and the absence of the slope tender doesn't seem as important because of the integral brakes that operate in much the same way as the slope tender when hydraulic power is lost.

However, if you consistently work steep cross slopes I think you would miss the tilting seat that the 1800 series has.

 

[SpringHollow]

Don't forget, the 1850 can be run with singles or duals. Because my bucket is the same width as my duals, when running down the drainage ditch to clean it out, i keep rubbing the tires against the dirt as i try to widen my cut. So i ran it with singles and was pleasantly surprised to find that with the bucket loaded with as much weight as it could take, i could still climb out of the ditch at a 20 degree angle in both directions without tipping over.

I personally would buy an 1850 over an 1845. I just could use more than 1200 lb lift capacity - almost exceeded that today - had to connect closer in on my lifting boom.

Ken

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

To me a single wheeled 1845 is pretty close to a 1445. I know there are differences, but why get a single 1845 (Charlie?).
Carl

I dunno.
The single wheel version is what I test drove. My impression was that the dual wheels would only be really useful in cross-mowing at the traction limit, and even then it had to be smooth enough for both wheels to be solidly on the ground. I wanted to be able to mow close to fences, and could only do that with the 72" deck with single wheels. (Anyone offset the mowers to get out past the duals?) The singles also have a little more ground clearance which I need since some trail maintenance is pretty rough.
I only mow two or three places where the duals would help, where I now may mow across with all four sliding and crabbing at maybe 15 degree angle. It does that more comfortably than the description sounds.

 

[SpringHollow]

Another advantage of the duals is that it cuts the ground impact of the tractor in half - extremely important where i live. Most of the time, i need duals to go down my trails because the clay is so soft. And i can drive the heavy tractor on my lawn without ruining it as well.

Ken

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

Another advantage of the duals is that it cuts the ground impact of the tractor in half - extremely important where i live. Most of the time, i need duals to go down my trails because the clay is so soft. And i can drive the heavy tractor on my lawn without ruining it as well.

Ken

I only rarely work in soft stuff. I've gottn mine stuck in the mud and been able to work its way out except twice when it was up against fence/tree when I had to tow assist. I wouldn't have been stuck w/ duals.
Re the 1445 - I'd like its lift capacity, but it is higher cg and probably capable on slopes but not as comfortable. The 1845 and 1850 are low cg.

 

[woodlandfarms]

So what about taking the leap of faith and making your 2445 a dualie? This is not meant to bring up the issue of structural integrity or motor life, both could be handled with maybe a 3 to 5K investment.

It is more to dodge the 18 to 30K investment for an 1850. I guess you would not have the braking system, but you could if you went to the 5K upgrade price and bought new wheel motors...

Food for thought, although this one may taste bad...

 

[wasabi]

The 1445 (or perhaps the 1460) ....the absence of the slope tender doesn't seem as important because of the integral brakes that operate in much the same way as the slope tender when hydraulic power is lost.

I had an experience last year while working in the orchard. I was headed down the steep side trail when a hyd hose blew and suddenly I was riding 5,000 pounds of freewheeling PT downhill gaining speed fast. Fortunately I was able to turn into the woods without flipping it or hitting anything. The slope tender may work fine when all hydraulics are intact, and I trust my instincts and reactions but a backup system would be prudent.

 

[wasabi]

So what about taking the leap of faith and making your 2445 a dualie? This is not meant to bring up the issue of structural integrity or motor life, both could be handled with maybe a 3 to 5K investment.

It is more to dodge the 18 to 30K investment for an 1850. I guess you would not have the braking system, but you could if you went to the 5K upgrade price and bought new wheel motors...

Food for thought, although this one may taste bad...

I've thought about it and done some research. My gut reaction is the cog would work out with dualies, but the 18 series makes more sense for mowing. (perhaps the lurking urge to have a fleet is a factor... )

I also think I might be pushing the 45 hp diesle a bit....i suspect the 2445 is already heavier than the 1845. Adding dualies may increase stabitlity and upgrading wheels may increase tourque, but the power is what it is...

 

[Bob999]

I had an experience last year while working in the orchard. I was headed down the steep side trail when a hyd hose blew and suddenly I was riding 5,000 pounds of freewheeling PT downhill gaining speed fast. Fortunately I was able to turn into the woods without flipping it or hitting anything. The slope tender may work fine when all hydraulics are intact, and I trust my instincts and reactions but a backup system would be prudent.

Wasabi--The brake tender on the 1800 series automatically applies brakes when hydraulic power is lost--hence the safety factor. The way it works is hydraulic power is used to release the spring applied brakes--remove the hydraulic power and the brakes are applied. The brake tender provides a manual way to apply hydraulic pressure to the brake circuit so if you have a tractor problem you can release the brakes and tow the unit.

MY UNDERSTANDING of the 1445/60 brake system is that it operates in the same fashion as the 1800 series in the event of loss of hydraulic pressure. The differences with the 1800 system are that: 1. the spring applied brakes are integral to the wheel motor; and 2. There is no brake tender to manually release the brakes--you must have hydraulic power to release the brakes.

 

[J_J]

1445/2445 /1460 Wet Disc Brakes- Spring Applied Hydraulic Release.

 

[J_J]

I had an experience last year while working in the orchard. I was headed down the steep side trail when a hyd hose blew and suddenly I was riding 5,000 pounds of freewheeling PT downhill gaining speed fast. Fortunately I was able to turn into the woods without flipping it or hitting anything. The slope tender may work fine when all hydraulics are intact, and I trust my instincts and reactions but a backup system would be prudent.

I had a similar experience on my 1445, when a wheel motor hose blew, rolling backward. If I would have been thinking and not in a panic mode, I could have lowered the bucket for some extra drag. Fortunately, a tree stopped my travel before I was about to go into a large stream.

I do see the need for a shotgun shell powered spike that would be shot into the ground with steel cable to stop the machine in a run-a way situation.

Another way would be to put a electric hyd shut off valve on some or all of the hyd motors, to put them into hyd lock.