Model Advice

[California]

With a loader, near impossible to steer until you start moving, then easy - unless there's a lot of weight in the bucket.

With a loaded bucket use the loader to lift the front tires off the ground, spin the steering wheel to point where you want to go, set the tires down and start off.

No loader? No big deal but you learn to start rolling before steering. It becomes instinctive. My last heavy non-ps vehicle was a Wagoneer, and long ago an Oldsmobile same model as a CHP cruiser. Plus Ford pickup etc that felt lighter. it's not that difficult, after you learn to start rolling slightly before attempting steering.

Your wife shouldn't have a problem.

 

[CoyPatton]

I agree with California, very difficult when sitting still. Slightly difficult with a load in the FEL bucket or lots of weights on front of tractor. Just like non power steering vehicles of years gone by, much easier with just a bit of rolling regardless of the load on the front. Add a spinner knob to help.
All that said, it is doable or no one would run a tractor without PS. Mine does not have PS and it is rarely an issue.

 

[nova3930]

With a loader, near impossible to steer until you start moving, then easy - unless there's a lot of weight in the bucket.

With a loaded bucket use the loader to lift the front tires off the ground, spin the steering wheel to point where you want to go, set the tires down and start off.

No loader? No big deal but you learn to start rolling before steering. It becomes instinctive. My last heavy non-ps vehicle was a Wagoneer, and long ago an Oldsmobile same model as a CHP cruiser. Plus Ford pickup etc that felt lighter. it's not that difficult, after you learn to start rolling slightly before attempting steering.

Your wife shouldn't have a problem.

Good deal. I'm not paying what they want for a loader with a skid steer on hand already.

 

[rScotty]

one more question I've been thinking about. What's the effort required to steer one of the non-PS models? Since the wife might use it, that's an important consideration. If it's too hard to steer she might not use it.

Good question. When I was in my 30s I had two tractors - one a Yanmar - with loaders and no power steering. You can do it.... I got the work done, but it sure wasn't easy.
Basically with a good load in the bucket steering is very difficult. Even if you can turn the steering wheel, you are putting a huge load on the steering gearbox. With any load in the bucket it was often necessary to stop, put the bucket on the ground, add some down pressure to lighten the front end, turn the wheels, then lift the bucket and proceed. Like I said, you can do it and so can she, but I ended up spending way to much time trying out various schemes to power the steering. All without real success.
Since I use the loader a lot just for chores, all our tractors since have had power steering.
Oh, WITHOUT A LOADER all the tractors I've ever drive steer just fine. In fact, they steer easily with one hand. No problem.

If your wife enjoys landscaping, planting things, and just general yard work and gardening ..... she would love a tractor with a small loader and power steering. She just doesn't know it yet. They are just so handy.
rScotty

 

[nova3930]

If your wife enjoys landscaping, planting things, and just general yard work and gardening ..... she would love a tractor with a small loader and power steering. She just doesn't know it yet. They are just so handy.
rScotty

Something to think about for sure. Maybe a newer compact with a hst might be better. I think she could handle the power shift with a little practice but an hst is even easier. Gotta find some time to let her drive some.

 

[careyo63]

Then there is A 3pt. scoop. What I use on the Ym2000 no power steering. Works really good. Fredricks has them. 275$ I think I seen. Believe it's the same make as mine, Lowery. Great for small chores. So extremely light a couple minutes to hook up. And then you don't have a FEL sticking out the front when mowing etc.. I have plenty of seat time on a JD. 5103 with a FEL.. 50Hp. It had a Frontier removable Bucket which stayed off.. One of the reasons the 2000 doesn't have a FEL. knowing what It can do. Had to move a large pile of dirt and wasn't nothing to it. Great to just hold and move things also Firewood Etc..

 

[bmaverick]

Am I losing my mind or aren't we on the vintage yanmar section?

I would agree. My Fredricks YM2610 just had a little over 1410hr on the meter when I got it. Tom mentioned they do not mess with the meter hours. That's like messing with a car OD. Each meter belongs to the tractor it came out of. I've just rolled it to 1706hrs last week. Not bad from summer 2014 till now. The hours really add up when the engine is at and above 2200rpm. BUT, I tend to operate at 1200 to 1800 much of the time.

The YM2610 is one of the nicer Yanmars Fredrick's puts out. That and the YM1720. The YM2610 has the PowerShift and the 4 speed selection PTO. The JD 850 uses the same engine. The JD 850 is the clone of the YM2500. Both are 4 speed geared. PowerShift gives you the 'live' PTO so you can mow forwards-shift-backwards without spinning the PTO down using the clutch with the YM2510 over the YM2500/JD850.

Parts in the USA for the JD850 JD750 JD900HC with the 3T80 are plentiful. The UK Yanmar YM257 uses the 3T80 and so does the Yanmar gensets and Marine here.

Thus, in years ahead, both the YM2500/YM2610 should have parts available. That was why I chose the YM2610 over all the rest.

 

[CoyPatton]

Something to think about for sure. Maybe a newer compact with a hst might be better. I think she could handle the power shift with a little practice but an hst is even easier. Gotta find some time to let her drive some.

I may be a minority on my view, but I would take a power shift anytime over a HST. Perhaps it comes from my age and being raised with gear tractors. I have found that my speed control is very inconsistent with an HST and my foot gets very tired when do jobs like bush hogging.
With a skid steer available, I would not spend the money on a FEL either. Nor would I worry with a _______scoop (dirt, pond or whatever you want to call the scoop). The scoop can serve multiple purposes, carryall, scoop and others. Often you can find used ones in decent shape on craigslist and FB marketplace, if you want to try one.
There is another recent thread where PTO speed selection and engine rpms are discussed. Some seem to think they are saving wear and tear on the motor and others do not. Personally, I am undecided on that topic. Personally, I think one of the reasons these tractors can go close or even beyond 10,000 hrs before typical major engine problems is that much of their life is spend not at “operating” RPM’s. Many of us have FEL’s on our ‘small’ tractors and there is just no need to turn 2400 rpm to do bucket work. A fast idle of about 1500 rpm’s usually gets plenty of fluid flow. The benefit to lower rpm’s and yet maintain PTO rpm’s will save fuel and depending on how much PTO work you will do, this may be worth playing around with.

 

[rScotty]

I may be a minority on my view, but I would take a power shift anytime over a HST. Perhaps it comes from my age and being raised with gear tractors. I have found that my speed control is very inconsistent with an HST and my foot gets very tired when do jobs like bush hogging.
With a skid steer available, I would not spend the money on a FEL either. Nor would I worry with a _______scoop (dirt, pond or whatever you want to call the scoop). The scoop can serve multiple purposes, carryall, scoop and others. Often you can find used ones in decent shape on craigslist and FB marketplace, if you want to try one.
There is another recent thread where PTO speed selection and engine rpms are discussed. Some seem to think they are saving wear and tear on the motor and others do not. Personally, I am undecided on that topic. Personally, I think one of the reasons these tractors can go close or even beyond 10,000 hrs before typical major engine problems is that much of their life is spend not at “operating” RPM’s. Many of us have FEL’s on our ‘small’ tractors and there is just no need to turn 2400 rpm to do bucket work. A fast idle of about 1500 rpm’s usually gets plenty of fluid flow. The benefit to lower rpm’s and yet maintain PTO rpm’s will save fuel and depending on how much PTO work you will do, this may be worth playing around with.

I don't think your view is in the minority at all. But maybe that's because I agree with everything you said.... including Yanmars' powershift over the HST.

Of course that depends on the HST. The one on our big Kubota coupled with it's automatic return to idle, adjustable HST attack rate, and a fingertip lever split-shifting rear axle that gives double the ranges....well, it's a pretty nice HST. In fact the best I've ever seen or used. But like you say, my foot still gets tired if I am going any distance. The simple powershift is better for that. The powershift is pretty rugged, too. And easily repaired....which the HST is probably not.
rScotty

 

[bmaverick]

I may be a minority on my view, but I would take a power shift anytime over a HST. Perhaps it comes from my age and being raised with gear tractors. I have found that my speed control is very inconsistent with an HST and my foot gets very tired when do jobs like bush hogging.
With a skid steer available, I would not spend the money on a FEL either. Nor would I worry with a _______scoop (dirt, pond or whatever you want to call the scoop). The scoop can serve multiple purposes, carryall, scoop and others. Often you can find used ones in decent shape on craigslist and FB marketplace, if you want to try one.
There is another recent thread where PTO speed selection and engine rpms are discussed. Some seem to think they are saving wear and tear on the motor and others do not. Personally, I am undecided on that topic. Personally, I think one of the reasons these tractors can go close or even beyond 10,000 hrs before typical major engine problems is that much of their life is spend not at “operating” RPM’s. Many of us have FEL’s on our ‘small’ tractors and there is just no need to turn 2400 rpm to do bucket work. A fast idle of about 1500 rpm’s usually gets plenty of fluid flow. The benefit to lower rpm’s and yet maintain PTO rpm’s will save fuel and depending on how much PTO work you will do, this may be worth playing around with.

I agree with you as well.

HST has it's place, but lacks the ability when needing to tow something heavy, or to use a deep bottom plow or being stuck in the snow and ice and going up inclines. Power-Shift or Shuttle Shift or Synchronize Shift (whatever way you want to call it) for gear selection holds stronger and the engagement is solid. It's not as smooooth as an HST, but you know that you know that gear is stable and solid when the bump shift is moved.