Rotary Cutter Rotary Cutter size
- Thread starter BHeus
- Start date
- Views: 6364
have_blue
Veteran Member
Should be a perfect fit.
Gatorboy
Elite Member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2001
- Messages
- 3,138
- Location
- Bel Air, MD
- Tractor
- Kubota M8950, Bobcat 873 SSL & Kubota ZD-331
The Rhino SE7 requires a minimum PTO HP of 45.
Your New Holland TN 55 has a PTO HP of 42.
Usually you want even MORE HP than the minimum required for a rotary cutter. You have less than the minimum, so I would not recommend this combination.
Your New Holland TN 55 has a PTO HP of 42.
Usually you want even MORE HP than the minimum required for a rotary cutter. You have less than the minimum, so I would not recommend this combination.
have_blue
Veteran Member
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Should be a perfect fit. )</font>
But, on the other hand, maybe not! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
But, on the other hand, maybe not! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
froggy
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2001
- Messages
- 1,075
- Location
- Cooke County, Texas
- Tractor
- JD4320 with TNT, electric diverter, cruise control and air suspension seat.
He could go with the SE8 "pull type" and be ok as it has a minimum pto horsepower requirement of 30.
Rhino SE8
Rhino SE8
RoyJackson
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2001
- Messages
- 24,646
- Location
- Bethel, Vermont
- Tractor
- John Deere 4052R Cab,, Deere 855D UTV, Z920A Zero Turn Mower and assorted implements
"The Rhino SE7 requires a minimum PTO HP of 45.
Your New Holland TN 55 has a PTO HP of 42.
Usually you want even MORE HP than the minimum required for a rotary cutter. You have less than the minimum, so I would not recommend this combination "
Although Gatorboy has a point about the recommended PTO HP "requirements", I ran a cutter the manufacturer recommended 20 (PTO) HP minimum. I used a 16.5 PTO HP tractor to operate it..other then having to take partial passes when it got really thick, I had no problems at all. This was a field that had grown for two or three years...the stuff was thick and as tall as the cowl (or higher in some places).
My current tractor, a Deere 790, has 24 HP @ the PTO...I'm running the same cutter and have no doubt this tractor could handle a 72" cutter if used with a modicum of common sense. The weight of the cutter would be more of an issue with my 790, then the "minumum" HP requirements.
So, I'd go for that 84" cutter...your 42 PTO HP will be more then adequate if you use common sense.
Your New Holland TN 55 has a PTO HP of 42.
Usually you want even MORE HP than the minimum required for a rotary cutter. You have less than the minimum, so I would not recommend this combination "
Although Gatorboy has a point about the recommended PTO HP "requirements", I ran a cutter the manufacturer recommended 20 (PTO) HP minimum. I used a 16.5 PTO HP tractor to operate it..other then having to take partial passes when it got really thick, I had no problems at all. This was a field that had grown for two or three years...the stuff was thick and as tall as the cowl (or higher in some places).
My current tractor, a Deere 790, has 24 HP @ the PTO...I'm running the same cutter and have no doubt this tractor could handle a 72" cutter if used with a modicum of common sense. The weight of the cutter would be more of an issue with my 790, then the "minumum" HP requirements.
So, I'd go for that 84" cutter...your 42 PTO HP will be more then adequate if you use common sense.
dknarnd
Gold Member
Personally I would not want to run something that I couldn't use 100 percent of the capacity 100 percent of the time. And the point of weight issues is a valid concern also, especially in rough and hilly terrain.
JerryG
Super Member
You will be a lot happier if you follow Daves advise.
Indydirtfarmer
Platinum Member
I know absolutely NOTHING about your tractor.... I know a little about that mower....
Here's what I DO know. I use a 7' Woods BB840 behind a 6500 lb (including ballast) Deere 2440 (60 PTO HP) That mower weighs enough to give my tractor a work-out....I do commercial mowing. When cutting HEAVY brush and weeds, it gives the 60 HP engine a work-out.
My opinion, for what it's worth.... You could handle 7' if you're just clipping pastures, or maintaining a field that gets mowed quite regularly. I'd say you wouldn't be too happy with the results in heavy weeds or grass. Weight-wise, I'd about bet you'de be disapointed....
All just opinion.... I have little "factual information" to base this on, OTHER than my experience with ANOTHER brand of tractor, as well as ANOTHER brand of 7' mower.
Here's what I DO know. I use a 7' Woods BB840 behind a 6500 lb (including ballast) Deere 2440 (60 PTO HP) That mower weighs enough to give my tractor a work-out....I do commercial mowing. When cutting HEAVY brush and weeds, it gives the 60 HP engine a work-out.
My opinion, for what it's worth.... You could handle 7' if you're just clipping pastures, or maintaining a field that gets mowed quite regularly. I'd say you wouldn't be too happy with the results in heavy weeds or grass. Weight-wise, I'd about bet you'de be disapointed....
All just opinion.... I have little "factual information" to base this on, OTHER than my experience with ANOTHER brand of tractor, as well as ANOTHER brand of 7' mower.
Tim_in_IA
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 840
- Location
- Eastern Iowa
- Tractor
- Kubota B7610HSD, Mahindra 6500 4WD, JD 440ic crawler, 2 560 farmalls.
I'm also looking at the SE7 and SE6. for about 800 less and 1 ft less capacity you can get the SE6, which would likely be easier on your tractor. Mine could handle the SE7, but I think my pocketbook would like the SE6 better /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif.
Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 52,424
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( He could go with the SE8 "pull type" and be ok as it has a minimum pto horsepower requirement of 30.
)</font>
You know.. I've always found that funny... I've also seen reduced hp numbers on pull type mowers compaired to equal sized / same manufacturer 3pt mower. My 10' 3pt mower reccomends more hp than the pull type.. etc.
What gives.. the gear box is the same.. why would the 3pt mower need more pto hp? than the pull type?
Soundguy
)</font>
You know.. I've always found that funny... I've also seen reduced hp numbers on pull type mowers compaired to equal sized / same manufacturer 3pt mower. My 10' 3pt mower reccomends more hp than the pull type.. etc.
What gives.. the gear box is the same.. why would the 3pt mower need more pto hp? than the pull type?
Soundguy
have_blue
Veteran Member
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( What gives.. the gear box is the same.. why would the 3pt mower need more pto hp? than the pull type?
Soundguy )</font>
It makes me wonder if cutter manufacturers are considering only HP or of they're also considering tractor weight.
Soundguy )</font>
It makes me wonder if cutter manufacturers are considering only HP or of they're also considering tractor weight.
Tim_in_IA
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 840
- Location
- Eastern Iowa
- Tractor
- Kubota B7610HSD, Mahindra 6500 4WD, JD 440ic crawler, 2 560 farmalls.
some of them like rhino have a seperate lifting hp and pto hp. I think they are generalizing how much weight a tractor should be able to lift based on engine hp. If this is the case then you just go by what your manual says your tractor can lift with the 3pt and make sure it can handle the implement, and make sure the pto hp is greater than the minimum for the implement.
