RTV900 vs Mule 3010 Diesel

[Wayne_H]

The belt drive worked great, but at 500 hours the torque convertor started to drag a bit, and after looking at the manual, it looked like a big deal... so that was the excuse for the RTV!

Wayne

 

[PapaPerk]

Nice, I am looking to move my 20' boat around the yard too.

Deciding between the Mule and RTV900 too.

The hydraulics on the RTV900 are nice to drive, but the belt system of the Mule seems much more simple.

Belts are for go carts in my opinion. The kubota is in a different class. Very well made... and with a Kubota diesel!

 

[2fast2]

Belts are for go carts in my opinion. The kubota is in a different class. Very well made... and with a Kubota diesel!

You know, I wasn't completely confident about belts when I went shopping at the John Deere dealership for our XUV850D. I asked the dealer about that (he owns the business) and he pointed out that Deere's huge combines which cost hundreds of thousands of dollars use belts to drive their transmissions. No way for me to verify that, nor to doubt that, but if true, it suggests belts are NOT just for go carts. This is proven technology, even if it isn't your personal first choice.

 

[mtrain]

Bad analogy.
Throw a butch of mud or water on those combine belts and they will slip also. The belts on a combine are not used to drive the power to the wheels to make the combine move. They are used to drive other mechanisms associated with the threshing process.
Case IH is actually doing away with most belt drive systems on their combines.

 

[2fast2]

Like I said, I didn't personally know about the combines, but it didn't make sense to me.
Being from up north originally, I was very familiar and comfortable with the belt drive technology since all the snowmobiles I'd seen had that system. They get wet with snow, and I'd never had a problem.
I'm not one of those guys interested in extreme mudding with my XUV. For me it is a capable utility vehicle. I'd personally NEVER drive one mostly underwater or through mud just to see what I could do, since I work for my money and I paid too much to risk ruining it. Other people look at things completely differently and buy machines for just such a purpose. We're all different. I'm almost 50 and I outgrew those tendencies long ago.
Now I do expect the machine to do what I want, through fields with mud, etc. But if the situation is more extreme I'm taking the JD 5210 MFW not the XUV anyway.
As I understand it, the gators have been running that belt drive for many years now. I think it works for utility purposes, but I'm not criticizing other brands with different drive systems. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Old Coot]

So I have owne a Mule 3010 gas version. I traded it in last fall for the RTV-900. They both have advantages and faults in my opinion. Here are some thoughts:

Overall, they are both good. If the new mules had power steering and a hydro trans I may have bought that, but they don't... so I have an RTV!

Wayne

I also had a gas 3010 Mule. I would agree completely with Wayne. And add that the Mule starts better in really cold weather. But I think the RTV is a tougher rig.
Also found that I ususally shut the motor off and shift gears and restart it when it sticks in gear. jack

 

[jinman]

Bad analogy.
Throw a butch of mud or water on those combine belts and they will slip also. The belts on a combine are not used to drive the power to the wheels to make the combine move. They are used to drive other mechanisms associated with the threshing process.
Case IH is actually doing away with most belt drive systems on their combines.

The belt on the Mule's transmission has filtered air supplied to it just the same as the air going to the engine intake. There is a snorkel vent at the top of the Mule's rollcage where air enters the tube and goes down one side to the engine and the other side to the transmission. The filter element is in a sealed case at the bottom of the rollcage that is held in place with six bolts and wingnuts. As an operator, you will need a scuba tank before the engine or transmission get wet or dirty. This is not true of all UTVs, but Kawasaki has this problem licked.

There is a 3010 Mule at Dallas-Ft Worth airport used daily to pick up trash. About a year ago, I asked the fellow operating it how many hours were on the clock. It was over 3,500 hours. I think that speaks very well for the longevity of a belt-drive variable speed transmission. The perceived reliability issues don't exist.

 

[gec343]

The belt on the Mule's transmission has filtered air supplied to it just the same as the air going to the engine intake. There is a snorkel vent at the top of the Mule's rollcage where air enters the tube and goes down one side to the engine and the other side to the transmission. The filter element is in a sealed case at the bottom of the rollcage that is held in place with six bolts and wingnuts. As an operator, you will need a scuba tank before the engine or transmission get wet or dirty. This is not true of all UTVs, but Kawasaki has this problem licked.

There is a 3010 Mule at Dallas-Ft Worth airport used daily to pick up trash. About a year ago, I asked the fellow operating it how many hours were on the clock. It was over 3,500 hours. I think that speaks very well for the longevity of a belt-drive variable speed transmission. The perceived reliability issues don't exist.

I must agree with you on the reliability of the Mule belt drive, and variable transmission. I bought a new 1997 2510 model, then used the thing for the last 14 years, hauled lot's of wood, granddchildren, etc. Never had a problem with it until recently, when I had to replace the U-joints, clutches and belt, plus a few other worn parts. The 2510 was extremely reliable until these issues. The total cost, including labor was $895.00. Not too bad for thirteen years of enjoyment. However, I am considering the RTV900, but still not certain that i shouldn't consider the Mule 4010.

 

[Gary Fowler]

Variable speed Belt drives have been on combines for more tha40 years I know. We had on on a Minneapolis Moline in the 70s and it did pull the final drive on the transmission. Also had a belt drive that pulled everything else. The transmission drive used hydraulic pressure the open an close a set of pulleys that got smaller on one side as the got bigger on the other which is how the variable speed worked. Never had any slipping problem and never replaced the belt on either of the two we owned and they had 318 cu in V 8 Chrysler engines and would stall the engine back rather severly before slipping the belts.
Now my brother in laws Gator 2 WD gas engine(dont know the model) will burn the belt when trying to pull a load and not a heavy load either. Was trying once to pull a 500 pound box blade from under the shed and wouldnt budge it. It does ok for putzin around the farm and goes pretty well in mud for just being 2 wd.