TC40DA

Crisswell · Jun 9, 2006

Ok. The plot thickens! Went to the dealer today and drove the hydro and shuttle shift models and also discovered that you can buy a TC 48DA (only comes with SS) for about the same price as a TC40DA (hydro).

The 48 will take a bigger RFM (90" vs 84") and Bush Hog (7' vs 6') and has about 10 more PTO HP. And alot of the Nicesities on the 40 DA are present on the 48. Only one that is a real sacrifice is the swivel seat. Not on the 48, I don't think.

I know the 48 & 55's are newer models. Anybody know how the quality/reliability issues have been with the 48's?

The hydro is definitely easier to operate, but I kinda like the SS. I feel like I've got more control over what's going on. Probably just because I'm more involved in making it happen. However, Both are VERY nice tractors/transmissions!

Any thoughts on buying the 48 instead of the 40? Any operating related problems with the 48's. The only issue I've read about is the 18 LA FEL lifts so much weight it's hard to keep the rear wheels on the ground.

Amy thoughts or advice?

Thanks.

Andy

Crisswell · Jun 9, 2006

Ok. The plot thickens! Went to the dealer today and drove the hydro and shuttle shift models and also discovered that you can buy a TC 48DA (only comes with SS) for about the same price as a TC40DA (hydro).

The 48 will take a bigger RFM (90" vs 84") and Bush Hog (7' vs 6') and has about 10 more PTO HP. And alot of the Nicesities on the 40 DA are present on the 48. Only one that is a real sacrifice is the swivel seat. Not on the 48, I don't think.

I know the 48 & 55's are newer models. Anybody know how the quality/reliability issues have been with the 48's?

The hydro is definitely easier to operate, but I kinda like the SS. I feel like I've got more control over what's going on. Probably just because I'm more involved in making it happen. However, Both are VERY nice tractors/transmissions!

Any thoughts on buying the 48 instead of the 40? Any operating related problems with the 48's. The only issue I've read about is the 18 LA FEL lifts so much weight it's hard to keep the rear wheels on the ground.

Amy thoughts or advice?

Thanks.

Andy

ovrszd · Jun 10, 2006

( Ok.

The hydro is definitely easier to operate, but I kinda like the SS. I feel like I've got more control over what's going on. Probably just because I'm more involved in making it happen. However, Both are VERY nice tractors/transmissions!

Amy thoughts or advice?

Thanks.

Andy )

I've read this entire thread and really enjoyed the discussion about SS versus Hydro. I've ran a backhoe a lot with SS and currently mow with Hydro.

To say you have more control with SS is similar to President Clinton's remark about "what the definition of "is" is".

If you are talking about "control" as in the definition of being in charge of the movement of your tractor with the least amount of input???? Then Hydro all the way!!!! No questioning that.

If you are talking about "control" as in when the engine is turning a given rpm and the transmission is in a given gear the end result is a given speed??? Then SS all the way. No questioning that.

If you are concerned about the ability to change direction, change speed with the minimum input from the operator, Hydro all the way!!!

The only negative I can see to Hydro is if the tractor HP you choose is critical because of PTO operated equipment that needs that specific amount of HP. Hydro robs some HP. But what it gives you in return is immeasurable over time.

I would challenge anyone to take two tractors, one SS and one Hydro and do repetative tasks such as the loader job described above where he moved 87 buckets of material or the brush hog project where he chopped around and against several trees and compare the results. I would be willing to bet that an increase of efficiency and ease of operation would be measurable, especially after several hours of operation.

Not trying to flame anyone, just offering this for discussion.

ovrszd · Jun 10, 2006

( Ok.

The hydro is definitely easier to operate, but I kinda like the SS. I feel like I've got more control over what's going on. Probably just because I'm more involved in making it happen. However, Both are VERY nice tractors/transmissions!

Amy thoughts or advice?

Thanks.

Andy )

I've read this entire thread and really enjoyed the discussion about SS versus Hydro. I've ran a backhoe a lot with SS and currently mow with Hydro.

To say you have more control with SS is similar to President Clinton's remark about "what the definition of "is" is".

If you are talking about "control" as in the definition of being in charge of the movement of your tractor with the least amount of input???? Then Hydro all the way!!!! No questioning that.

If you are talking about "control" as in when the engine is turning a given rpm and the transmission is in a given gear the end result is a given speed??? Then SS all the way. No questioning that.

If you are concerned about the ability to change direction, change speed with the minimum input from the operator, Hydro all the way!!!

The only negative I can see to Hydro is if the tractor HP you choose is critical because of PTO operated equipment that needs that specific amount of HP. Hydro robs some HP. But what it gives you in return is immeasurable over time.

I would challenge anyone to take two tractors, one SS and one Hydro and do repetative tasks such as the loader job described above where he moved 87 buckets of material or the brush hog project where he chopped around and against several trees and compare the results. I would be willing to bet that an increase of efficiency and ease of operation would be measurable, especially after several hours of operation.

Not trying to flame anyone, just offering this for discussion.

Doc_Bob · Jun 10, 2006

( ( Ok.

If you are concerned about the ability to change direction, change speed with the minimum input from the operator, Hydro all the way!!!

Not trying to flame anyone, just offering this for discussion. )

Good points and no flame felt or read. HST vs SS, each has it strong points. Now, what do you think about power shuttle (or EHSS) ? Versus these two (SS/HST)?

Power shuttle (PS) can forward and reverse with ease and speed. As fast as any HST. And PS has multiple fixed gears forward and reverse with no loss of power at PTO. Then, PS has a foot throttle (and a dash throttle), which allows infinite control of speed (within range of initial gear selected). Is PS the best of both worlds? I see PS on the bigger (more HP tractors). What does that mean?
Bob

Doc_Bob · Jun 10, 2006

( ( Ok.

If you are concerned about the ability to change direction, change speed with the minimum input from the operator, Hydro all the way!!!

Not trying to flame anyone, just offering this for discussion. )

Good points and no flame felt or read. HST vs SS, each has it strong points. Now, what do you think about power shuttle (or EHSS) ? Versus these two (SS/HST)?

Power shuttle (PS) can forward and reverse with ease and speed. As fast as any HST. And PS has multiple fixed gears forward and reverse with no loss of power at PTO. Then, PS has a foot throttle (and a dash throttle), which allows infinite control of speed (within range of initial gear selected). Is PS the best of both worlds? I see PS on the bigger (more HP tractors). What does that mean?
Bob

Crisswell · Jun 10, 2006

( ....

Not trying to flame anyone, just offering this for discussion. )

Didn't take the heat on anything you said - except for comparing me to Slick Willy!! - But I won't comment any further on that at the risk of turning this into a political debate. Let's just say I didn't waste alot of time listening to anything he had to say so I wouldn't be in a position to know how he defines anything. Must have been a different experience for others. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Keeping things positive, I probably could have been more specific. My reference to control had more to do with engine rpm's, transmission gear selection for the task at hand, ground speed, braking, etc. And from a personal point of view, a safety related concern.

I've driven alot of clutches over the years, and am accustomed to reacting in a certain way in an emergency situation - clutch, shifter and brake move as fast as I can make them. My programmed reaction would NOT be productive on a Hydro. I know I'd want to use the directional pedal(s) as a brake in that split second you have to avoid a disaster. That's not to say the Hydros are unsafe - it's just how I'm programmed to react, now. A big control/safety concern specific to me!!

I like having a foot pedal for an accelerator. Again, something I'm accustomed to having/operating. I'd have to re-learn that pushing the directional pedals further doesn't necessarily mean you go faster and providing less foot pressure doesn't mean you go slower. Seems like it would take awhile to figure that out and re-program my brain. Again, not to say there's anything wrong with that, or that I couldn't eventually get comfortable with it, it just introduces uncertainty for me and makes me feel less in control now.

However, I absolutely can see how doing repetitive tasks (FEL related work) would make the hydro the clear choice. But for me, at this point, I dont know how much of the FEL work I'd be doing, staying in one place and scooping 87 loads of anything in a day. But then again you never know until you have it.

Thanks for your input on this. Really. It was very helpful! Made me focus on exactly what my control concerns are! /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Andy

Crisswell · Jun 10, 2006

( ....

Not trying to flame anyone, just offering this for discussion. )

Didn't take the heat on anything you said - except for comparing me to Slick Willy!! - But I won't comment any further on that at the risk of turning this into a political debate. Let's just say I didn't waste alot of time listening to anything he had to say so I wouldn't be in a position to know how he defines anything. Must have been a different experience for others. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Keeping things positive, I probably could have been more specific. My reference to control had more to do with engine rpm's, transmission gear selection for the task at hand, ground speed, braking, etc. And from a personal point of view, a safety related concern.

I've driven alot of clutches over the years, and am accustomed to reacting in a certain way in an emergency situation - clutch, shifter and brake move as fast as I can make them. My programmed reaction would NOT be productive on a Hydro. I know I'd want to use the directional pedal(s) as a brake in that split second you have to avoid a disaster. That's not to say the Hydros are unsafe - it's just how I'm programmed to react, now. A big control/safety concern specific to me!!

I like having a foot pedal for an accelerator. Again, something I'm accustomed to having/operating. I'd have to re-learn that pushing the directional pedals further doesn't necessarily mean you go faster and providing less foot pressure doesn't mean you go slower. Seems like it would take awhile to figure that out and re-program my brain. Again, not to say there's anything wrong with that, or that I couldn't eventually get comfortable with it, it just introduces uncertainty for me and makes me feel less in control now.

However, I absolutely can see how doing repetitive tasks (FEL related work) would make the hydro the clear choice. But for me, at this point, I dont know how much of the FEL work I'd be doing, staying in one place and scooping 87 loads of anything in a day. But then again you never know until you have it.

Thanks for your input on this. Really. It was very helpful! Made me focus on exactly what my control concerns are! /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Andy

BungeeII · Jun 10, 2006

Seeing how the tranny conversation is going here (and especially with 87 loads to reference)

I've been trying to see in my minds eye how I would use either tranny for my needs. I too have been moving lots of dirt. We have a small vein of sand that I've been robbing, and now we have a few piles of clay that I'll need to move. For the sand, I've been scooping down with the 730 loader on the old ford in 1st gear, pulling up and back to reverse, pushing down and forward to 2nd to drive out of the hole with the heavy load, and then while moving, clutching and moving to either 3rd or 4th to travel several hundred feet where the load will go.

My biggest concern for either Hyd or Gear is whether I'll be able to go through all steps in a single range. Because, it seems to me, that changing ranges for any model will require stopping the tractor.

Any input?

BungeeII · Jun 10, 2006

Seeing how the tranny conversation is going here (and especially with 87 loads to reference)

I've been trying to see in my minds eye how I would use either tranny for my needs. I too have been moving lots of dirt. We have a small vein of sand that I've been robbing, and now we have a few piles of clay that I'll need to move. For the sand, I've been scooping down with the 730 loader on the old ford in 1st gear, pulling up and back to reverse, pushing down and forward to 2nd to drive out of the hole with the heavy load, and then while moving, clutching and moving to either 3rd or 4th to travel several hundred feet where the load will go.

My biggest concern for either Hyd or Gear is whether I'll be able to go through all steps in a single range. Because, it seems to me, that changing ranges for any model will require stopping the tractor.

Any input?

TC40DA

Crisswell

Bronze Member

Crisswell

Bronze Member

ovrszd

Epic Contributor

ovrszd

Epic Contributor

Doc_Bob

Elite Member

Doc_Bob

Elite Member

Crisswell

Bronze Member

Crisswell

Bronze Member

BungeeII

Gold Member

BungeeII

Gold Member

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

Footer Links 1

Footer Links 2