DVerbarg
Platinum Member
Interesting thread. At first I had an emotional response (not very objective) but the more I read the more interesting it became.
Regarding the PTO engagement question, the PTO on a NH can be engaged/disengaged on the fly by moving the lever, no foot clutching involved. In fact, on the TC35-45 series, there is no foot clutch. The PTO also has some type of brake to slow the PTO driven implement down after disengagment. This is useful on implements such as a rotary cutter. Once the PTO shaft is stopped the brake does not have any effect on the PTO shaft, allowing easy hand turning while attaching implements.
Having done a similiar comparison when I purchased, but not with the rigor that Glenn has introduced, I almost went with the JD but ended up with the NH when subjective forces were factored into the equation. Like Bird (I hope I am remembering correctly) I will not purchase certain cars because of poor operator comfort, even if it can be argued that they objectively are better than others. Operator comfort plays a more critical role then objective measurements. What use is a tractor and FEL that can lift 300 lbs more if you reduce your use by 30% (a subjective number) because it is difficult, awkward, or uncomfortable? My 15 year old brother is at my house every few days wanting to borrow my TC40D instead of using my parents MF275. Their loader lifts 3ft higher than mine, lifts at least 800lbs more (doesn't need any counter weight either), and has 25 more hp, yet many tasks get done around my parent's place with my TC40D that would take much longer to get done because the MF275 is not as easy/comfortable to use. Even my sister is now borrowing the TC40D, but won't use the MF275 anymore after trying a few times.
The conclusion that I came to when I purchased my unit was that the force measurements were all within ranges that made them practically equal (+/- 10%), only leaving questions of functionality. Such questions include, but are not limited to, the ability of the JD units to lift the belly mower independently of the rear 3pt. Objectively this was a negative for NH, but as Glenn has pointed out, we each need to weight the pros and cons once we know what they are (since I already owned a rear mount finish mower this was very low).
One other note, someone mentioned the NH sloped hood being an asset. After getting over the initial subjective "don't like it", I would agree, it has an objective benefit. While rotary mowing in tall grasses obstacles can be more easily seen. This can be an objective difference as the more we can look straight down between the grass blades instead of across the grass blades, the less interference there is in seeing objects lying on the ground. (Another task that my TC40D w/5ft rotary mower gets used for instead of the MF275 with 7ft rotary mower).
Glenn, keep up the great thought provoking threads.
DaveV
Regarding the PTO engagement question, the PTO on a NH can be engaged/disengaged on the fly by moving the lever, no foot clutching involved. In fact, on the TC35-45 series, there is no foot clutch. The PTO also has some type of brake to slow the PTO driven implement down after disengagment. This is useful on implements such as a rotary cutter. Once the PTO shaft is stopped the brake does not have any effect on the PTO shaft, allowing easy hand turning while attaching implements.
Having done a similiar comparison when I purchased, but not with the rigor that Glenn has introduced, I almost went with the JD but ended up with the NH when subjective forces were factored into the equation. Like Bird (I hope I am remembering correctly) I will not purchase certain cars because of poor operator comfort, even if it can be argued that they objectively are better than others. Operator comfort plays a more critical role then objective measurements. What use is a tractor and FEL that can lift 300 lbs more if you reduce your use by 30% (a subjective number) because it is difficult, awkward, or uncomfortable? My 15 year old brother is at my house every few days wanting to borrow my TC40D instead of using my parents MF275. Their loader lifts 3ft higher than mine, lifts at least 800lbs more (doesn't need any counter weight either), and has 25 more hp, yet many tasks get done around my parent's place with my TC40D that would take much longer to get done because the MF275 is not as easy/comfortable to use. Even my sister is now borrowing the TC40D, but won't use the MF275 anymore after trying a few times.
The conclusion that I came to when I purchased my unit was that the force measurements were all within ranges that made them practically equal (+/- 10%), only leaving questions of functionality. Such questions include, but are not limited to, the ability of the JD units to lift the belly mower independently of the rear 3pt. Objectively this was a negative for NH, but as Glenn has pointed out, we each need to weight the pros and cons once we know what they are (since I already owned a rear mount finish mower this was very low).
One other note, someone mentioned the NH sloped hood being an asset. After getting over the initial subjective "don't like it", I would agree, it has an objective benefit. While rotary mowing in tall grasses obstacles can be more easily seen. This can be an objective difference as the more we can look straight down between the grass blades instead of across the grass blades, the less interference there is in seeing objects lying on the ground. (Another task that my TC40D w/5ft rotary mower gets used for instead of the MF275 with 7ft rotary mower).
Glenn, keep up the great thought provoking threads.
DaveV
