Tractor Tranny Tracking: From HST to GST to ...

[DAP]

Nothing I can do to stop a thread from going where it's gonna go so ....

I logged 11 hours this weekend on a Kubota L2900 GST with a loader. (My 5K mowing machine has an HST tranny btw.)

It wasn't my first experience with a GST type trans. but all prior experience is over 30 years ago (driving uncles old farmall back and forth to the barn - so it doesn't really count.)

Most of my chores this weekend were loader tasks. My left leg is hard as nails.

I will say this: GST (as opposed to Hydro or Variable Speed Trannies) are dated technology and a neanderthal-like hold-overs from the technology of yesteryear.

Sure ... before the invention of 'automatic' transmissions in farm and industrial machines/tractors, they were cutting edge.

Especially for REAL farm work with endless lenghts of straight lined rows to navigate for crops, haying, discing, cutting, etc.

In this day an age however, GST remains as a relic to the past as far as engineering goes, and perhaps thereby cheaper to produce and perhaps maintain.

Now I KNOW that hyros eat both valuable engine AND PTO hp but it is an admissible percentage. If 5% or less hp to the wheels or the PTO shaft make a difference, then you may have sized your tractor to the borderline anyway, IMO.

My biggest complaints for the GST were the clutch work required for repeated loader tasks. Also, it takes 2 feet to stop the machine and a hand and a foot to reverse directions. May not sound like much, but work 60 bucket loads of material for 6 hours straight and you'll see what I mean.

I'm trying to look out to the future and imagine the need for ANY gear driven transmissions in the near engineering realm and am having trouble seeing any reason for them to persist, unless purely financial.

All this being said, if you like GST, you'll state your reasons, but mostly I suspect that the pro Gear folks like em because they are merely accustomed to them. Their efficiency value over the automatic trannies is minimal as far as I can see. Their initial difficulty in learning to 'finesse' the machine is no longer necessary. One argument I expect to hear is that some operators, through experience, can finesse their machine as well as any other ... perhaps quite true, but it took a lot longer to acquire that skill methinks - and certainly more human effort.

I may be splitting hairs here but the entire idea of a tractor is to save time, increase productivity, and do these as safely, expediently, economically and easily as possible.

For the folks thinking about realizing some or all of the above via a tractor/machine investment, I hope this helps demystify this oft asked area of interest.

My dos centavos /forums/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

 

[shvl73]

I had almost no tractor experience when I bought my 2810HST. I tried a couple of gear models & liked them but, when I tried the one I purchased I loved it. Very easy to operate. I would reccommend hydro to anyone like myself with little or no experience. I think they've been around long enough to have durability proven with proper mantainence.

 

[Tractors4u]

That Kubota must have one stiff clutch! I am accustomed to a gear tractor. I had one HST and it was a JD 855. After using it for a few months I sold it and got another gear machine, a grey market gear machine. I then stepped up to to a shuttle shift machine. When I bought a new tractor I never even considered a HST machine. I knew for my budget that I could get more tractor for my money in a non-HST machine. I use mine for mostly loader work and love the the power reverser transmission. The clutch isn't needed for changing direction, but I use it about half the time. Funny thing about gear vs HST, when I was shopping for a new tractor the Kubota brochure actually recommended the gear shuttle shift for loader work.

 

[DAP]

Brent ... the unit was a rental (1590 hrs) and the clutch was very very stiff. The tractor was in excellent operating condition though - less the clutch tensions. I had no problems depressing it. My point was I had to depress it at all.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I new for my budget that I could get more tractor for my money in a non-HST machine.)</font>

If you are saying that HST machines comparably equipped cost more, then I agree. If you are saying that a non-HST machine is a better value, than I disagree - which is at the crux of my posting.

/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

[Tractors4u]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( If you are saying that HST machines comparably equipped cost more, then I agree. If you are saying that a non-HST machine is a better value, than I disagree - which is at the crux of my posting.
)</font>

Honestly I have thought about whether I should have given HST another chance. The reason I didn't get HST is because I had a JD 855 that did not allow me to dig as agressively with it as I did with a gear tractor. When it comes to finesse, I think there is some finesse to using a HST tractor really agressively with a FEL. Time after time I killed the engine on the 855. As of today I have yet to kill the engine on the 4310 after 6 months of use with the FEL. The power reverser is second nature to me. Driving a shuttle shift tractor is not like driving a normal gear tractor. I don't hunt for the gears. I simply flip a lever without thinking about. Direction changes are very fluid, often without the tractor coming to a complete stop.

 

[cowboydoc]

I will say this: GST (as opposed to Hydro or Variable Speed Trannies) are dated technology and a neanderthal-like hold-overs from the technology of yesteryear.



Are you talking about all tractors or just compact utility tractors? And then again it all depends on who, what, where, and why you're using the tractor. Each one is suited to different needs. If you're mowing or using one 70 or 80% of the time for loader work then yes a hydro would be choice. Or if a person just has a few acres and needs an all-around tractor then sure. But if you're talking about really using a tractor for farm work then it's the hydro that is obsolete. They certainly both have their place and value.

 

[fishman]

I can't comment on the power reverser or shuttle shift as I have no experience. However, when I first got my hst I had similar problems with lugging the motor down. My inexperience. The problem was that I pushed harder on the hst pedal thinking it would make the tractor go more. In fact, the lighter you push on the pedal, the more torque is transfered to the wheels. I was using it like a gas pedal, and that didn't work.

Once I figured it out, things went really smoothly. Probably the same could be said for any transmission. They all beat a wheelbarrow. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[bigblock]

Brent,
I have to agree with you. I can't/won't throw stones at anyone who thinks that hydros are the cutting edge of technology. Still, I feel that the power reverser has it's place. The JD ePowrReverser is very easy to use and very power and cost efficient. When I first got the tractor I was a little hesitant about changing directions without using the clutch but after 355 hours it is, as you said, second nature. It is possible to go for hours, while grading or doing loader work, without ever touching the clutch. I know that hydros are the hot item these days but I don't feel even slightly inferior with the power reverser. To each his own. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Bob

 

[rockyridgefarm]

<font color="green"> I think there is some finesse to using a HST tractor really agressively with a FEL. Time after time I killed the engine on the 855. </font>

That sure isn't the case with the eHydro! Loadmatch does all the finesse. It is lightning fast at correcting the tranny to keep verything working hard.
Not sayin an eReverser is a bad thing...

 

[DAP]

Rich ... with all do respect .. please re-read my post that started this thread.

After you concur (with yourself actually), I notice that you use JD machines, 6000, 5000, 4000, series, all the way down the line.

Since I'll never match your experience with all of those hours on all of those machines, just what would be the operational difference between running your 8000 or 6000 series tractor with a comparatively powered hydrostatically controlled machine, were one to exist?

Now I KNOW that currently, a hydro version with the power of those machines may not exist, but that is the basis for my entire posting.

I'm making a prediction that in some not so large amount of years, GST will fall by the wayside. Right now, the major issue seems to be cooling and temperatures.

Now, I've yet to drive a power reverser or a shuttle shift, but perhaps you could tell me those operational details.

The very bottom line is 'finesse'. The hydrostatically controlled propulsion concept is about finesse, fine movements, large and small, it's about precision, and this too will be improved too. I challenge anyone to say the finessing a machine of any size is irrelevant or unnecessary, regardless whether your really using a tractor or just takin care of a dozen acres, a few horses and goats.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( ...talking about really using a tractor for farm work then it's the hydro that is obsolte.)</font>

Rich, I KNOW you don't actually mean that entirely. I'm well aware of your power to the ground arguments and the power bleeding that hyro's have and won't be foolish enough to debat these truths.

I AM saying however, that these deficiencies will ultimately be accounted for in the not too distant future. Perhaps Kubota will have an H8050 hydro in the future - 110 brake horse power to the wheels and 75 pto variable speed hp and a hydro tranny or something that operates efficiently just like one. Let's nix the old IH variable trannies that were engineering disasters.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( They certainly both have their place and value.)</font>
They do for now.