What's Better?

jj1 · Apr 26, 2006

What\'s Better?

Shaft or Belt Drive to the trans on hills. Some people say the belt if something would happen is an easy fix. REPLACE BELT. They also say it is a lot quieter. On the other hand the shaft crowd believe it puts more power to the back wheels (with equal HP) especially on hills with no slippage and less maintenance. Would I be wrong to say that with a shaft drive unit there is not any "give" unlike a belt driven system therefor more problems may arise?

gamble77 · Apr 26, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

Well I am no expert ( /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif) but I have NEVER drove a belt driven mower that is quieter than a shaft driven mower! How could a belt flapping down around there be quieter than a direct drive?

Also...of all the Cub Cadet shaft driven mowers we have sold over the years I have NEVER seen a shaft break, twist, or anything else that would render the mower inoperable. They just don't break. I am sold that shaft drive is the way to go for hilly areas. And it does put power the rear wheels more efficently.

It doesn't matter how much hp you have or how good of a mower you think you have, if that belt breaks then there you are...that drive shaft won't break.

jj1 · Apr 26, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

Gamble77..Does the Cub shaft drive have some sort of sheer pin so that would break before you would have a major problem with the shaft?

Bird · Apr 26, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

Unless I'm missing something, we're talking about a shaft drive to the rear wheels; not to the mower deck. But even if you have a shaft drive to the mower deck, you probably have a belt to the two blades, so rigid mower blades have a belt to protect the machine if a blade hits something that stops it suddenly. Rotary cutters, single spindle ones at least, don't have a belt and don't need it because the blades are hinged; i.e., swinging blades, which serves the same purpose. But as far as a shaft to the rear wheels . . . well, your car and pickup don't have any belt between the engine/transmission/rear end and I can't imagine a scenario in which it would benefit a lawn tractor or garden tractor. Am I missing something? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

coasterez · Apr 27, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

Don't let anyone tell you that belt is better. Shafts don't break. Belts do. Also, in most cases, shafts will be much quieter than a belt machine.

Regarding shaft driven implements... My MMM is shaft drive to a gearbox that then drives three blades off a belt. There is a clutch in the gearbox pully that protects it should you hit something that stops the blades.

Changing shaft driven implements is usually easier to do, as well - no belts or pullies to mess with. No tensioner or idler arm to adjust either.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find many who prefer belt over shaft for either the main drive line or for implements. There is just no comparison.

Bob_Skurka · Apr 27, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

My Cub 1862 is probably 13 years old? Shaft drive. Works great on hills, better than many others that slipped when I tested them. The shaft seems to be (at least to me) more efficient as the Cub would mow while driving up VERY STEEP hills while the belt drive units I tested would not climb and mow at the same time.

No clue if there is a sheer pin in the shaft, but I don't know why it would be needed. The engine will either die out or the rear wheels will spin, but neither event has damaged my engine (Kohler 18hp) in my Cub. Seems to me that it doesn't need a sheer pin . . . is there one in the drive shaft of a car? Same concept.

jj1 · Apr 27, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

Bob.. (and others) Thanks for the reply. I am leaning towards a shaft driven machine. I have owned a number of shaft driven motorcycles in the past and gave me ZERO problems. But one question I have is why on a motorcycle they say that a shaft drive robs you of HP to the back wheels? To prove that point, just look at the sport bike market , all chain driven. Makes me wonder if given the same HP what would the Hp measure to the back wheels on a shaft drive VS a belt on a tractor??

TOL1488 · Apr 27, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

( Bob.. (and others) Thanks for the reply. I am leaning towards a shaft driven machine. I have owned a number of shaft driven motorcycles in the past and gave me ZERO problems. But one question I have is why on a motorcycle they say that a shaft drive robs you of HP to the back wheels? To prove that point, just look at the sport bike market , all chain driven. Makes me wonder if given the same HP what would the Hp measure to the back wheels on a shaft drive VS a belt on a tractor?? )

Weight is the primary reason you don't see sport bikes with shaft drive.

daTeacha · Apr 28, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

Yes, there is a shear pin, at least on the older Cadets. My 109 from the early 70's has one. It sheared once on a steep ditch side and I had to replace it in the field after driving out the stub. I put in a grade 2 bolt, which lasted quite a while, but that also eventually broke and was replaced with another similar 1/4 in. bolt. That wore out and let go about the same time the engine finally died after 30 years of hard work and was replaced by a 12 hp. That engine was faulty, Kohler wouldn't back it, but Cub Cadet bought me a new engine for a 30+ year old machine!

I also have a belt drive Cadet, a model 1215. It is simply not in the same league as the 109. It's a lawn mower, while the 109 is a lawn&garden TRACTOR.

bearhawk · Apr 28, 2006

Re: What\'s Better?

( Weight is the primary reason you don't see sport bikes with shaft drive. )

I think it is more to do with the torque of the shaft when accelerating and decelerating in corners, sometimes called "the shaft effect".

Jim