Who has gone from an HST tranny to a hydro shuttle and what did you think?

[Piston]

In my never ending quest to figure out which tractor I want to be my next one, I have come up with the one main disadvantage of upgrading, and that would be going from my current HST transmission to a hydro shuttle transmission.

I know there are quite a few of you who have gone from having a compact tractor with an HST tranny, to a larger tractor where the HST isn't an option. I believe some of you currently have multiple tractors, some with HST and some with hydro shuttle. I think TripleR and Builder may be in this situation but not sure if memory serves me correctly.

So,
What were your thoughts on switching from HST to Hydro Shuttle? Did you think long and hard about it, or not really think it was a big deal? I know I will miss my HST but I'm wondering just how much.
Was it worth going with a bigger, more capable tractor by giving up the HST?
Do you have any regrets or is it just one of those things you get used to and don't think much about?
How hard is it to go from one tractor with HST, over to another with hydro shuttle, and back to the HST tractor for you guys that have multiples?

I think I would eventually get used to it, but everytime I find myself inching up to a tree to push it over, or changing direction while brush hogging but keeping the PTO at 540 the entire time, I can't help but think I will miss my HST. It's really the ONLY thing stopping me from upgrading to a larger frame tractor with better lifting capacities.....well, if you don't count the whole $$$ thing :laughing:

 

[DieselMonk]

I have both. One tractor has HST the other EHSS (electro hydro shuttle shift). It all depends on what you are doing or what you expect off the tractor to do. One thing is the same: Both tractors won't move if you lose hydraulic oil. I use the HST for a rotary broom on front and a 5' rear finnish mower for my lawn around the house. Frequent start / stop, forward / reverse... gotta go around this and that... blahblah...
For the fields and anything else I use the big brother with the 12x12 EHSS transmission. There is also a new one called CVT (continous variable transmission). It is absolute no good under heavy load, as it won't let you spin any wheels.

Now if your concern is that your bush hog runs 540 while inching up to a tree to push it over? Gee... lemme, see... I may shift from third to first gear or shift not at all, since the bigger tractor has more power to start with and also bigger implements. You are still able to set the engine RPM constant at 540, just the movement will not be quite as smooth and rapid acceleration will be slower as you go through the gears, vs pressing on the pedal harder on the HST.

Bigger is not always better. You have to choose the right tool that does the job for you with least effort.

 

[jenkinsph]

I think there are good reasons to have both tractors types and would point out that all your equipment is designed to work with the smaller tractors. If you are going to sell off the smaller hst and go to a larger reverser tranny tractor then I suggest you also consider the Kubota M59 which is still a hydro machine with greatly increased abilities over your L4610. I am not a Kubota expert but would check on the M59 with and without the backhoe since it is a 60 hp machine with the extra hydraulics you can utilize for the topntilt and grapple.

 

[TripleR]

I drive a L5030 HSTC (soon to be L5740 HSTC) and M8540 HDC almost exclusively and will often change between them during a work day.

I have told the story before, but will repeat it as you may not have read it. I have trouble walking, so one day I was working with my youngest son and when I needed to trade tractors with him, I would call him and we would meet, pull up fairly close, left door to left door, change tractors and take off.

We both noticed a "lag" , maybe ten seconds or so from the time we got in until we took off; both looked up about the same time and laughed. We were both "rebooting" our brains to transition from one operating system to the other. Once the "reboot" was complete, it was like we had never been on the other tractor; no pushing the wrong buttons, clutching, trying to shift etc.

Like Diesel Monk says, no problem maintaining PTO speed while changing directions with either.

It wasn't a big deal to me as I grew up driving geared tractors long before HSTs were available then "upgraded" to a synchronized shuttle and later went to an HST then hydraulic shuttle.

I really like both types of tractors for our uses and don't find the additional shifting between gears a big issue or the need to use a hand lever for direction changes and direction changes for us are often on slopes, along water's edge, drop off etc. problematic.

I wouldn't let a hydraulic shuttle shift as opposed to an HST keep me away from a bigger tractor if a bigger tractor is what I needed. However given the choice on a 60 or so HP tractor for general loader, cutter, utility type stuff, I will always go with an HST.

I agree with Diesel Monk that "bigger is not always better, sometimes it is just bigger". The real difficulty arises in making that determination.

We once tried to get by with only one big tractor on one of our farms and took a bath buying our old, smaller trade in back.

Today, we could get by without our M8540 if we had the added time to spend, but it simply won't fit in some places, so it's a combination of tractors or a lot more time in the seat.

I hope some of that made sense instead of adding to the confusion.:laughing:

 

[Gary Fowler]

Other than when I was growing up on the farm where we had all gear tractors with Torque Amplifier or dual range power shift or what ever each brand called them (basically a hydraulic shifted dual range gear in each gear but still gear drive, my first tractor I bought for my little acreage was a Yanmar 4220 with power shift which took some time to get proficient with, but could be operated completely without the clutch. It power shifted from neutral to reverse and up 3 gears in each of 4 ranges. I loved it when bush hogging as it was simple to downshift in heavy stuff and then jump back up to higher gear on light cover. It also worked ok with the FEL although reverse was quiet fast in range 3. I then bought a supplemental 70 HPwith CAB and AC and shuttle shift with 20F/20R gears for moving heavy loads and working in the heat. It is great for that, but much too large to use in tight spaces and you do have to clutch it to change gears. A few months ago, I found a B26 TLB with Hydrostatic transmission that I love to use. It is small and gets in places that I cant get with the LS 7010 and does most of what the 4220 would do so I sold my Yanmar and could likely sell the LS also as most of my heavy, heavy work is completed. We still find a few very large rocks occassionally that the B 26 wont lift and might buy some additional land that will need some heavy clearing of pine trees so the LS will stay around for a bit. As for changing from one to the other, not an issue at all, just get on and go, but I have driven gear tractors all my life so they are kinda set in my mind and the HST are so simple that you dont really need to think about them to use them with the rocker foot control. MY Brother in law has a New Holland with separate F and R pedals and I do have to look at that to make sure I am on the right pedal when I occassionally drive his. I really dont like that control. My only complaint with HST is that everyone I have been on has the brakes and HST pedal on the same side which make is almost impossible to use the steering brakes when needed. They should put the pedal on one side and brakes on the other with my preference would be to put the go pedals on the left and leave the brakes on the right as all other tractors have. I cant fathom the designer who put both the go pedals and brakes on the same side unless he is catering to the one right legged tractor drivers and how many of those do we have out there? It not much use in having steering brakes on these tractors as they are nearly useless and a single brake would do just as well, but might should not mention that as then they might do away with the steering brakes altogether which would not be noticed by many here on TBN as lots of folks have commented that they have never used the steering brakes on their tractors anyway.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

If you are stuck on HST, there are a few 60hp tractors available with that type of trans. You CAN have a 60hp tractor with an HST. I am another person that has many different types of transmissions, it is no problem to jump from one to the other. For me, the only real work that I do where I would miss the HST it rototilling.

Just my :2cents:

 

[Piston]

I'm obviously not familiar with the way a hydro shuttle (or whatever they're called) works when changing directions while using the PTO. I was under the impression that if you were say, brush hogging, and wanted to back up to the corner of a field, you would have to press the clutch in (or in the case of hydro clutch it would do it for you?) then change direction and the PTO would disengage while it changes gears.
Quite honestly, now that I'm typing this, it makes no sense at all what I was thinking, I should have thought about that a little more I suppose.

I have used other tractors that are not HST but I certainly favor and have sort of fallen in love with the HST, aside from a few situations. I don't THINK I would have a problem going from HST to gear shift (as long as I dont' have to press the clutch each time, call me lazy) but I wanted to get some opinions on it. It seems by the few (very good) replies so far that it isn't as big of a deal as I'm thinking it would be.

I understand something like a 60hp compact would do everything I need as far as PTO power is concerned, and I'm still seriously debating between that and a larger frame tractor, but the problem for me comes with the FEL lift capacity, as well as 3 pt lift capacity. I tend to like to 'baby' heavier equipment rather than 'max out' lighter equipment. I've started a couple threads on this so far so I won't go into it too in depth.

For PTO power, I never thought I would need (or want for that matter) anything over 45hp or so. I've recently bought a 3 pt hitch stumpgrinder that I sort of fell in love with using, and is rated for 35-100hp, so of course the higher the number the better. I'm sure I'd see a big difference in the 55 PTO hp or so of the more powerful CUT's vs my 39 pto hp now. Again, it would come down to lift capacities for the most part.

One monkey wrench I can throw into my situation, is that I may work out a deal with my father to buy the 410 backhoe that we both own outright, which would mean it would be at my house at all times, this would completely solve my FEL lift capacity and possibly be the best of both worlds, I could have that for heavy work, and something like a 60ptohp HST tractor for lighter more nimble work. It's such a tough decision for me and I go back and forth on it because I still have so much time to think before pulling the trigger.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Piston, if you were to get a power shuttle with a lot of gears, I doubt that you would be dissatisfied.

 

[Piston]

I suggest you also consider the Kubota M59 which is still a hydro machine with greatly increased abilities over your L4610

Steve,
I've been following a couple of the M59 threads with interest, and agree that it could be a very good compromise, especially if I do not end up with the backhoe in the long run.
My only gripe with that (may as well get it out now:laughing is the lack of cab option. I know there are the very nice Laurin cabs, but I've never seen one so can't say if I'd love it or not. One main purpose for my next tractor is going to be snowblowing in the winter months, and I do want a cab.

I hate to list all the things that I'm going to be using the tractor for and what I intend to do, as I know that becomes a manotonous question that is answered over and over on here, and honestly I pretty much know what I need, but I do like to get the advice of you way more experienced operators.

I suppose I should have started a thread listing all my intented uses for my next tractor, as well as what implements I will be using and what size I prefer, and then start asking about the HST vs. Hydro shuttle....

I think you guys have pretty much answered my question on whether or not it would be difficult to go to hydro shuttle from HST, and you've eased my fears... :laughing:

 

[TripleR]

I'm obviously not familiar with the way a hydro shuttle (or whatever they're called) works when changing directions while using the PTO. I was under the impression that if you were say, brush hogging, and wanted to back up to the corner of a field, you would have to press the clutch in (or in the case of hydro clutch it would do it for you?) then change direction and the PTO would disengage while it changes gears.
Quite honestly, now that I'm typing this, it makes no sense at all what I was thinking, I should have thought about that a little more I suppose.

I have used other tractors that are not HST but I certainly favor and have sort of fallen in love with the HST, aside from a few situations. I don't THINK I would have a problem going from HST to gear shift (as long as I don't' have to press the clutch each time, call me lazy) but I wanted to get some opinions on it. It seems by the few (very good) replies so far that it isn't as big of a deal as I'm thinking it would be.

One monkey wrench I can throw into my situation, is that I may work out a deal with my father to buy the 410 backhoe that we both own outright, which would mean it would be at my house at all times, this would completely solve my FEL lift capacity and possibly be the best of both worlds, I could have that for heavy work, and something like a 60ptohp HST tractor for lighter more nimble work. It's such a tough decision for me and I go back and forth on it because I still have so much time to think before pulling the trigger.

On "most" tractors with an Independent PTO, pushing in on the clutch will not disengage the PTO. For some reason, on our Kubota HST Grand L it does; not a problem as I only use the clutch to start it.

Not lazy as we can really tell a difference in the fatigue factor between running a tractor you have to clutch to change directions and one you don't; makes a long day in the seat much less tiring.

Absolutely nothing beats having two tractors sized right for the jobs.:thumbsup:

 

[WilliamBos]

Went from a 1523 HST to a 1635 12x12 Powershuttle. Do not regret it one bit, and do not miss the HST. With all the gears to choose from, there is one for every need, from snow blowing to creeping with a tiller on. Also went to a cab tractor, and do not miss the HST whine either.

The Powershuttle is slick, and just as easy as an hst for changing directions too.

Go for it, you will be happy you did.

 

[joshuabardwell]

My only complaint with HST is that everyone I have been on has the brakes and HST pedal on the same side which make is almost impossible to use the steering brakes when needed. They should put the pedal on one side and brakes on the other with my preference would be to put the go pedals on the left and leave the brakes on the right as all other tractors have.

For what it's worth, my CT225 has the brake pedals pinned together, and if I recall correctly, the manual recommends leaving them that way during normal operation and only disconnecting them for adjustment of left/right brake balance. It seems like the intent on newer tractors may be that the brakes are not used for steering, so that may explain why they designed them the way they did.

I personally appreciate having the go-pedal on the right and the clutch on the left, since that mirrors every manual-shift vehicle I've ever driven. But I'm new to tractors, so I may be the odd man out if tractors usually had it some other way.

 

[JerryK]

I have both HST and reverser. You will still get that 'odd moment' when you are brainlessly doing something and try to flip the reverser lever on you HST... and try to press the reverse pedal when driving your reverser tractor. Same thing some of us had to put up with when then moved the dimmer switch from the floorboard to the steering column on cars....

 

[jenkinsph]

For what it's worth, my CT225 has the brake pedals pinned together, and if I recall correctly, the manual recommends leaving them that way during normal operation and only disconnecting them for adjustment of left/right brake balance. It seems like the intent on newer tractors may be that the brakes are not used for steering, so that may explain why they designed them the way they did.QUOTE]

I suspect that Bobcat is covering themselves from improper operation by inexperienced operators. With an older tractor with hydraulic brakes for instance pressing both brake pedals simultaneously with uneven pressure will still result in an even application of the brakes to both rear wheels. There is an equalizer valve built in just for this purpose on the 1960's John Deere tractors on most Ten and Twenty series. Don't know when this started for sure but it has been in use for a while. My 820 has it and my prior 3020 and 4020 did too. This older and more expensive brake system works much better than the mechanical linkage (think cheaper) used on the new compacts today. Both my 110tlb and 4520 have the mechanical linkage and these require more pedal pressure to use and frankly just are not as good.

I don't need the brakes in most operations with hst but there are occasions such as this week on a side slope where I used the steering brakes to position my 110 and it would have been more difficult to do without them. So there is a reason for having split brakes but your manufacturer is concerned with the chance of someone operating at high speeds and making a panic stop depressing only one brake pedal lets assume the left and veering into the oncoming traffic on a roadway. I lock the pedals together when loading on a trailer or operating on a roadway, when performing most other work I have the pedals unlocked. When backdragging with a loader bucket applying down pressure the steering brakes make it alot easier to stay on course, just another good use or reason for having them.

If you haven't tried them unlocked for low speed operation then you aren't getting the full benefit of your tractor imo. Why would you have two pedals instead of just one pedal?

 

[Piston]

The one reason I decided not to go with a Kubota for my next tractor (if I stayed HST) was because of the difficulty in using the steering brakes, so I certainly agree with the posters that complain about this. I still use the steering brakes often with a couple different methods and it really is a PIA!

The main reasons I'm leaning towards a larger tractor, I believe, far outweigh the downsides of staying with a smaller tractor. I believe that I will certainly miss the HST, that is no secret, but I think I'd be fine with the hydro shuttle. I also think I'll miss the smaller size when in tight quarters which I'm often in, in my current home, but in my new home I don't believe I'll have too many tight areas aside from of course, all the trees, however I plan on making trails and taking down any trees that are in my way.
It is also easier I'm sure, to trailer the smaller, lighter tractor, but I don't really see myself trailering that often. Not to mention, I've added so much weight to my 4610 that I bet it isn't that far off from a larger frame tractor at this point.

Since many of you that posted currently have larger tractors, I'll mention a few things that I'd like the larger tractor for, and I'd like your opinion if I'm on the right track, or if you think I'd be fine with a higher hp (PTO) CUT.

One main reason, is that I would like to purchase (or build) a 3 pt hitch log skidding grapple, and I am very concerned that the lighter CUT just isn't built to take that weight and abuse when skidding a large log, there is a tremendous amount of force on the toplink connection when skidding a decent sized load. (this is the main reason I want a tractor with a considerable 3 pt lift capacity)

Another main reason is FEL lift capacity, I just can't get a whole lot more lift capacity than I currently have with another CUT. I enjoy a timber framing hobby and use a small portable mill to make my timbers, since the timbers need to be fairly long, I need to keep them that way when loading/unloading onto the mill, there are a lot of times where I can't use the FEL to load a log on my mill, and need to use the larger 410 backhoe (which I may or may not end up with full time)

The larger tractors also tend to have higher hydraulic pump outputs in both flow and pressure. I would like the ability to run a FEL mounted low flow skidsteer snowblower.

Another main thing I will be using the tractor for (eventually) is mowing heavy brush. I would like to purchase a HD bush hog at a minimum of 6'. Many of the specs for these are listed as 50HP+ at the PTO, and some even more than that, due to the weight of them, which may be too much for a smaller lighter tractor.

I have many more bullet points that I've listed on my "tractor preferences" list but don't want to bore you all with a super long post

Do any of you guys that upgraded to a larger frame size regret it?

 

[TripleR]

As mentioned, my idea of the perfect world is one of each.

My son and I were mucking out a pond a couple of years ago with him on the M8540 and me on the L5030. We were making a 90 degree turn off a forest trail in tight new growth then down a fairly steep slope; pretty significant drop off during the turn. We went down, got full buckets then reversed the route and dumped them about an eighth of a mile away. We were both occasionally "barking a tree. After an hour or so, I had him just cut it down. It remained a tight turn for both of us, but by locking his inside wheel he could turn as sharp as the L5030. We had trimmed limbs to keep them off our cabs. And yes, my son is a better operator than I and I'm proud of it.

A skilled operator can get in some pretty tight places with even a good size tractor. You wouldn't believe some of the places one of our renters goes with a 7000 Series John Deere pulling a 15' bat wing cutter.

 

[RealJimbo]

I've never run HST, but the Hydraulic Shuttle on the the Kubota Mxx40 series work very well for me. The only 'mowing' I do is roadside/trail maintenance with a rear mounted flail. There is no drop in the PTO when reversing. The one thing I like to do is pause a split-second between forward and reverse so as to reduce the whiplash at 1,800 rpms.

And of course, it's a 'farm tractor' (M) so it still has independent rear brakes for maneuvering.

I've heard that HST is great for finish mowing. But most of my work is ground engagement, so I'm very satisfied with hydraulic shuttle. Plus it'll save ya a couple grand

 

[Piston]

I've never run HST, but the Hydraulic Shuttle on the the Kubota Mxx40 series work very well for me......

And of course, it's a 'farm tractor' (M) so it still has independent rear brakes for maneuvering.

Does the M7040 have the brakes on the right or left? I know most Kubotas are on the right but I'm only familiar with the smaller ones. (and HST)

 

[TripleR]

Yes, the M Series all have the traditional layout, brakes on the right with a hand and foot throttle, clutch on the left. On the hydro, you can use the clutch in the hand operated shuttle or the foot clutch.

 

[mra400ex]

I recently joined the forum. Like several replies I was raised on geared tractors on the farm. I have a geared B8200 that is over 25 years old and looks like new. I also own a L39 Kubota Backhoe which has the Glideshift trans. I also use a John Deere 110 TLB at our off road riding area. It is HST.

There are situations where I have wished the B8200 had HST. But that said I know that the HST of those years lost a lot of HP to the HST. The B8200 has never let me down and it has always taken on any attachment I hooked it too. No matter how oversized it was. Truly an amazing tractor.

Having access to two TLB and being able to compare them, I have advised several people when looking to purchase a tractor. If you do a lot of loader work the HST can be a little quicker for loading. On the L39 you can keep up but you have more going on as far as the shuttle lever and sliding the gear selector. When getting close to something to dump you have to use the clutch. (like when easing up to a dump truck). That is the main advantage of the HST.

I have found several advantages to the Glideshift transmission:

First is heat. The JD110 will keep your feet warm on a cold day. Warm to hot days is is the source of pure agony. Above 80 degrees and you will be hot and your feet will be burning. The L39 passes no heat thru the floorboards.

Second is when both units are used with 3 point arms installed. The Glideshift is a dream when bush hogging, blading,etc. You simply slide the lever to regulate the speed range if the bush hog bogs down, etc. very pleasant to use. With the JD110 HST you are constantly adjusting the pedal speed and did I mention the heat. Hot summer day bush hogging and you are in misery. I have also noticed the JD110 runs very hot on the gauge in hot weather where the Kubota runs cooler in comparison. No extra cooling capacity designed in the JD110.

So to conclude as a TLB the Deere is quicker with the HST. The L39 only gives up a little speed as a TLB, but as a tractor it is clearly the top choice. The glideshift is a dream and with the shuttle shift it is smooth to change directions. I have never used a tractor that is better to bush hog with.

One additional note. With the HST your engine rpms need to be running high for everything to operate correctly. With the glideshift you can throttle back in the higher gears if you like and use your throttle pedal as needed to get more speed as necessary. Like I said before, when in tractor mode the glideshift is a joy. A buddy has a 30hp Kubota with HST and cab and he also gets quite a bit of heat into the cab with it. All those hydralics of the HST create heat. With the JD110 on a hot day you can fry an egg on the floor.

Both are great machines and do work that surprise you.

mra400ex.
B8200
L39 TLB