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

[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