Snowblowers.

Hydrostatic *sounds* sexy - but so did gear drive on my BCS & implements, but
it sucks pretty bad in practice: expensive, noisy, heavy...

So what about hydrostatic vs belt drive?

Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.

What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?

Honda's 28" (http://tinyurl.com/y7kxxm8a) claims a few more inches depth
capacity over the Ariens analog (http://tinyurl.com/y77ls44s), but $1,400?

Anybody own either one?

One Deal Breaker feature for me is handlebar height: 38" minimum, 40"
preferred... and Honda seems to offer that... not sure about other brands.

An important capability noted by many reviews is the ability to bust through
that 2-3 feet of ice/frozen slush/snow that the city plow leaves at the end
of one's driveway.

Three-stage blowers were sounding attractive until somebody opined that 3
stages was mainly a way to get the same performance from a smaller engine.
--
Pete Cresswell

I can tell you my experience with a Honda mower. It had a 3 speed manual
transmission. It was the best mower I ever owned, used a twin blade design,
that gave the best mulching cut, grass looked very even, the mower was
quiet. But..... Maybe I got 10 years out of it, if that and then then
tranny failed. I took it apart, to get to the tranny, what a cluster f***.
All kinds of little parts, bushings, screws, I used two egg carton containers
to try to keep it all in order to be able to put back together. Then I
found that a new tranns was $140. At that point I considered the other
options and found a brand new Craftsman that someone locally was selling
on Ebay for $160. I bought it. It's more powerful, but also at lot more
noise and it doesn't cut as nice. After about 6 years or so, one day
it too wouldn't move. I took a plastic cover off over the belt area,
it was just two sheet metal screws to remove. Whereupon I saw that the
spring that tensions the belt, the end had broken off. I used a piece of
bent coat hanger to re-attach it and was mowing again. That was 6 years
ago, it's still going strong. The belt drive also gave speed variability
across all speeds, the more you pressed the handle, the faster it goes.

So, would I go for the more complex, hydrostatic transmission that costs
$1000 more in a snowblower? No. IDK what drive exactly mine is, it's
a Sears, but I guess it's belt drive also. It has a handle that lets
me select from about 8 forwards speeds, two in reverse. That works for
me.

On Thu, 24 May 2018 15:17:01 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Snowblowers.
Hydrostatic *sounds* sexy - but so did gear drive on my BCS & implements, but
it sucks pretty bad in practice: expensive, noisy, heavy...
So what about hydrostatic vs belt drive?
Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.
What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?
Honda's 28" (http://tinyurl.com/y7kxxm8a) claims a few more inches depth
capacity over the Ariens analog (http://tinyurl.com/y77ls44s), but $1,400?
Anybody own either one?
One Deal Breaker feature for me is handlebar height: 38" minimum, 40"
preferred... and Honda seems to offer that... not sure about other brands.
An important capability noted by many reviews is the ability to bust through
that 2-3 feet of ice/frozen slush/snow that the city plow leaves at the end
of one's driveway.
Three-stage blowers were sounding attractive until somebody opined that 3
stages was mainly a way to get the same performance from a smaller engine.



Quit messing around ... it's only money.

https://powerequipment.honda.ca/snow...d-i-control-es

ps: I didn't even know there was a hydro-drive snowblower ..

John T.

On 5/24/2018 3:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.

What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?

I have a 13-year-old hydrostat zero-turn with about 950 hrs. It's an absophuckinglutely awesome mowing machine but...the cost to replace the 2 pumps and 2 drive motors is $3200 plus labor.

On Thu, 24 May 2018 20:00:51 -0400, Kyle wrote:

On 5/24/2018 3:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.

What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?

I have a 13-year-old hydrostat zero-turn with about 950 hrs. It's an absophuckinglutely awesome mowing machine but...the cost to replace the 2 pumps and 2 drive motors is $3200 plus labor.

Nymsifter, isn't it Dev Null who insists on cutting the lawn at the
asylum?

You are going for a record with your different nyms and fantasies this
month.

Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.
What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?


I have a 13-year-old hydrostat zero-turn with about 950 hrs.
It's an absophuckinglutely awesome mowing machine but...
the cost to replace the 2 pumps and 2 drive motors is $3200 plus labor.


I have a ~ 30 year old Toro Wheelhorse lawn tractor with 1100 hours
- the hydro tranny seems just fine - but if it was a gear unit -
it would also be good ... on the decent quality machines,
it's not the engine or tranny that fails first ..
.... deck, spindles, .. etc
John T.

On 5/24/2018 7:00 PM, Kyle wrote:
On 5/24/2018 3:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.

What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?

I have a 13-year-old hydrostat zero-turn with about 950 hrs. It's an
absophuckinglutely awesome mowing machine but...the cost to replace
the 2 pumps and 2 drive motors is $3200 plus labor.

Â* I have a 36 year old JD model 317 yard tractor with a hydro trans .
Linkage is all worn and sloppy , drive unit could probably stand a
rebuild , but the pump works fine . And it still does the job , that 17
Hp Kohler opposed twin will spin the tires until it's buried up to the
hubs , just spins 'em on pavement .

--
Snag
Ain't no dollar sign on
peace of mind - Zac Brown

On 05/24/2018 08:32 PM, None wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2018 20:00:51 -0400, Kyle wrote:

On 5/24/2018 3:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Belts, I can replace... but hydrostatic sounds way beyond my pay grade.

What does hydrostatic provide to earn it's $1000+ premium?
I have a 13-year-old hydrostat zero-turn with about 950 hrs. It's an absophuckinglutely awesome mowing machine but...the cost to replace the 2 pumps and 2 drive motors is $3200 plus labor.
Nymsifter, isn't it Dev Null who insists on cutting the lawn at the
asylum?


Are you a mall cop by day?

On 5/24/18 1:17 PM, BurfordTJustice wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message
...

snip horse****.

Quote exactly the part that brags?

Since you are a known far left lying loon with zero Credibility,
lets see the bragging part.






"trader_4" wrote in message
...
: On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 11:41:34 AM UTC-4, BurfordTJustice wrote:
: Just bomb the fat **** off the face of the earth.
:
: White House pulls out of summit with North Korea's Kim Jong Un
:
: And about this, you're bragging?



Trying to change the subject makes you a luzer.

On 5/24/2018 3:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Snowblowers.

Hydrostatic *sounds* sexy - but so did gear drive on my BCS & implements, but
it sucks pretty bad in practice: expensive, noisy, heavy...

So what about hydrostatic vs belt drive?

Snowblowers?
I know nothing.

Hydro vs belt drive?
35 years of mowing for a living.
I believe my first hydro also a commercial mower was
a Scag. I've never had one fail, and never even
considered buying a belt drive since. In the mowing
world there is no comparison.

That first Scag, bought about 20 years ago...
I bought it slightly used, mowed with it about 10 years.
It was sold to my good friend and next door neighbor
to mow his 2+ acres. It's still going strong, and
seeing it almost daily, I know very well, he too has
never had an issue at all with the hydraulics.

my dos pennies...

On Mon, 28 May 2018 06:52:55 -0400, 83LowRider wrote:

On 5/24/2018 3:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Snowblowers.

Hydrostatic *sounds* sexy - but so did gear drive on my BCS & implements, but
it sucks pretty bad in practice: expensive, noisy, heavy...

So what about hydrostatic vs belt drive?

Snowblowers?
I know nothing.

Hydro vs belt drive?
35 years of mowing for a living.
I believe my first hydro also a commercial mower was
a Scag. I've never had one fail, and never even
considered buying a belt drive since. In the mowing
world there is no comparison.

That first Scag, bought about 20 years ago...
I bought it slightly used, mowed with it about 10 years.
It was sold to my good friend and next door neighbor
to mow his 2+ acres. It's still going strong, and
seeing it almost daily, I know very well, he too has
never had an issue at all with the hydraulics.

my dos pennies...

My hydro experience is most current with snow blowers. There is still
a belt coupling the engine to the hydro - but instead of a friction
disk type variable speed drive you have the Hydro. The frictiondisk
slips when it gets wet, the rubber hardens making it slip - if it gets
oily it slips - nothing but a total pain in the keester.

The hydro gets away from all that drama at a sizeable weight penalty.
I'd never go back to a friction drive. Fully variable speed, on the
go, forward and reverse with no slippage on track drive is all I could
ask for. The newer ones with "power steering" or "fingertip steering"
would be even nicer - but NOT if it meant going back to friction
drive.

On 5/28/2018 11:22 AM, Clare Snyder wrote:

My hydro experience is most current with snow blowers. There is still
a belt coupling the engine to the hydro - but instead of a friction
disk type variable speed drive you have the Hydro. The frictiondisk
slips when it gets wet, the rubber hardens making it slip - if it gets
oily it slips - nothing but a total pain in the keester.

Slippage is a critical factor with my mowers. These steep hills
of East TN can be very scary and dangerous. Belt mowers tend to
slip, just as you described.

I'd never go back to a friction drive. Fully variable speed, on the
go, forward and reverse with no slippage on track drive is all I could
ask for.

All true, and no brakes to worry over too!