larger mowers

[T77911S]

it also depends on your property.
I NEED ZT.
when I had a regular riding mower I cut the same areas many times because of the layout of my yard.
if you want a finish cut get a tractor with a belly mower, you don't have to take it off to use the PTO in the rear.

[tevake]

In regards to ride upon vs tow behind, this Exmark in one of the dirtiest lawn machines I've ever used. It and the opperator are covered after a bit of mowing. I'm blowing grit out my nose and flushing my eyes for days after mowing. It's got to be better with the tow behind.

I'm hoping once the place is cleaned up better and more grass place it will get better.
We are doing clean up from heavy bush hogging at this point in some areas.

Whew, I'm thinking helmet with tight fitting full shield etc plus possibly dust mask. Add the ear protection and you have quite the get up to put on and wear.

Cheers Richard

[rfuerst911sc]

Tevake what records or what makes you confident that the rebuilt tractor was done properly ? I will say that it looks good . How many original hours on both ? Does the four wheel drive work on the 4x tractor ? That is a plus in my opinion . Changing the tires is no big deal but the cost of doing so has to be considered . I assume no power steering on either ? A FEL bucket loaded with stuff plus the framework makes steering more difficult but if everything is working properly can be managed . Do you have the ability to adapt the FEL or will you have to pay someone ? More cost to be considered . Having said all that IF the rebuilt tractor checks out I would lean in that direction .

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by tevake

Since we are on the subject of small tractors here as well as mowers I'd like to run one by y'all

My only advice is to get a tractor with hydrostatic transmission. I have an old MF tractor with a manual transmission. It has FEL and it is pain in the butt to use.

I rarely use it for anything other than bush hogging pastures, line maintenance, ring grooming, etc. where I am in one gear for long periods of time.

The small MF 2300 with a FEL and a hyrdostatic transmission runs circles around the larger tractor...I get twice the amount of product moved with the FEL in the same amount of time.

I would not buy a manual transmission tractor. MHO.

[tevake]

Can you elaborate on the trans differences and how that effect the FEL use?
I'm coming into this with very little experence on tractors.
Thanks, Richard

Ps are y'all noticing the southern twang Im picking up down here?

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by tevake

Either way will end up near the same price, probably a little more for the restored one, which way would you go?

Nice choices, but I would go with a tractor with front wheel assist all day long. Get some weight on the loader in soft ground and you are going nowhere with rear wheel drive, especially if you have turf tires.

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by tevake

Can you elaborate on the trans differences and how that effect the FEL use?
I'm coming into this with very little experence on tractors.
Thanks, Richard

Ps are y'all noticing the southern twang Im picking up down here?

Hydrostat: No gears to shift, just a forward/reverse selector.
Shuttle shift where you have a forward/reverse selector and a range of gears.

Hydrostat is the user friendly setup.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by tevake

Can you elaborate on the trans differences and how that effect the FEL use?
I'm coming into this with very little experence on tractors.
Thanks, Richard

Ps are y'all noticing the southern twang Im picking up down here?

I noticed something. I thought you were just having early cocktails.

Gear drive is more efficient, and there are a lot of gear drive options. You can get gear drive with a direction reverser, which is great for using a loader. You just step on a pedal and all the sudden you are going the opposite direction. Basic gear drive transmissions your range of ground speed is limited by the gear you are in. If you need to speed up and slow down a lot, it's a real pain to declutch and change gears. Some have synchro ranges so you can be in, say, third gear and push a lever and it will shift up or down one gear. Others (older Fergusons) have two or three speed planetary transmission in front of the gear drive transmission that gives you some ground speed flexibility without using the clutch or shifting gears.
Hydrostat is sort of a continuously variable transmission. The usually have a few gear drive ranges and a pedal you push on to vary the ground speed and direction from zero to the max limits of the selected gear drive range. It's VERY handy, as you can keep the engine speed up and bring the tractor practically to a stop or even reverse it. This is important if you are using a PTO tool, because it needs to be at operating speed no matter what your ground speed is, and so does the hydraulic pump. The only downside is the hydrostat uses about 10% of the engine's power.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by tevake

Can you elaborate on the trans differences and how that effect the FEL use?
I'm coming into this with very little experence on tractors.
Thanks, Richard

Ps are y'all noticing the southern twang Im picking up down here?

Please remember that tractor preferences are like picking a 1/2 ton truck...everybody has their opinions and they are all valuable!

With the manual transmission tractor you will spend a lot of time shifting between forward and reverse. A lot: Scoop, stop, shift to reverse, back out, stop, shift to forward, move product, stop, dump, shift to reverse, back out, stop, shift to forward move to scoop, stop...

This is important to me because we have horses and I manage a lot of manure and compost. We have an area on the farm where we let the manure "age". We also have other compost rows for other material to break down in (I am a drop point for trees service folks so they do not have to pay dump fees). I then combine the two and manage those rows until the mulch is born.

With hydrostatic it is all done with your right foot on a paddle that controls forward stop and reverse seamlessly, smoothly and quickly. I also maintain a 1/2 a mile drive way and find that the hydrosatic allows for more precise grave placement as well as smoothing with the FEL.

Your needs may not be as demanding as mine, but I have found the hydrostatic much safer in confined areas as well...when you lift off the paddle in forward or reserve, the tractor stops right away - zero delay.

My two cents and I own both.

[tevake]

Good info above, and as usual it's mostly going to be ignored.
Budget is a big driver in this. I started hopeful that $5k would get some thing useful.

That now up tp $7/7.5 k. To get all of those hydro trans, power steering four wheel drive, goodies would take that to over $10k for sure. Plus Down here those air conditioned cabs sure look good, but, but.

These fords seem to me to be stout basic rugged machines that can reliably do the job at a realistic price range.

Am I going to be kicking myself later?

Cheers Richard

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by tevake

Am I going to be kicking myself later?

If you try and fit that old FEL on the Ford, yes. All the lines will have to be replaced and the lack of adapters scares me. What kind of shape are the hydraulic pistons in, the pivot points, etc? Equipment that is sitting is sitting for a reason.

Also, is the Ford up to the task hydraulic-wise?

I did this once: I found an old back-hoe that fit my MF 235. It was sitting is a yard with a FSS on it. The dumbest thing I have ever bought.

I spent time getting it up to speed only to find a continuous set of leaks and piston issues, etc. I got boned.

Anyway, I'll stop belaboring the point. I did a quick search in Florida and found what you need for sub 10k.

[LakeCleElum]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

With hydrostatic it is all done with your right foot on a paddle that controls forward stop and reverse seamlessly, smoothly and quickly. I also maintain a 1/2 a mile drive way and find that the hydrosatic allows for more precise grave placement as well as smoothing with the FEL.

Your needs may not be as demanding as mine, but I have found the hydrostatic much safer in confined areas as well...when you lift off the paddle in forward or reserve, the tractor stops right away - zero delay.

Listen to Paul - he is right. I spent all day yesterday moving snow on my manual shift JD.......I knew better when I bought it, but it was local, a great deal and the only one available.....I'll upgrade when the right deal comes along.

[wdfifteen]

I used to plow snow with a Ford 9N - no live hydraulics and no position control. Scrape a blade full of snow into a pile. Hit the clutch, pull the transmission into neutral, engage the clutch to run the hydraulic pump to lift the blade, hit the clutch again, pull it into gear. Repeat. Endlessly. It was easier than shoveling, but not by much.
Moved up to a John Deere 420 with a gear transmission, and it did have live hydraulics. A lot better, but still a pain. My friend had a 420 Industrial with a direction reverser that he loaned me one winter. Much better, but my HST Kubota way better - power steering a front wheel assist.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

I used to plow snow with a Ford 9N - no live hydraulics and no position control.

You have forgotten more about tractors than I will ever know, so I have to ask: Does the Ford he is looking at have live hydraulics or will he need to power the FEL off a pump attached to the PTO?

[wdfifteen]

^^
I don't think anything has been made since about 1960 without live hydraulics, so they would have it.

[tevake]

I think it does have a hydrolic pump on it for the three point lift at the back.
Not sure if it's enough to to support the loader.

The four wheel drive one has an external mounted one on the engine.

What are some good sources to look at to find other choices to consider?

I'm on the verge of doing this deal tomorrow, for the restored 1910
Two wheel drive one, it runs so nice engine sounds so nice. It can work well on our sub two acre place mostly flat smooth terrain, with our tearing up the grass.
First job is moving 8' wooden fence panels into place as I build a fence on some parts of the place. So I will have to get right on to fixing up and getting the loader mounted. There may yet be some brackets to be fabed up. I do have the factory specs on the mounting hardware, but they don't supply those now.

Even tho it doesn't have the full capibility of the 4WD rig, it should be plenty for our needs here. It does come with wheel weights. For front and back wheels.

The other four wheel drive one with the Ag tires, the engine sounded a bit clunky or ruff when driving at moderate speeds, had hydrolic leaks and looked hard used, and rarely even put away.

Most of the loaders I'm finding available used in the area are $2,500/ $4,000., and would still probably need some new hoses and such. So going into this one at $750 leaves room for cylinder seal kits, new hoses and possibly a new controller. And still come in better than others.

[ckelly78z]

Originally Posted by tevake

Can you elaborate on the trans differences and how that effect the FEL use?
I'm coming into this with very little experence on tractors.
Thanks, Richard

Ps are y'all noticing the southern twang Im picking up down here?

My JD 955 has a foot control hydrostatic transmission, which leaves one hand free to operate the power steering, and the other hand to operate the wobble stick (a 4 direction contol for the FEL). When I am speading stone, or dirt, I can roll/lower the bucket to the level I want, while moving forward, and steering into the pile all in one smooth movement, no clutch, no individual FEL controls, or gear shift/clutch to deal with. I hardly ever hit the brakes on the tractor, because just letting off the "forward" pedal will stop the tractor, and a quick move of the foot, will have the tractor moving backwards.

My Dad has a older Cub Cadet garden tractor gear shift, with a 4 control FEL, it just takes extra time, and concentration to operate it efficiently.

[ckelly78z]

4WD is almost a must on a FEL, unless you hang big weights on the wheels, and drawbar. Nothing scares you more than having the rear end come up off the ground from a heavy load in the bucket on a 2WD tractor, because all forward momentum is lost when the wheels are spinning in mid air.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by tevake

Most of the loaders I'm finding available used in the area are $2,500/ $4,000., and would still probably need some new hoses and such. So going into this one at $750 leaves room for cylinder seal kits, new hoses and possibly a new controller. And still come in better than others.

I get where you are headed, no worries.

Make sure you do not hook up the FEL to the Ford until the FEL is purged and clean, no test runs.

I wish I was closer since you could use my stuff while working through this!

All the best.

[Crowbob]

I concur, with that advice that you will be making a mistake in not getting hydrostatic drive. Though the transmission does soak up some horsepower, EVERYTHING you do with the tractor will be a whole lot easier, faster and more efficient.