PDA

View Full Version : 52" WB not productive????


J&R Landscaping
07-09-2006, 07:15 PM
I have been talking to a few local dealers getting ready to demo a machine. I am wanting to demo a 52" floating deck hydro walkbehind. 1 dealer I have been to says his sales are mainly belt drive, that he is old school and doesn't like hydros. 2 Dealers said they sell a good amount of that machine. 1 dealer said he don't sell many mowers in that combination of deck/drive system.
He says that I should just spend the extra 2500 and go with a 52" Z Rider.

I reminded him that I was running a 52" WB some of last season and he says that I am one of the few people that he knows that runs a WB that size.

Should I consider a 52" WB or should I go with a Rider? Some of my larger lawns are a bit bumpy and a few are hilly where I would not be able to use a rider.

rodfather
07-09-2006, 07:25 PM
We have 2 Ferris WB's in our fleet with 52" decks, 23 hp Kawis, and dual hydros. They run like apes in a banana patch and go just about anywhere. My guys love them too btw.

Dashunde
07-09-2006, 08:12 PM
I'll get to the point... that guy is full of crap.

In St. Louis County there is a lco called "Lawns of Distinction" and all they run is 52" Ferris wb's - I think this company was in the newspaper saying that they do around 2 Million a year. I'm guessing they are profitable. ;)

howardsells2000
07-09-2006, 08:24 PM
I have a 52" Ferris WB Dual Hydro. I love it. I use it all the time.

J&R Landscaping
07-09-2006, 08:30 PM
Thanks for the replys, keep the opinions comming!

edward hedrick
07-09-2006, 09:03 PM
I have a 52 Toro w/b classic w 18 Koh, I also have a 52 " Lesco wb

I use the Toro all the time, My only 48" is a Walker Ghs. Ed

sjessen
07-09-2006, 09:46 PM
Without knowing your lawns it is hard to tell you what to buy. Having said that, I have been in business since 1992 and only use walkbehinds. I have 2 60" and a 48". Personally, I do not think you can go wrong buying a 52" hydro. Worst case scenario, you use the walk behind for a couple of years and then purchase a rider and use the walk behind for backup/trimming.

northernsvc's
07-09-2006, 10:04 PM
we run 52" exmark tt with sulkies very productive machines

Quail Creek LC
07-09-2006, 10:05 PM
Any dealer that tells you that a belt drive is better than a hydro, is full of crap. Around my neck of the woods, everyone runs 52" decks. Make sure that you get at least a 21hp or larger or you will be under-powered. If you cant use a sit down on all your properties, then go with the 52", its the most productive way to go.

Detroitdan
07-09-2006, 10:38 PM
I have a 52 inch WB Ferris belt drive, so far I love it. I've only used it 3 times (I'm a brand-newbie) but it blows me away. I bought it used but it wasnt a commercially used piece, it was a homeowner with two fairly large properties, so it is in pretty good shape. It goes faster than I could ever need it to go, and it turns quickly and cuts well, so I dont understand how it could be unproductive. I'm not sure what size the Kawasaki engine is, I thought it was in the 20 plus horse range, but somebody told me its more like a 14. I dont see any decals on it, but I havent really looked close. I would think it has to be more than 14.

abuckeye
07-09-2006, 10:42 PM
I have a 52 Exmark TTHP that I use all the time on my accounts that I can't use my rider on. It is great on hills

J&R Landscaping
07-09-2006, 10:59 PM
Any dealer that tells you that a belt drive is better than a hydro, is full of crap. Around my neck of the woods, everyone runs 52" decks. Make sure that you get at least a 21hp or larger or you will be under-powered. If you cant use a sit down on all your properties, then go with the 52", its the most productive way to go.

He never said belt drive was better than hydro. He just thinks it is not worth getting a 52"hydro WB when I could spend a few k more on a z rider.

Gilla Gorilla
07-09-2006, 11:10 PM
Go with the Hydro and you will not regret it for one moment. I started with a 36 Metro HP 15hp belt drive two years ago and picked up a used 52 Exmark TTHP with a 17hp kawi this spring and I LOVE it. I really hate using the Metro now!!!

nograss
07-09-2006, 11:25 PM
Used Ferris 23 hp DD WB w/floating deck for 5 years, tanks can not destroy and great cut. Anybody that uses belt drive doesn't have the money for hydro, and we all have been there on that point. Easy to work on and you'll never look back.

PaulJ
07-10-2006, 12:18 AM
Most dealers don't know crap about What works and what is efficient in this buis. Get a 52" or so hydro wB with the biggest engine you can and put a fixed sulky on it. NOT a trailering type. This set up will do anything a 52" Z will and more.

I use a 48" HUstler WB with 23hp and thier H-bar steering (the best) for lawns from under 2k to over 30k and my own lawn, almost 2 acres. I've demoed bigger zTRs and gained almost no time. And had less maneuverability.

MTR
07-10-2006, 03:49 AM
Anyone who said that 52" WB is not productive, that person shouldn't be in lawn business. For me, based on personal experience, the 52" regardless, rider or wb, is the best cutting deck to date. It is the marvel that can make you limitless money without betting burnt in time and effort.

J&R Landscaping
07-10-2006, 03:15 PM
MTR, Do you think 17 hp is enough power for a tthp or would i be better going with 19hp?

jimmbo407
07-10-2006, 03:19 PM
I think my 52" ferris dual hydro is a very good machine. I have a velke on it. I cuts nicer than my ZTR. If I had alot of employees, I think I would have them all on large WB with Velke's.

LawnBrother
07-10-2006, 03:40 PM
Buy the right tool for the job. If the wb is going to get used more than a Z would, then it is going to be more productive for you. As far as belt vs. hydro, everyone I know who has bought a hydro to replace a belt drive would never go back.

MTR
07-10-2006, 04:08 PM
MTR, Do you think 17 hp is enough power for a tthp or would i be better going with 19hp?

J & R; the 17 with 52" deck as WB/sulky is fine if your accounts are not overly fertilized, and lawn is cut every week. It will become underpowered when you deal with some lawns that are very healthy and thick, other than that, 52/17 wb is fine. I have run the Tracer for 2 years before I got my Gravely this year which is no comparison. Now, I only use my eXmark for 3 hilly accounts that my Z is somewhat dangerous. Always safe and sure, never sorry later. Also, wb is good for dirty work, like wet lawn, ditch, and lake bank, cutting in the rain...that what it is made for in addition to hill.

J&R Landscaping
07-10-2006, 10:49 PM
J & R; the 17 with 52" deck as WB/sulky is fine if your accounts are not overly fertilized, and lawn is cut every week. It will become underpowered when you deal with some lawns that are very healthy and thick, other than that, 52/17 wb is fine. I have run the Tracer for 2 years before I got my Gravely this year which is no comparison. Now, I only use my eXmark for 3 hilly accounts that my Z is somewhat dangerous. Always safe and sure, never sorry later. Also, wb is good for dirty work, like wet lawn, ditch, and lake bank, cutting in the rain...that what it is made for in addition to hill.

Sounds about right then! My bobcat 52" hydro had a 16 vanguard on it and as long as the grass was maintained, it did fine! Thanks!

PaulJ
07-10-2006, 11:27 PM
MTR, Do you think 17 hp is enough power for a tthp or would i be better going with 19hp?


Get the 23 or 25hp if you can. How many 52" Ztr's do you see with only 17hp on them? GEt the biggest engine you can. YOu won't be sorrry for the extra hp but you will be sorry if you don't have enough.

REALSLOW
07-10-2006, 11:39 PM
I have a 52" with a 19 Kawie any more motor in my opinion is a waste. Yes for major cleanups WB are superior to any thing and about 2 times a year I wish I had more power than a 19 but when you factor in fuel savings a smaller engine has some benefits. The 23 HP and 25 HP kawies eat way more fuel than a 19,I personnaly would pass on them compared to a 19. And if what I have been reading is true about Kawie getting more power out of the 19 block by just adding a bigger carb and calling it a 25 I know the 19's are way better on fuel and the reliability aspect should greatly be in the 19's favor. I had a 23 and it sucked gas compared to the 19!

PaulJ
07-10-2006, 11:47 PM
I run 23hp on a 48" with double blades and a sulky and in heavy grass it is just about right. I would never want any less.

fiveoboy01
07-11-2006, 12:18 AM
Though my TTHP is only a 48" deck, I got the 19hp engine. I haven't had any issues with bogging down. Get the biggest engine you can get.

I do my dad's lawn once a week and it has really steep hills that I wouldn't even think about touching with a z.

topsites
07-11-2006, 12:28 AM
The reason the 52" isn't that popular is because the slightly smaller 48" will fit through most 4-foot single gates where with the 52", you can only fit through double or extra-wide gates.

As for power, my 48's have 15hp Kohler's and I ran 13hp on a 52" before, your choice how much you feel like spending on fuel thou I do think 18hp would be adequate for a float.

I really wish they still made the 60"

Dashunde
07-11-2006, 02:03 AM
The reason the 52" isn't that popular is because the slightly smaller 48" will fit through most 4-foot single gates...."

Not true in my world...
My 48" measures 52" across without a chute and wont fit through any 4ft gate.

Does anyone have a 48"er that measures less than 50"???

Daneman
07-11-2006, 10:58 AM
I am quite surprised at all of these posts, and nobody ressommended you try a stand on mower. Demo a Dane, or a Wright Stander, and see how much more productive they are than a walk-behind.