View Full Version : Stander VS ZTR
Eng Mwr Guy
12-29-2001, 12:16 PM
Good to see you back.
Why should a person purchase a stand-on unit vs. the ever popular ZTR?
01-02-2002, 10:44 AM
1. Lower cost than most (maybe all) ZTRs
2. Lower center of Gravity = steeper hills
3. Better mower weight distribution and ability to use body for enhancing the overall weight distribution for a given situation(hills especially)
4. Easier to get on and off machine to pick up trash, empty catcher, move lawn obsticles, open/close gates, etc.
5. Not trapped on machine giving a safer feeling especially on hills.
6. Lighter weight and easier to "manhandle" the machine if you ever had to push it out of a "stuck in the mud" type situation with or without power to the drive wheels.
7. Lifetime deck/tractor warranties unlike most mowers.
8. Superb visibility.
9. Most compact mower for it's deck sizes - saves trailer space
10. Superb manuverability (standing over zero turning point)
Get in and out tighter places (no engine frame sticking out the back end).
Note: Patented to the Gils and more pending = If everyone else could make it, it would very likely be the NEW "ever popular" mower. We'll just have to take it there ourselves.
I was wondering, how do these things follow the ground contours? I live in central alabama so I usually cut pretty close to the ground. Around bout 2 inches and sometimes lower than that. Would this be a good machine for my lawns? Some lawns are bumpy and rough. I am looking at the 52 inch cut stander. Any more input would be most appreciated. Thanks!!!!! :(
01-14-2002, 09:58 AM
GLC- Here are some reasons why the 52" will contour very well:
1. The rear tires are only 1/4" from the back of the deck and the front tires are as close to the front as possible while allowing space for king-pin bushing wear. Close wheels allow the deck to contour the ground like anti-scalp wheels would for a floating deck. Other fixed deck mowers often have several inches between the back of the deck and the rear drive tires. Many floating deck mowers have even more space between the deck and front and rear tires to allow for the forward and backward movement of the deck due to the arc path when raising and lowering. Also, some mowers use the same wheel spacing when they get a smaller deck which adds even more space between the wheels and deck. One mower that comes to mind has no less than 6 inches between the back of the deck and the front of the rear tire.
2. The middle-rear of our deck is notched out to allow for easy removal of the clutch but also reduces the possibility of scalping.
Thanks for your inquiry,
01-31-2002, 09:43 PM
First off, its an honor just see that "JVelke" interacts with this site.
I have used eXmark for the past two years. Recently I demo-ed a 60+" Stander. While I'll liked many of the features you pointed out, there are a few that I do not.
1. The engine kill switch being under my feet (an appropriate place) - I found that my feet shifted as I mowed and the engine would start to kill. I thought the engine was "missing" until I figured out what was happening (I imagine this can be fixed easily)
2. Deck height adjustments are limited. When my dealer was prepping the unit for me, we discussed what heights I mowed at. I mow between 2 1/2 & 4". Turns out, you can't have this thing set up to do that range. He had to lift the entire unit, pull off the wheel motors and reset everything. I have to admit, when I watched this, I said to myself "No way I'm going to have a machine like this". I adjust the deck all day, sometimes in the middle of a job. How can this mower meet that need?
3. Standing so close to the rear tires. I could only imagine what I'd look like after mowing in wet, marshy terrain. You should see my eXmark's gas tanks after mowing in these conditions - there's mud everywhere - I did not take the Wright in those conditions, but I think it would be ugly.
Sorry, Sorry for the neg. stuff - The Wright Stander blasted through the toughest stuff I could find! The size of the unit is great. (I could turn full circle in a 6.6 x 10 trailer). Beyond that - It was alot of FUN.
If my concerns listed above were laid to rest, I promise that Wright would find its way into my arsenal.
01-31-2002, 10:19 PM
I demoed a Wright Stander and while I liked the cut, it doesn't work for me. The biggest problem is that I have fairly short fingers and I could not reach from the fixed handle to the moveable handles and have enough of a grip to control the machine. The two ladies on my crew could not run it for the same reason. If you have small hands or stubby fingers, you can barely hang on to the machine. Their needs to be some way to move the levers/handles closer together. I kept losing my grip. If not for that, I would probably have a couple of them.:(
02-01-2002, 10:37 AM
Guardian - Thanks for the feed-back. I'll share my thoughts about your comments.
1. The platform foot switch is designed to activate as soon as you shift your weight to your heals as if you were getting off (or falling off) for a quick shutdown. Once you know about the foot switch, it becomes natural to keep the switch depressed without thinking about it. Sort of like getting used to a clutch petal on a car you never drove before. It takes a few times before you can get going smoothly without thinking about it.
The platform switch may have needed some adjustment too.
2. Stander Deck height adjustments - Tipical of any fixed deck mower but it suits many peoples needs.
We have the Sentar for quick height of cut change. Fastest deck height adjustment in the industry.
3. We could easily add fenders but have had few complaints by not having them. We don't want to add cost if there's little demand.
Mowingman - If we brought the handles together while keeping the same speeds, it would make the steering more sensitive and increase hand pressures needed to operate it. Try putting your hands toward the sides where the distance gets closer.
Thank you both for your comments. We consider all comments so that we can offer the BEST mowers.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.