Hydro vs. belt (long term maintenance)

[KB]

I have had both a turf tracer HP 48" / 17kaw and a Lazer Z HP 52/23kaw over the past 5 years and recently got out of the business. I was a part timer. I said that I would never again use a regular "residential" mower after seeing the time savings with these commercial but now have only a 21" push for my lawn. I am looking for a small walkbehind for my personal mower. I like the TT HP because of the hydro, but do not like the extra $1200 cost that I have been quoted. I have seen a couple of times where it was mentioned that the hydro may be more dependable with regards to maintenance than the belt drive. Seeing as how this will be used only as a personal mower 15-20 hrs per year, I plan to keep "until the wheels fall off". I would have thought with the additional mechanics involved with the hydro system, it would be more like to have some sort of failure over time that would also prove more costly. Can you explain why the hydro could be considered more dependable than the cheaper and seeingly more basic belt drive system? Thanks!

[eXmark]

KB,

For the number of hours your going to be using the mower each year the maintenance aspect between the hyro and gear drive really isn't a huge issue.

You will have brake adjustments, drive linkage adjustments and it would be a good idea to service the transmission once each year but that's about the only differences. The other thing to remember is that over time the drive belts wear out or dry out and require replacement. On the hydros there really are not very many adjustments and only one that you should ever really need to worry about and that is the tracking adjustment knob.

The real difference is going to be in the the handling of the mower. A hydro is simply more maneuverable with instant forward and instant reverse, zero turn capability etc. The gear drive may be a really good fit for yo depending upon the amount of landscaping you have, the grade of the lawn etc.

Thanks,

Terry