Thread: Bad Boy Mowers
View Single Post
Old 10-07-2012, 03:02 PM
puppypaws's Avatar
puppypaws puppypaws is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Marshville,NC 28103
Posts: 8,338
Originally Posted by retrodog View Post
If you get the Super get the 66" It performs so much better than the 72, I can't explain why, decks look similiar underneath, but have a buddy that has both here and they favor the 66. They mow lots of huge properties too.
If this is the case he has something wrong with the 72, and yes that can happen. They brought me a brand spanking new 35/72 Super Z with .6 hrs. on the meter to try. I immediately saw there was a strip of uncut grass left between the center and outside blades on both sides. I talked with the area rep about what I saw, and it was like this has never been seen by anyone but me, and well, my dealer also, because I had him take the mower and run it, and he saw the same thing.

I've owned and operated 60", 66", and 72" Hustler Super Z mowers, and they have all given a very good cut on the grasses and weeds in my area. The new 72 gives a very smooth cut, to the point one could not tell what size deck was used when looking at the mowed area. I can also maneuver the 72 in the same areas as the 60 and 66 with no problem whatsoever. Honestly the only difference I can tell in the machines is I can mow more grass with each increase in deck size.

Below is a picture of the new 72" deck cutting crab grass at full speed, and this is a good close shot so a person could easily tell if any grass was left uncut, or uneven. I cannot believe the person you know says the 66" cuts better than the 72", look at these pictures and see if this would not be considered a very good cut.

I can say without doubt, if he sees a difference in cut between his 66 and 72, with the 66 being better, there is a problem with his 72, because every Super Z deck I've owned gives a very acceptable cut, but I did see a problem with the cut from the new demo they brought me to try.

Farm Mower
Reply With Quote
Page generated in 0.04208 seconds with 8 queries