Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-04-2012, 11:29 AM
RoyalTree RoyalTree is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami fl
Posts: 155
wam or 72 mower

I am looking for some advice from some of you guys that are doing very large properties. We are bidding on 70 huge places and am trying to figure out some productivity numbers on a wide area mower. Is it worth the investment or should we stick with the 72s? The biggest places is about 250 acres and the average is about 15-20. They will only get cut 16 times per year.

Each site is bid individually and not as a package.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-04-2012, 12:16 PM
KrayzKajun's Avatar
KrayzKajun KrayzKajun is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Harvey,LA
Posts: 10,426
What about a tractor w/ batwing? How far apart are the sites?
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:33 PM
RoyalTree RoyalTree is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami fl
Posts: 155
They are all over town, pretty far apart for the most part. I am not sure if a tractor will be allowed or not. I would think the wam would be easier to get around the sites and cause less damage.

Does anybody know any realistic productivity estimates or 15 ft wams or batwing tractors.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-04-2012, 02:45 PM
Mark Oomkes Mark Oomkes is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 7,419
Dedicated mowers--wams-- are going to be more productive, especially if there are any obstacles.

Being in Florida, I'd think a wam would be better. (year round mowing, almost)

Most of the wams have a 2 speed tranny anyways, for roading from site to site.
__________________
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

I like my guns like Obama likes his voters: Undocumented

Criminals obey gun laws like politicians follow their oaths of office
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-05-2012, 08:35 AM
Toro 455 Toro 455 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: sabina oh
Posts: 238
It's kind of hard to justify a WAM for an annual contract. Then there's the problem with operator abuse of expensive equipment. Here in Ohio 16 cuts per year would be bush-hogging, because with only mowing a couple times per month WAMs get bogged down with that much growth.

But to answer your question WAMs are more productive or they couldn't sell them. They only have a road speed of about 25 mph.

I've been using WAMs for years. They have advantages but not in every situation.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-05-2012, 09:22 AM
KrayzKajun's Avatar
KrayzKajun KrayzKajun is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Harvey,LA
Posts: 10,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toro 455 View Post
Here in Ohio 16 cuts per year would be bush-hogging, because with only mowing a couple times per month WAMs get bogged down with that much growth.

.
good point. same thing down here in Louisiana. a WAM wouldnt be able to handle the rapid growth during the spring and summer. it shows the OP is located in Florida, so i think he would be in the same boat.
__________________

Landscape Contractors
Louisiana Licensed: Landscape/Horticulturist, Commercial Ground Applicator, Arborist, Irrigation Contractor, Utility Arborist

Onsite Sandbagging, Palletized Sandbags & Bulk Totes, Emergency Response, Erosion & StormWater Barriers
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-05-2012, 09:31 AM
Mark Oomkes Mark Oomkes is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 7,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toro 455 View Post
It's kind of hard to justify a WAM for an annual contract. Then there's the problem with operator abuse of expensive equipment. Here in Ohio 16 cuts per year would be bush-hogging, because with only mowing a couple times per month WAMs get bogged down with that much growth.

But to answer your question WAMs are more productive or they couldn't sell them. They only have a road speed of about 25 mph.

I've been using WAMs for years. They have advantages but not in every situation.
Depends on which WAM. A 455, you are correct, underpowered for 16 cuts. If the OP was going for a 580 (Or whatever their new designation is) no problem at all. HP to spare. Possibly even a 4000\4100.
__________________
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

I like my guns like Obama likes his voters: Undocumented

Criminals obey gun laws like politicians follow their oaths of office
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:19 AM
Toro 455 Toro 455 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: sabina oh
Posts: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Oomkes View Post
Depends on which WAM. A 455, you are correct, underpowered for 16 cuts. If the OP was going for a 580 (Or whatever their new designation is) no problem at all. HP to spare. Possibly even a 4000\4100.
I haven't noticed the 455 being underpowered. Maybe 65hp and that's on only a 10.5' deck. I've had a couple of 580-D's and they had 80 or so hp on a 16' deck. So the deck width to hp ratio is similar.

The problem comes with the type of decks on WAM's which are rear discharge drop decks. They can't handle lots of growth like a side discharge deck that shoots the clippings out of the way.

I used to have a 12' 3deck batwing mower made by Alamo to mow roadside ditches. It had no baffeling under the deck, and the back was straight, not dropped down like a lawn mowing WAM. It gave a lousey cut and I finally welded baffeling under the deck which improved it somewhat. I don't mow with it anymore and use the tractor portion of it to pull my core aerator.

BTW the new model of the Toro 580-D is the 5900-D. I checked one aut at my dealer. It has an air ride seat! Fantastic mower! I wish I needed one.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:24 AM
Mark Oomkes Mark Oomkes is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 7,419
My 455's were the 55 HP and were underpowered, too low tip speed, "4WD" sucked, etc.

The big thing the 580's have is not being naturally aspirated.

Always wanted one, never could justify it.
__________________
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

I like my guns like Obama likes his voters: Undocumented

Criminals obey gun laws like politicians follow their oaths of office
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-06-2012, 12:26 AM
TXLWN TXLWN is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: North Texas
Posts: 38
I prefer 72" mower due to the fact that its easy to replace operators and machines if somebody quits or a machine breaks. Bid it with 72's and when it makes sense then possibly go for the wam.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.com™ - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:51 AM.

Page generated in 0.08143 seconds with 9 queries