Register free!
Search
 
     

The Green Industry's Resource Center


Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 01-24-2014, 11:42 AM
newguy123 newguy123 is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,013
An addage often quoted is "equipment is cheaper than employees." If that is true, why wouldn't we want the biggest deck and fastest mower out on our lawns??? If Z's are faster, which is true in regards to speed, why use walk behinds that don't move as fast?

Turn around time? Is a Z slower turning around than a walk behind. I think the difference is negligible, and easily made up on the faster ground speed.

If the users of walk behinds are utilizing them because of a lighter foot print, then I can understand that.

But if the Z's move faster...and equipment is cheaper than employees...why do the big companies use walk behinds? Is this statement in accurate?
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 01-24-2014, 07:50 PM
SDLandscapes VT SDLandscapes VT is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Essex, VT
Posts: 574
newguy123

the other adage is "speed kills"

It really depends on your setup--if a zero turn can mow all of your lawns without damage or rutting then do it, but that isn't the real world...which means you have to have other equipment on your trailer which increases your operating costs for something that is underutilized. a 48" wb will mow a larger set of sites than a 60" Z. You have to know at what capacity you make the switch--you certainly cannot be profitable owning a machine that only mows a portion of your sites.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 01-24-2014, 10:56 PM
newguy123 newguy123 is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDLandscapes VT View Post
newguy123

the other adage is "speed kills"

It really depends on your setup--if a zero turn can mow all of your lawns without damage or rutting then do it, but that isn't the real world...which means you have to have other equipment on your trailer which increases your operating costs for something that is underutilized. a 48" wb will mow a larger set of sites than a 60" Z. You have to know at what capacity you make the switch--you certainly cannot be profitable owning a machine that only mows a portion of your sites.
Yeah I can understand your points. Basically I need to be convinced...have more facts/stats? Not trying to be a hassle here. But it's either purchasing more Z's this year or Turf Tracers. Have a few months left to consider...but??? questions remain.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 01-25-2014, 12:30 PM
Townhouse Yards's Avatar
Townhouse Yards Townhouse Yards is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Vienna, VA
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deererunner View Post
Actually, the scag is much cheaper than the exmark, I was just quoted for the 48" SWZ for $4100.

I'll be replacing all my mowers over to the scag SWZ's. To me, which I have said before, I see much more productivity out of the walk behinds then the z-turns.
Posted via Mobile Device
Dang, I got quoted $6450 plus tax for a scag swz 36'. I want to get a 36' wb this year and I was curious what they are new. The Toro hydro wb equivalent at that same dealer is $6054 plus tax.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 01-25-2014, 05:30 PM
clydebusa's Avatar
clydebusa clydebusa is online now
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Posts: 1,544
Do multi acre lots so 72" ZTR and 2 48" walk behinds with 1 30" and 1 21". This covers all my needs.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 01-25-2014, 05:31 PM
echo echo is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 898
Townhouse, you need a different dealer for sure. That's ridiculous pricing.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 01-25-2014, 05:36 PM
Church2224 Church2224 is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo View Post
Townhouse, you need a different dealer for sure. That's ridiculous pricing.
Posted via Mobile Device
That is about normal pricing for a lot of mowers here in Virginia. Pricing is high here. I was quoted the following-

Scag SWZ- 6,600.00
Toro Fixed Deck hydro 48- 5,600.00
Toro T2 Hydro 48-7,000.00
Exmark Viking 48- 5,400.00
Exmark Turf Tracer S Series 48-6,500.00
Snapper Pro SW30 48- 4,400.00
Hustler Trimstar 48-4,900.00
Gravely Pro Walk Hydro 48- 6,200.00
Ferris Comfort Control DD 52- 7,250.00

People who are wondering why no go with the Hustler or Snapper Pro? Well I demoed the Hustler and did not like it, and every LCO I talked to who owns a Snapper Pro complains about issues they have with them. I rather spend money one something I know I will like.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 01-25-2014, 05:40 PM
echo echo is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Church2224 View Post
That is about normal pricing for a lot of mowers here in Virginia. Pricing is high here. I was quoted the following-

Scag SWZ- 6,600.00
Toro Fixed Deck hydro 48- 5,600.00
Toro T2 Hydro 48-7,000.00
Exmark Viking 48- 5,400.00
Exmark Turf Tracer S Series 48-6,500.00
Snapper Pro SW30 48- 4,400.00
Hustler Trimstar 48-4,900.00
Gravely Pro Walk Hydro 48- 6,200.00
Ferris Comfort Control DD 52- 7,250.00

People who are wondering why no go with the Hustler or Snapper Pro? Well I demoed the Hustler and did not like it, and every LCO I talked to who owns a Snapper Pro complains about issues they have with them. I rather spend money one something I know I will like.
Where's the pricing for a 36"?

What complaints are you hearing about the SnapperPro?
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 01-25-2014, 05:50 PM
Church2224 Church2224 is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo View Post
Where's the pricing for a 36"?

What complaints are you hearing about the SnapperPro?
Posted via Mobile Device
Gravely 36-5,200.00
Toro 36 Hydro- 5,500.00
Exmark Viking 36-5,300.00
Exmark Turf Tracer 36-6,000.00
Hustler Trimstar- 4,500.00
Snapper Pro SW20-3,900.00
Scag SWZ- 6000.00
Scag SWZT- 4,500.00

No idea what Ferris is, when I saw the price of a 52 I just looked elsewhere.

Snapper pro complaints I hear about are high prices on parts, issues with getting the mowers on curbs because of the positioning of the hydro pumps/wheel motors, and issues with smaller parts breaking. I asked a crew of a local LCO who used them what they thought and the crew leader goes "I hate these things." They are looking for a new company to use next year.

And my friend who was a technician with a company that used them, Tru Green (Yep Tru-green uses Snapper Pro and Ferris in the Virginia Beach/Norfolk Area) says they are over engineered and they have had issues he has not scene on other mowers. What they were I did not ask, he just told me to stay away.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 01-25-2014, 05:55 PM
echo echo is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 898
$4500 for the 36" is certainly in line and a swz should be easily found for $5500. $4400 for a SnapperPro 48 is a great price and the Toro you have listed is $550 less than his quote. The prices Townhouse was quoted, again, are ridiculous.

Very odd. We've always run Ferris and most ever LCO in the area who runs Ferris and SnapperPro loves them, especially the price of the SP's. If it weren't for the lack of electric start on the SnapperPro 36" we'd have 2 of them.
Posted via Mobile Device

Last edited by echo; 01-25-2014 at 06:05 PM.
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.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:45 PM.

Page generated in 0.07052 seconds with 8 queries