Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Lawn Mowing' started by adcare lawns and gardens, Jan 17, 2008.
im looking at walk behind mowers today.... what is better belt or hydraulic???
Imo, belt drives are a waste of money esp if you're mowing on inclines. Been there and done that. Hydro is the only way to go.
Hydro, all day long, but expensive!
Belts are what you buy if you can't afford a hydro. Hydro is much better and more reliable. Plus, dual hydro is much easier to use than belt.
Hydraulic is better in a lot of ways you dont have to push it back wards the belts dont slip when wet.
I personally dont think a hydro is worth the money unless you have alot of hills. Belts work fine and are very easy to use if you know how to properly use one. If your cool with spending the money for a hydro go for it but I wouldn't.
If you go with a belt drive, get a T-bar by Toro, it is light years ahead of pistol grip control systems. I would take a belt driven T-bar over a pistol grip hydro even. Make the dealers let you operate several different machines before you buy.
The best thing you can do is to demo both of them on grass. A belt drive is cheaper, a little lighter, and they are easy to turn but they tear the turf easier, the belts sometimes slip when they are wet, and you have to pull the crap out of them to go backwards. Hydro is a lot easier on the body also. I would say get the hydro if you can afford it. If you can't afford it wait until you can! The ones that are telling you to get the belt drive are the ones that don't have a hydro- Misery loves company! Just my opinion.
what size mower are you looking at? Anything over a 32" a dual hydro system is a must. 32" and under you can probably get away with belt drive.
Also, how often will you be using this mower? Once a month for an hour? if so then belt, otherwise hydro again.
hydros with dual pumps only