Dude, you're about to get 50 votes for hydro. I've got both and there's no comparison whatsoever. Hydro walk behinds will go anywhere. Much easier to maneuver and use. Less fatigue on the operator.
Hydro vs. Regular ?
Right now I am mowing 25 lawns a week with a John Deere 120. 
I am ready to buy a walk behind possbily a John Deere GS45 or GS 75. Those are the regular walk behinds or should I go hydro? Not sure on what is better?
I am ready to buy a walk behind possbily a John Deere GS45 or GS 75. Those are the regular walk behinds or should I go hydro? Not sure on what is better?1 - 20 of 25 Posts
I too have both belt and hydro...without a doubt go with the hydro
I had a t -bar Toro belt drive and traded it for a Exmark hydro. The Toro only had about 10 hours on it and was a good mower. I have used the hydro about 15 minutes and agree Gr Grass, no comparison. I have a Walker and am use to the control of a hydro.
Thanks for the response. Now I hear differences opinions about snappers, john deeres and bobcats? What do you guys think would be a better longer lasting 36 inch hydro?
What is a better deal for a hydro for a 36 inch walk behind? Would a Deere Snapper or Boncat give a better deal on hydro's? What about horse powers 14hp or 17hp? Its like 800 more for an upgrade from 14 hp to 17 on deeres. Is it worth it?
I think most folks here would tell you to go for the higher hp if you can afford it regardless of the mower make you settle on, especially if you are going to be riding a sulky behind the mower.
As for mower makes.........I think LGF hit the nail on the head not long ago in a thread similar to this when he suggested to a guy "you have a lot of reading to do." Use the search feature on here where much information can be had on mower opinion.
As for mower makes.........I think LGF hit the nail on the head not long ago in a thread similar to this when he suggested to a guy "you have a lot of reading to do." Use the search feature on here where much information can be had on mower opinion.
Cheese,
I used my Exmark Turf Tracer HP 36", 15hp Kawasaki, today for the first time, Man what a difference in this and the Toro fixed deck 36", 12.5 hp. belt drive.
No one could have convinced me there was that much difference.
Day and night. If there is any way $$$, go hydro. I chose Exmark because of there reputation and the local dealer.
I lost about $700.00 on the belt Toro, but after really using the Exmark, it is all forgotten.
I used my Exmark Turf Tracer HP 36", 15hp Kawasaki, today for the first time, Man what a difference in this and the Toro fixed deck 36", 12.5 hp. belt drive.
No one could have convinced me there was that much difference.
Day and night. If there is any way $$$, go hydro. I chose Exmark because of there reputation and the local dealer.
I lost about $700.00 on the belt Toro, but after really using the Exmark, it is all forgotten.
dude, you need to go hydro and stay away from Deere. Their machines dont get enough lift from their decks to get a high quality cut that eXmarks are know for. If you want to become really productive, look at a Wright Stander...awesome machine. In closing, dont buy a John Deere.
Hi there,
I'm about to trade my gs45 for a Hd45. I find that with the belt drive I get a lot of slip in the wet weather or even just wet grass plus, it only has a reverse assistants, meaning you can put it in reverse but then you have to pull it physically to get out of a spot. I know MacLawnCo doesn't like John Deere, but I love mine. I got a mulch kit put on there and have no problems with an awesome cut. I have put it through some long grass too. It even shaved off a piece of concrete step, (didn't know what I was doing when I first got it), and there was no damaged to the mower or the blade. Lucky enough I was trying it out on my own property. But I would really go Hydro. as for HP. I'm sticking with the 14hp. It's all I need really, and like I said, it cut's long St. Augustine or Bahia grass that I have put it through anyway.
hope this helps
Steve
I'm about to trade my gs45 for a Hd45. I find that with the belt drive I get a lot of slip in the wet weather or even just wet grass plus, it only has a reverse assistants, meaning you can put it in reverse but then you have to pull it physically to get out of a spot. I know MacLawnCo doesn't like John Deere, but I love mine. I got a mulch kit put on there and have no problems with an awesome cut. I have put it through some long grass too. It even shaved off a piece of concrete step, (didn't know what I was doing when I first got it), and there was no damaged to the mower or the blade. Lucky enough I was trying it out on my own property. But I would really go Hydro. as for HP. I'm sticking with the 14hp. It's all I need really, and like I said, it cut's long St. Augustine or Bahia grass that I have put it through anyway.
hope this helps
Steve
Exmark Turf Tracer HP 36 gets my vote. Spend a little more now and recieve much more down the road. My TTHP is unbeatable for the properties I service. I've cut my mowing times by 65% on most properties over a 21", maybe more. The productivity of a hydro over a belt is 40%, you do the math. More lawns in less time = profit.
skag--your productivity figures of your professional machine over some 21 inch pusher sounds reasonable.Originally posted by Scag48
I've cut my mowing times by 65% on most properties over a 21", maybe more. The productivity of a hydro over a belt is 40%, you do the math. More lawns in less time = profit.
but where do you get the hydro over belt is 40% more productive? and that is all other things being equal.
I'm willing to meet you or anybody else for a little grass cutting session if you think that with all things being equal except for belt vs. hydro and you spot me 40%, that you can beat me and my old belt drive.
all you stand to lose is a little $GREEN$ !payup
I am no way saying that a belt unit is preferable to a hydro but belt drive machines have their place, what ever that is, or manufacturers wouldn't make them.
OH BTW--what testing I have done with a JD walkbehind I hated them. but that just might be me.
GEO
Oops, my bad Geo. The 40% figure was Exmark's mulching sales pitch. For some reason, I could have sworn I heard 40% more productivity over belts from somewhere. I think 20% or so productivity gain with hydro is sufficient.
BTW, bring it on, Lesco don't scare me!
BTW, bring it on, Lesco don't scare me!
hahaha! thanks skag fot that little correction!Originally posted by Scag48
Oops, my bad Geo. The 40% figure was Exmark's mulching sales pitch. .... I think 20% or so productivity gain with hydro is sufficient.
BTW, bring it on, Lesco don't scare me!
the light of truth, honor and justice shines bright in these hills again tonight as the GEO-man sets another record straight! LOL.... we won't quibble over a little 20%.
GEO
I've owned both, but I'd be curious to hear how T bar belt drive users feel about it. From a pistol grip belt, heck yes the hydro is a huge improvement. But the difference seems less vs. the T bar belts. I like that they're lighter, even though they don't back up and you have to manhandle them in tight turns, since I pull them out on rainy days and on hills. But if you're using it full time, I vote hydro too. But I'd rather have a $6000 small ZTR than a $5000 hydro wb. God bless ZTR's. I had to triple mow one yard today and it was so much easier.
I own both if you don't have a lot of money then buy a scag or exmark walkbehid, belt driven. Then later on when you have the money get a ztr. Don't waste the money on a hydro walkbehind ,Because once you use a ztr you will never want to use anything else.I have used belt driven mowers for almost 20 years ,Now i have a ztr i don't even want to pull them off the trailer..Beg ,barrow, do your self a favor and get the ztr. Good luck
At least try a Hustler 37".........Nothing will laster longer, IMO........PeteOriginally posted by Cheesedawg1
What do you guys think would be a better longer lasting 36 inch hydro?
Although the hydro is a larger investment than the gear drive without a doubt you will get your money back faster with a hydro mower. It is simply faster and gives you more production. Go with the hydro.
The "40%" increase is true, from what I've learned. It is a 40% increase over the life of the mower, I believe. Not for one yard. Factoring in an average of accounts, wet, dry, tall, short, etc.
Easily a 20% increase on a yard to yard basis, maybe more. When you have mastered the Zero turn, which a belt cannot do, you will see a large increase of production. Only with 10 yards a day, save 5 or 10 minutes each yard....you see my point. I've used a Viking for 10 years or more, owned a belt 36", and sold it, now I just got the TTHP 36", there really is no comparison IMHO. Belt was slower, wet or dry, handling response was slow and labored, and seemed to need more up-keep. My TTHP is SO smooth, and responsive, and fast and agile that I would NEVER consider a belt drive again UNLESS it was a 32" for back yards only....then MAYBE I could justify it....maybe.
My $.02
~Nest
Easily a 20% increase on a yard to yard basis, maybe more. When you have mastered the Zero turn, which a belt cannot do, you will see a large increase of production. Only with 10 yards a day, save 5 or 10 minutes each yard....you see my point. I've used a Viking for 10 years or more, owned a belt 36", and sold it, now I just got the TTHP 36", there really is no comparison IMHO. Belt was slower, wet or dry, handling response was slow and labored, and seemed to need more up-keep. My TTHP is SO smooth, and responsive, and fast and agile that I would NEVER consider a belt drive again UNLESS it was a 32" for back yards only....then MAYBE I could justify it....maybe.
My $.02
~Nest
nest--sorry to repeat you whole post. and I'm not arguing but I don't see your numbers working out.Originally posted by ElephantNest
The "40%" increase is true, from what I've learned. It is a 40% increase over the life of the mower, I believe. Not for one yard. Factoring in an average of accounts, wet, dry, tall, short, etc.
Easily a 20% increase on a yard to yard basis, maybe more. When you have mastered the Zero turn, which a belt cannot do, you will see a large increase of production. Only with 10 yards a day, save 5 or 10 minutes each yard....you see my point. I've used a Viking for 10 years or more, owned a belt 36", and sold it, now I just got the TTHP 36", there really is no comparison IMHO. Belt was slower, wet or dry, handling response was slow and labored, and seemed to need more up-keep. My TTHP is SO smooth, and responsive, and fast and agile that I would NEVER consider a belt drive again UNLESS it was a 32" for back yards only....then MAYBE I could justify it....maybe.
My $.02
~Nest
5-10 min a yard over 10 yards doesn't equal 40% in my neck of the woods. perhaps it does in your market but you'd have to mow only about four hours to get those 10 yards and make about 40 %.
there is no doubt in my mind that I should be running a hydro since I work for myself but the belt drives have their place. again, if they didn't the manufacturers wouldn't make them.
as for zero turns, I mow one property where a grass nut lives and I have to be careful not to leave a turn divot there. otherwise, you simply touch the brake handle to start the turn and let off. mower turns, inside wheel travels slightly, no turn divot. except for the grass nuts lawn. I can't take a chance there!:blush:
the ole lesco is very responsive, pulls great wet or dry, and drive belt maintainance is no big deal since I changed out the drive pulleys.
GEO:waving:
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Lawn Care Forum
A forum community dedicated to lawn care and landscaping professionals and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
