Shuttle shift vs hydrostatic transmission

[perryjosh64]

Planning on getting a new 25hp compact tractor with front end loader this year. Will be for mowing pastures, moving hay bales, maintaining property, keeping trails and food plots cleared, dirt work when needed, over seeding pastures and planting food plots, etc. Reading that hydrostatic better for loader/grapple work when going forward and back a lot but requires more maintenance and costs to maintain or repair along with some power lost to PTO. Shuttle shift better for power and PTO driven implements but is a pain with frequent starts and stops, back and forth work (loader) which would wear on clutch.
Again this tractor mainly for maintaining property, hunting areas and horse pastures. Is one really better than the other? One requiring less maintenance and easier/cheaper to maintain/work on? Or about the same and you just get use to it? I’m sure I’m overthinking this but want to get the most bang for my buck. Current tractor is a good old 1964 Ford 2000 tractor. Tractors im looking at are the LS MT226 and the TYM 2515 tractors. Any experience or advise appreciated.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

If you're used to a gear drive tractor, you won't notice having to clutch and shift for loader work. Just having the shuttle shift is a HUGE improvement over older tractors. The hydro is nice but if you don't know what you're missing you won't miss it.

My brother in law bought a gear drive Kubota because it was thousands less than the hydrostatic. Being an old farm boy himself, the clutching and shifting was no skin off his nose.

 

[Hobo,NC]

I have a 46HP Hydrostatic if used for tillage other than a rotor tiller the hydro eats up HP. For all the other work it can not be beat. Keep the 64 2000 for heavy tillage type of work. If you need a all in one a shuttle shift is the way to go. I was tired of buying loader tractors that did not satisfy me that's why I went Hydrostatic. I have a fleet of farmalls and Fords for working ground.

 

[Texasmark]

I posted somewhere on this site that I traded in a nearly new shifter on a hydro LS MT2-25s. If you are planning on just plowing, constant speed and all then the shifter will get you by. If you are doing any kind of loader work or odd jobs around the farm (which is why I bought my 25 HP) and especially if you work alone, the hydro is the way to go...hands down.

2 examples: That LS tractor had tilt steering, premium seat....on a 25 hp tractor. Second, if you are working alone, as I always do, and you are backing up to connect an implement, you can be standing by the side of the tractor and reach down and touch the forward or reverse pedal to move the tractor that extra inch or two to get the pins and lift arms lined up....you can't do that with a shifter....you have to get in the seat, do the clutch, look back over your shoulder and hope you get it lined up with a few tries.

 

[sotxbill]

Most of the hydrostatic tractors that I know of around here have "all but one", failed when used for heavy heavy work. ymmv

 

[Jim.ME]

Don't look at horsepower alone. If you want to move bales (round?) with it, you need to compare bale weight to loader and/or 3-point lifting capacity.

 

[Tx Jim]

For general tractor use when some soil plowing is expected to be performed I'll suggest hyd shuttle over hydrostatic. My '11Kubota M7040(64 pto hp) hydraulic shuttle has pulled a chisel type pasture aerator over several acres & handled many 100's of 4X5.5 rd bales. It has 1900 hrs on speed/hr meter with no problems on original trans components. Hyd reverser has no dry clutch to wear out but uses hyd clutches in reverser for similar task as traction clutch. All things equal hyd clutches outlast dry clutches. My JD 4255 with hyd traction clutch has 12,000 hrs on original clutch linings.

For just FEL operation or simple pto operation hydrostatic would be fine. Most hydrostatic trans require some horsepower for operation that hyd shuttles don't require.

 

[Devin Down South]

I have Kubotas with both. I would say both are hands down better than just a regular old gear drive tractor and even a synchronized shuttle tractor. When comparing a hydraulic shuttle to hydrostatic I probably lean to the hydraulic shuttle. I don’t mind it but having to press a pedal constantly isn’t exactly desirable. Yes I know they have cruise control but that only applies if you’re going to be working at a constant speed. With the hydraulic shuttle you get the benefit of a stronger tractor and at slow speeds you don’t even have to touch the clutch when moving from forward to reverse unless it just makes you feel better to do so. Both are super nice but the hydrastatic is going to cost you more money upfront and rob power down the road. Base your decision around what you plan to do with the tractor. For light duty work hydrastatic is fine but if you’re pulling with it I’d go with the hydraulic shuttle.

 

[urbancase]

I am a shuttle guy I have both but what you are talking about shuttle is better. And shuttle repairs don’t come close to hydro repairs. That’s me but hydro repairs give me the sick feeling in my stomach.

 

[Butch(OH)]

The only reason to go with a gear drive on a utility tractor like that is of it's going to be doing lot of heavy drawbar work. A large estate I take care of traded in a gear drive New Holland on a 6010 Kioti a couple years ago. It's used to take care of 35 acres of hilly lawn pulling a very heavy 18 foot finish mower. Grade the mile of driveways, brush hog a few areas etc. It has a loader with buckets ans a grapple which are used for all the same things that chore tractors must do. While I'm not in love with the Kioti brand the hydro is the cat's meow for that kind of tractor work I wouldn't want anything else.

 

[showcrop]

I had a Kubota years ago with hydro. It was good except that the "cruise" wouldn't hold and had to be repeatedly reset when doing field work. A newer one has the "glide shift" which I really like but that was discontinued because hydros took over. It also has a shuttle which works very well. All of the manufacturers seem to have very good hydros including very high powered tractors. You seem to never hear of a problem with them.

 

[Texasmark]

I had a Kubota years ago with hydro. It was good except that the "cruise" wouldn't hold and had to be repeatedly reset when doing field work. A newer one has the "glide shift" which I really like but that was discontinued because hydros took over. It also has a shuttle which works very well. All of the manufacturers seem to have very good hydros including very high powered tractors. You seem to never hear of a problem with them.

I was skeptical about hydros when they first started showing up on "hard usage" published data. That was a long time ago. When I started seeing heavy equipment using more and more of them I changed my mind and bought a small one having had zero problems with it. I think the hydro has been on the table long enough for mfgrs. to know what breaks and have had time to fix it.....gotta be the case or you wouldn't continue to see new (especially heavy duty) applications for the design. Yes you loose some of the engine HP with the design, but when you (I) look at what you get and the little it costs you compared to overall engine HP its no big deal.....my opinion and worth what you paid for it.......grin.

 

[Devin Down South]

I had a Kubota years ago with hydro. It was good except that the "cruise" wouldn't hold and had to be repeatedly reset when doing field work. A newer one has the "glide shift" which I really like but that was discontinued because hydros took over. It also has a shuttle which works very well. All of the manufacturers seem to have very good hydros including very high powered tractors. You seem to never hear of a problem with them.

I have a buddy that works at a very large kubota dealer. He said they very rarely ever see any problems come in with hydrostatic drive problems in tractors. Despite what some may think that have seen very isolated issues they are extremely reliable drive systems.

 

[Dieseltech]

I have the MF model 2850E with the three range hydro, I'm really glad I chose that instead of the shuttle model. Also have two older IH Hydro tractors, model 84 and larger 100. Long as oil and filter service is done there are lots of higher hour Hydro drives still working fine.

 

[Hobo,NC]

I have a buddy that works at a very large kubota dealer. He said they very rarely ever see any problems come in with hydrostatic drive problems in tractors. Despite what some may think that have seen very isolated issues they are extremely reliable drive systems.

The hydrostatic on my bota L4600 quit while under warranty they tore it apart the fix a 25 cent washer.

I fixed a bota L3600 GTS the clutch drum broke it quit moving. Bota's fix a updated drum and all the shift rails just 2K in parts.

Both tractors have been trouble free since and no manufacture has a perfect record.

 

[stoughtonfarmboy]

I posted somewhere on this site that I traded in a nearly new shifter on a hydro LS MT2-25s. If you are planning on just plowing, constant speed and all then the shifter will get you by. If you are doing any kind of loader work or odd jobs around the farm (which is why I bought my 25 HP) and especially if you work alone, the hydro is the way to go...hands down.

2 examples: That LS tractor had tilt steering, premium seat....on a 25 hp tractor. Second, if you are working alone, as I always do, and you are backing up to connect an implement, you can be standing by the side of the tractor and reach down and touch the forward or reverse pedal to move the tractor that extra inch or two to get the pins and lift arms lined up....you can't do that with a shifter....you have to get in the seat, do the clutch, look back over your shoulder and hope you get it lined up with a few tries.

That would make me nervous. I want to avoid a headline that reads "elderly Stoughton man succumbs to injuries incurred in farm accident".
Agree it can be frustrating to be just a little off when hooking up an implement.

Ken

 

[Texasmark]

That would make me nervous. I want to avoid a headline that reads "elderly Stoughton man succumbs to injuries incurred in farm accident".
Agree it can be frustrating to be just a little off when hooking up an implement.

Ken

Nothing to be nervous about. The tranny has 3 ranges and the RPM goes from about 600 to 2600. In low range, idle RPM, just touching one of the pedals it just creeps.....you take your finger off the pedal and it stops.....instantly. You are right there where you can alter steering, alter the position of the 3 pt height, and have the ability to move the tractor that extra inch to get a hookup. No big deal and mighty convenient.

 

[Russ from MN]

I can't imagine a modern 25 hp tractor handling hay bales on the loader very well, I'm assuming big round bales. I have lifted them with our JD4600 a little, and it's 37 pto hp. Our JD is a shuttle-shift, and I love it. We mostly use it for mowing/brush cutting with a 6-foot Bush Hog, it handles it well.

 

[504]

I Have a 656 Hydro and a gear drive shuttle on a 504 IH, the hydro is faster and smoother than the shuttle.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

Nothing to be nervous about. The tranny has 3 ranges and the RPM goes from about 600 to 2600. In low range, idle RPM, just touching one of the pedals it just creeps.....you take your finger off the pedal and it stops.....instantly. You are right there where you can alter steering, alter the position of the 3 pt height, and have the ability to move the tractor that extra inch to get a hookup. No big deal and mighty convenient.

I'm surprised that it works like that. Should be an "operator presence" switch that requires a butt in the seat before it will move. 30 year old gear drive tractors have them.

What I could see happening is you lose your balance, grab at the nearest thing for support (the pedal, because your hand is already on it), naturally pulling down harder and harder on the pedal as you're pulled under the wheel, until you are hopelessly pinned when you finally let go of the pedal. Not that I wouldn't inch the tractor around with the pedals from the ground myself, and probably manage to run myself over in that exact manner...