If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by dpb on May 15, 2007, 5:45 pm
> dpb wrote:
..
...
> The larger deck, though, will do it in fewer passes. This would likely
> be offset by the overhead of a slightly larger engine.
> I use less gas with a 18hp lawn tractor than with a 5.5hp self-propelled
> mower for the same piece of lawn. It takes a lot less time too.
> Don't forget the value of your time when considering a larger mower.
> You always come out ahead, even if you use more fuel.
...
You're making the wrong comparison. OP was asking about the
difference in fuel consumption between to mowers of the _SAME_ size
deck, but one of significantly larger HP than the other. Therefore,
the apt comparison is simply one of whether one can drive enough
faster w/ the higher powered one to make up for the higher fuel
consumption rate.
As noted, that may (or may not) be possible depending on the
configuration of the area to be cut. If it's one big rectangular
field w/ nothing in the way, got a chance. If it's full of flower
beds and other obstacles or a very irregular area, not so much...
|
|
Posted by trainfan1 on May 15, 2007, 8:10 pm
dpb wrote:
>> dpb wrote:
> ..
> ...
>> The larger deck, though, will do it in fewer passes. This would likely
>> be offset by the overhead of a slightly larger engine.
>> I use less gas with a 18hp lawn tractor than with a 5.5hp self-propelled
>> mower for the same piece of lawn. It takes a lot less time too.
>> Don't forget the value of your time when considering a larger mower.
>> You always come out ahead, even if you use more fuel.
> ...
>
> You're making the wrong comparison. OP was asking about the
> difference in fuel consumption between to mowers of the _SAME_ size
> deck, but one of significantly larger HP than the other. Therefore,
> the apt comparison is simply one of whether one can drive enough
> faster w/ the higher powered one to make up for the higher fuel
> consumption rate.
>
> As noted, that may (or may not) be possible depending on the
> configuration of the area to be cut. If it's one big rectangular
> field w/ nothing in the way, got a chance. If it's full of flower
> beds and other obstacles or a very irregular area, not so much...
>
"To get a larger (48-50")deck, I need to get units 23-27 hp. Does a
unit in 23-27 hp. range(48-50") use appreciably more gas than a 18 hp
(42")unit"
Was the comparison I am making.
You guys must have smaller lawns than I do, I have hundreds of trees, &
there is no way a smaller deck is better than a large one under any
circumstances.
The OP is concerned over fuel usage, which really is moot when you
consider acquisition costs & your time.
Rob
|
|
Posted by dpb on May 15, 2007, 9:21 pm
trainfan1 wrote:
> dpb wrote:
> >> dpb wrote:
> > ..
> > ...
> >> The larger deck, though, will do it in fewer passes. This would likely
> >> be offset by the overhead of a slightly larger engine.
> >> I use less gas with a 18hp lawn tractor than with a 5.5hp self-propelled
> >> mower for the same piece of lawn. It takes a lot less time too.
> >> Don't forget the value of your time when considering a larger mower.
> >> You always come out ahead, even if you use more fuel.
> > ...
> > You're making the wrong comparison. OP was asking about the
> > difference in fuel consumption between to mowers of the _SAME_ size
> > deck, but one of significantly larger HP than the other. Therefore,
> > the apt comparison is simply one of whether one can drive enough
> > faster w/ the higher powered one to make up for the higher fuel
> > consumption rate.
> > As noted, that may (or may not) be possible depending on the
> > configuration of the area to be cut. If it's one big rectangular
> > field w/ nothing in the way, got a chance. If it's full of flower
> > beds and other obstacles or a very irregular area, not so much...
> "To get a larger (48-50")deck, I need to get units 23-27 hp. Does a
> unit in 23-27 hp. range(48-50") use appreciably more gas than a 18 hp
> (42")unit"
> Was the comparison I am making.
But the way you quoted it isn't exactly the way OP wrote it--
"I've always used 16-18 hp units with 48-50" mower decks.
Unfortunately, new units in that hp. range come with 42" decks. To
get a larger deck, I need to get units 23-27 hp.
Does a unit in 23-27 hp. range use appreciably more gas than a 18 hp."
Pretty clearly, he's asking in reference to his current machine which
apparently is a 48" deck but at least the manufacturers he's looked at
are now not providing that w/ as low as the 18 hp engine.
> You guys must have smaller lawns than I do, I have hundreds of trees, &
> there is no way a smaller deck is better than a large one under any
> circumstances.
I guess that would obviously depend on how the trees are arranged and
what portion is mowed... :)
No idea how big the mowed area is, OP didn't say. I've seen guys use
things far bigger than the area would justify simply for the desire to
have it. OTOH, I've seen other struggle along w/ a 20" pusher on
areas that might take days to get over...
The size of lawn I have seems immaterial... :)
> The OP is concerned over fuel usage, which really is moot when you
> consider acquisition costs & your time.
Guess that's in the eye of the asker, too...at pushing $4/gal it does
begin to make a visible expense. Since it now takes over $200 to fill
the tractor and during planting or other heavy use time periods that
happens every day, I can certainly understand the desire to hold down
fuel costs, even it if is just the yard... :)
> Rob
|
|
Posted by Larry Caldwell on May 16, 2007, 9:57 am
bozarth.d@gmail.com (dpb) says...
> The only consolation may be that the newer, larger engines may be
> slightly more efficient.
I hear the newer engines with pressure oiler systems are a LOT more
efficient.
--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.
|
|
Posted by on May 15, 2007, 3:47 pm
On May 15, 7:06 am, Windswept@home (Jack) wrote:
> I've always used 16-18 hp units with 48-50" mower decks.
> Unfortunately, new units in that hp. range come with 42" decks. To
> get a larger deck, I need to get units 23-27 hp.
> Does a unit in 23-27 hp. range use appreciably more gas than a 18 hp.
> unit, assuming same driving speed and workload? Thx.
Jack,
Don't worry about it. The 23-27HP units of today are the same 16-18HP
units of days gone by.
The way the engine manufacturers rate their engines.... The size of
the horse has gotten smaller.
|
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | MTD Lawn Tractors ? | June 25, 2005, 12:06 am |
| Husqvarna lawn tractors | September 8, 2009, 10:25 pm |
| Your Opinion Of Zero-Turn Lawn Tractors | May 6, 2008, 2:42 pm |
| Ethanol In Garden Tractors, Lawn Mowers | June 16, 2009, 9:43 am |
| Hot Water Oil Consumption | July 29, 2006, 9:27 am |
| steam boiler oil consumption | January 9, 2006, 10:44 pm |
| Power consumption: new Dustbuster | February 4, 2007, 5:13 pm |
| SEER and power consumption | April 10, 2007, 8:07 pm |
| Track your mileage and gas consumption | May 14, 2008, 11:09 am |
| Low power consumption dehumidifiers $ave ? | September 8, 2008, 9:18 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap