Garden Tractor Forums banner

Which GT's have real hydraulics?

29K views 70 replies 21 participants last post by  hydriv 
#1 ·
Which make and model GT tractors have real hydraulics and the HP and chassis capable of utilizing them with implements still available? Hoping to start a list of machines. Thanks

Tom
 
#6 ·
So, most any John Deere GT that has a hydrostatic transmission can run hydraulics? My GT245 has a Tuff Torque K71B hydro, how would you hook hydraulics onto that tractor for say a sleeve hitch lift (since it cannot accept a 3 point) rather than using an electric lift on the sleeve hitch?
 
#7 ·
thompson, I had just parted ways with a GT-275, They are pretty much set up as a all in one design. I think that deeres tuff torq in the Gt series was the best of that style, charge pump, final all one unit. In theory the charge pump would make the pressure, but I do not think that there is a easy way to utilize the hydraulics of the all in one design. The Toro Wheel Horse, Ford, New Holland smaller gt s used a similar tuff torq But i dont think they stand up anywhere close to the ones in your Deere. I would recommend the electric lift, just my two cents. Shawn
 
#8 ·
The hydrostatic unit would have to have ports to hook up to, so not all hydrostatic drives can use it's pump to use auxiliary hydraulics. To get back to the original topic, the list for today's garden tractors would be small. John Deere X-700 series (maybe X-500 series), possibly Simplicity's Legacy, Ingersols 3000 and 4000 series and.....that could be it. I probably left one or two out, but the list would be small. Since SCUTS and CUTS have the market, manufacturers are offering less and less capable true garden tractors. Gone are the days of the John Deere 4X5, 400/420/430s, 316/318/322/330/332, etc., Cub Cadets Super Garden Tractors, etc., and etc. Today's market is a bevy of lawn tractors, garden tractors with manual lift systems, auxiliary electric lift hitches, sleeve hitches, etc., while the more serious garden tractors are the SCUTS and CUTS which are now very popular.
 
#10 · (Edited by Moderator)
No need to make a list because a list implies more than one entry.

The ONLY line of tractors that meet the requirements of the OP is the Colt/Case/Ingersoll's.

Try running a hydraulic rototiller off of the charge pump in a hydrostatic drive system and see what happens. NOTHING. It can't be done. Deere themselves know that to be true because if you buy their hydraulic tiller, you have to buy the belt-driven auxiliary hydraulic system to operate it. Case/Ingersoll tractors have a TRUE hydraulic system that is capable of delivering 8 to 10 gallons per minute at pressures up to 2500 PSI. You can run the tiller, four foot bush hog mower, four foot finishing mower hung off the three point hitch, log splitters, chipper/shredder and the best vacuum bagger ever made. Some models even had hydraulic drive decks and snow blowers.

The other brands of GT's with hydro's can operate some small cylinders but they can't run motors. And that statement applies to every John Deere, Cub Cadet, Wheelhorse, Gravely, Ford, Allis, Simplicity etc ever built.
 
#11 ·
Hi Folks

This is my first post. In looking for a GT to restore I have been looking at a lot of the older machines for the first time. The Case /Colt/Ingersoll tractors are fundamentally different in that they are not hydrostatic drive. They have a hydraulic pump and a hydraulic motor- separate units. This seems to me to offer a lot of flexibility and perhaps better serviceability for the long term. As far as running hydraulic attachments from the pump versus conventional attachments I am not sure that is much of an advantage for me. The conventional mechanical PTO type attachments like tillers are more common and cheaper than hydraulic ones , around here at least.
For me it is more important to have available a 3 pt hitch with hydraulic lift and a PTO for attachments. I had a JDx475 and the hydraulics were very capable for my uses even though it is a hydrostatic drive system. The big JD's certainly have the size and HP to run a lot of attachments, although as others have said they were not designed to run hydraulic motors based attachments. To the OP -What is available and affordable for attachments in your area is going to be a major factor in deciding if you must limit yourself to the Case/Ingersoll tractors.

Brian
 
#12 ·
JDBrian said:
Hi Folks. This is my first post...Brian
Well then, :wave: Welcome to GTTalk! Glad to have you with us and thanks for weighing in on the subject! We hope that you enjoy the forum!
 
#13 ·
JDBrian said:
Hi Folks

This is my first post. In looking for a GT to restore I have been looking at a lot of the older machines for the first time. The Case /Colt/Ingersoll tractors are fundamentally different in that they are not hydrostatic drive. They have a hydraulic pump and a hydraulic motor- separate units. This seems to me to offer a lot of flexibility and perhaps better serviceability for the long term. As far as running hydraulic attachments from the pump versus conventional attachments I am not sure that is much of an advantage for me. The conventional mechanical PTO type attachments like tillers are more common and cheaper than hydraulic ones , around here at least.
For me it is more important to have available a 3 pt hitch with hydraulic lift and a PTO for attachments. I had a JDx475 and the hydraulics were very capable for my uses even though it is a hydrostatic drive system. The big JD's certainly have the size and HP to run a lot of attachments, although as others have said they were not designed to run hydraulic motors based attachments. To the OP -What is available and affordable for attachments in your area is going to be a major factor in deciding if you must limit yourself to the Case/Ingersoll tractors.

Brian
Brian,
The OP's question was very clear.

Which make and model GT tractors have real hydraulics and the HP and chassis capable of utilizing them with implements still available? Hoping to start a list of machines. Thanks

Apparently, the OP isn't looking for tractors that have very limited hydraulic capabilities. I take it that he has some sort of specific purpose in mind that needs the sort of hydraulic system that is only found on CCI tractors.

As for implement availability, the OP resides in Wisconsin, which happens to be the birthplace of the Colt (Milwaukee) and the location of the manufacturing facility of Colt, Case and Ingersoll from 1963 to 2005. When seeking attachments for a Deere, you will find that to be more of a problem then you think because Deere just loved to make attachments that only fit one or two models.

Not so with Case. A H-series tiller was introduced in the early 70's but you can put it onto any Case or Ingersoll GT right up to 2011. Find me a Deere attachment (other than a wheel weight) that you can install on all models and all years.

John Deere makes a lot of very good equipment but none of it will meet the needs of the OP.

Case has had a 3 pt hitch with hydraulic lift and down pressure since 1971 along with a hydraulic PTO that needs no V belts or driveshafts. And hydraulics protect implements from damage when they are overloaded because they have a relief valve.
 
#14 ·
JDBrian, :welcometogttalk:

Welcome to GTtalk, The "GREATEST SITE ON EARTH" for Gt's anyway. Have fun and ask all the question you like, someone will surely answer you shortly.

As far as your question goes, Case is a different breed of Gt. There are several brands of Gt's that are fully capable of doing any type 3pt work or running a front end loader, relying on an external hydraulic pump, or the limited abilities of the hydrostatic transmission. "Hydriv" make a good point that Case is the only Gt that can run anything that requires large volume hydraulic flow to operate. So, the main thing you need to decide is, what equipment are you wanting to run and how you want to power them. Wheel Horse, not being built anymore, is one of the Gt's that could also use most of the equipment it made regardless of when they were built. Bolens is another brand that, depending on tube or large frame, their equipment would also fit on several different years. Even with John Deere, most of their stuff would work on a lot of different series of tractors.

With that being said, each brand has their advantages and disadvantages. This is a subject that will be argued between all of us to the end of time. Pick out a brand you a drawn to, and try it out for a while. If you don't like what you get out of it, sell and buy another brand.

Have fun and enjoy the sport.:itsok:
 
#15 ·
hydriv said:
Brian,
The OP's question was very clear.

Which make and model GT tractors have real hydraulics and the HP and chassis capable of utilizing them with implements still available? Hoping to start a list of machines. Thanks

Apparently, the OP isn't looking for tractors that have very limited hydraulic capabilities. I take it that he has some sort of specific purpose in mind that needs the sort of hydraulic system that is only found on CCI tractors.

As for implement availability, the OP resides in Wisconsin, which happens to be the birthplace of the Colt (Milwaukee) and the location of the manufacturing facility of Colt, Case and Ingersoll from 1963 to 2005. When seeking attachments for a Deere, you will find that to be more of a problem then you think because Deere just loved to make attachments that only fit one or two models.

Not so with Case. A H-series tiller was introduced in the early 70's but you can put it onto any Case or Ingersoll GT right up to 2011. Find me a Deere attachment (other than a wheel weight) that you can install on all models and all years.

John Deere makes a lot of very good equipment but none of it will meet the needs of the OP.

Case has had a 3 pt hitch with hydraulic lift and down pressure since 1971 along with a hydraulic PTO that needs no V belts or driveshafts. And hydraulics protect implements from damage when they are overloaded because they have a relief valve.
Hydriv

Your response seems to be a bit defensive. I did not mean to in any way disparage Case/Ingersoll tractors. I am most familiar with the capabilities of JD stuff. In doing research on other brands of GT's I was surprised to see the unique (for GT's) Hydriv implementation used by Colt and later Case/Ingersoll. As I mentioned above it is fundamentally different than a hydrostatic drive system. I am well aware of the advantages of such a system. I am using this site and MTF to gather info about different GT's so I can decide what best fits my needs. Being from Canada I have no knowledge of what attachments were available in the OP's area. Case GT's are rare here and the attachments, other than mower decks, would be even harder to find. This will be a consideration for me when I am looking for a restoration project. I thought it might also be so for the OP.

Regards
Brian
 
#18 ·
I've learned a lot from this Thread already, lots of good info here. Next time I see a Case on craigslist I'll have to check it out . It would be handy to have a tractor with a 3pt , PTO and hyds to run attachments like a small post hole digger or maybe a 3pt log splitter. What kind of attachments where you planning on using on your tractor ? Al
 
#20 ·
JDBrian said:
Hydriv

Your response seems to be a bit defensive. I did not mean to in any way disparage Case/Ingersoll tractors. I am most familiar with the capabilities of JD stuff. In doing research on other brands of GT's I was surprised to see the unique (for GT's) Hydriv implementation used by Colt and later Case/Ingersoll. As I mentioned above it is fundamentally different than a hydrostatic drive system. I am well aware of the advantages of such a system. I am using this site and MTF to gather info about different GT's so I can decide what best fits my needs. Being from Canada I have no knowledge of what attachments were available in the OP's area. Case GT's are rare here and the attachments, other than mower decks, would be even harder to find. This will be a consideration for me when I am looking for a restoration project. I thought it might also be so for the OP.

Regards
Brian
Brian,
My response was not about defending Colt, Case and Ingersoll tractors.

Rather, it was about staying on point.

The OP asked a very simple question. He wanted to know the make and model number of all the tractors that had "real hydraulics" that could power available implements. If you are as familiar with Deere products as you say you are, can you name me even ONE Deere GT that has a hydraulic system capable of powering Deere's own hydraulic rototiller? Aside from a hydraulic rototiller, do you know of another Deere implement that uses a hydraulic motor?

You are very correct in saying that Case GT's are difficult to find east of the Quebec border. Maynard Jodrey, a long-time member of this forum, has been looking for one for some time now and he lives in Nova Scotia. You are also right in saying that different areas of North America can be either rich or poor in tractors and implements and that also affects the prices demanded and paid. However, as someone who is a collector and living in Ontario, Canada; I have not let distance deter me from obtaining items that I want. Last year, I bought a GE Elec-trak from Arizona, a Colt 2510 from Kansas, a Colt Super from Georgia and a Case walk behind Tiller and Case Lawn Tractor from Michigan. I have also sold two Case snowcasters to forum members living in British Columbia and Alberta.

As a collector/restorer, I could care less about tractor attachments unless I consider them to be rare because attachments are a royal PITA to take to tractor shows. Therefore, I kinda find your reference that attachment availability would be a consideration in a restoration project because I don't know another collector who cares about attachments any more than I do.

Based upon your wording, I get the impression that you are looking to make a "working tractor" for yourself as opposed to the show/parade trailer queens that most collectors have. As for the OP, I have no idea what he wants a tractor for as he has not revealed a single clue.

The thing about threads is that they end up in archives and neither you nor I have any idea who will read them months or years from now. Whatever information is in this thread should be accurate; don't you agree?
 
#21 ·
Alc said:
I've learned a lot from this Thread already, lots of good info here. Next time I see a Case on craigslist I'll have to check it out . It would be handy to have a tractor with a 3pt , PTO and hyds to run attachments like a small post hole digger or maybe a 3pt log splitter. What kind of attachments where you planning on using on your tractor ? Al
FYI, Case and Ingersoll garden tractors use a CAT O three-point hitch and a hydraulic PTO. Therefore, one would have to build their own hydraulic post hole digger because there are none available in the marketplace any longer. Danuser did make one back in the early 70's but I don't know of a single copy in existence today.
 
#22 ·
Because of me not knowing what the heck, an OP is I am confused LOL . Is it Other person, octopus pleasure, open pollinated, Opel performance, OIL POWER, Obama president, other power, original problem, open pressure, ostrich power, only pressure , open port am I close. I have not seen any wrong answer , a lot of real good points, I own many different brands with all kinds of different drivetrains. I love them all , each machine in as different from the next as people are. There are gains and losses in all systems . Shall we continue to argue about what brand is better or take the advice from each other, and find the solution that best fits your needs. gravely had a great design that the implements could interchange for more years than I can remember. Power Kings hydraulic system is not from a charge pump on the non fiberglass models, although it was not high volume . Think about how easy a PK would be to have the high flow hydraulic system of a case. I would like to thank everyone for the wealth of knowledge that we all share on this great site. By the way, my design is better than yours! :poke:
 
#23 ·
tractorgarden said:
Because of me not knowing what the heck, an OP is I am confused LOL . Is it Other person, octopus pleasure, open pollinated, Opel performance, OIL POWER, Obama president, other power, original problem, open pressure, ostrich power, only pressure , open port am I close. I have not seen any wrong answer , a lot of real good points, I own many different brands with all kinds of different drivetrains. I love them all , each machine in as different from the next as people are. There are gains and losses in all systems . Shall we continue to argue about what brand is better or take the advice from each other, and find the solution that best fits your needs. gravely had a great design that the implements could interchange for more years than I can remember. Power Kings hydraulic system is not from a charge pump on the non fiberglass models, although it was not high volume . Think about how easy a PK would be to have the high flow hydraulic system of a case. I would like to thank everyone for the wealth of knowledge that we all share on this great site. By the way, my design is better than yours! :poke:
OP means 'Original Post'er". In other words, the party that began the thread.

Secondly, this was not about which brand was better. It was about which brand or brands had a hydraulic system capable of powering attachments.

Thirdly. Hydraulic systems need to be judged on their capability and that capability is related to the ability of the pump to produce X number of gallons per minute and to also develop peak pressure when called upon to do so.
 
#24 · (Edited by Moderator)
hydriv said:
OP means 'Original Post'er". In other words, the party that began the thread.

Secondly, this was not about which brand was better. It was about which brand or brands had a hydraulic system capable of powering attachments.

Thirdly. Hydraulic systems need to be judged on their capability and that capability is related to the ability of the pump to produce X number of gallons per minute and to also develop peak pressure when called upon to do so.
Thank you for clarifying what OP meant. I did however not see that the OP wanted to run a hydraulic motor powered implement, It seems that he was most concerned with lifting capability. The three point cat.o on my AMF has the capability to lift the rear wheels completely off the ground using down pressure, The tractors weight is 1650 lbs without me on it when I plow. not to bad for a low flow charge pump. I think that a sleeve or three point hitch is considered a implement, because they are not standard equipment, that in turn uses true hydraulic power to raise and lower. So my 12" brinly plow becomes a hydraulic operated implement, as does any other tool that I raise and lower with the combined flow and pressure from the charge pump. You are a very intelligent resource when it comes to this topic. True hydraulics is in essence around all of us every single day,be it the engine you found at the scrap yard full of water , removed the plugs turned over by electric starter and got drenched, LOL yes happened more than once to me, some times I never learn. I do not disagree with your thoughts on case, Ive had case gts since about 84, I love them. As you know hydraulics have a lot in common with electric, voltage =pressure amperage=flow , so that means there is more than one way to get the end result. By the way what do you think about putting a case drive train in place of the peerless in a magnatrac crawler loader? Your friend in case hydraulics, Shawn
 
#25 ·
tractorgarden,
I think that it's fair to say that different people can read the same post and come away with different interpretations. Perhaps that is what's at issue here, more than anything else. At the risk of appearing to be flogging a dead horse, I have to refer to the words of the OP once again.

Which make and model GT tractors have real hydraulics and the HP and chassis capable of utilizing them with implements still available?

Here's how I interpreted the above. The OP was looking for a tractor with a real hydraulic system in it. While it is true that a hydrostatic drive tractor does rely on hydraulic principles to propel it, a hydro pump is exceedingly limited when it comes to operating attachments. How many attachments do you know of that only use a hydraulic cylinder/s?

Front end loader

Power angle snow/dirt/dozer blade.

3 point hitch

log splitter.

Perhaps I've missed one and others are welcome to add to that list.

But in the world of attachments needing real hydraulic power, that list is small thanks to the low pressure and low flow that the charge pumps in hydrostatic drives. But if one has a real hydraulic system like a Case or Ingersoll has, the whole issue of capability to power attachments opens up dramatically.

You are correct that the OP did not specify that the hydraulic system had to be able to power motors but he did state that he wanted the hydraulics to power attachments. The Case and Ingersoll tractors are the only ones capable of powering a BROAD range of attachments, some of which are not even offered by other brands.

How many brands are capable of powering a chipper/shredder or a 4 ft Bush Hog style rough-cut mower or a 48" three-point hitch finishing mower? How about a hydraulic drive 48" and 60" mower deck or 48" snowblower?

I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here. I'm simply pointing out that there's a huge difference between the two systems, as you well know. If all the OP wants to do is to move some hydraulic cylinders back and forth, then any GT fitted with a hydrostatic drive equipped with external ports will work just fine but if his goal is to have a truly capable hydraulic system, then the choice narrows to the Case and Ingersoll tractors.

As for the Magnetrac idea, I think that most Magnetrac enthusiasts would band together and beat you silly if you did that. :D:D:D

Yes.. it could be done but instead... why not find a cheap Case GT from 1978 or later? Remove the trans-axle and front axle. Get a set of tracks from an old trencher or mini-excavator or even build your own track set up and join them up to the Case. If you have the Case and an existing track drive set up, then you have all the parts needed to create a Case crawler. It's been done in the past and there are groups on Yahoo that are all about making tracked machines.

 
#26 ·
hydriv said:
tractorgarden,
I think that it's fair to say that different people can read the same post and come away with different interpretations. Perhaps that is what's at issue here, more than anything else. At the risk of appearing to be flogging a dead horse, I have to refer to the words of the OP once again.

Which make and model GT tractors have real hydraulics and the HP and chassis capable of utilizing them with implements still available?

Here's how I interpreted the above. The OP was looking for a tractor with a real hydraulic system in it.

While you are correct on the quote from the OP's original post, his second post (Post #3) began with a qualifier.

"Guess I was thinking like the JD 445, et al."

Further reading of his second post will further confuse the issue if full credence is not given to this qualifier and perhaps accepting a lack of knowledge by the OP in the realm of hydraulics.

While you are also correct that only the Case and Ingersoll tractors have full hydraulic capability from the factory, that capability can be added to any GT by the simple expediant of bolting a suitable pump to an adapter on the front of the engine, coupling it to the crankshaft and adding the required components. It will not be original, but it will be equivalent to the Case/Ingersoll implement system with the added advantage of retaining the rear PTO and the hydrostatic drive. Major plusses in my opinion, and without adding belts.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top