Jump to content

Nominations for Tractor of the Month
Garden Tractors and Parts on eBay



Photo
- - - - -

Sundstrand and Eaton hydro Transmissions


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 WHEELHORSE418 OFFLINE  

WHEELHORSE418

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 1055
  • 2 Thanks
  • 65 posts

Posted April 05, 2011 - 01:17 PM

What is the best hydro Wheel Horse transmission Sundstrand or Eaton because I need someone's opinion . Ben

#2 olcowhand OFFLINE  

olcowhand

    Red Tractor Nut & Diesel Addict

  • Staff Admin
  • Staff
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Sponsor
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 20
  • 35,555 Thanks
  • 29,815 posts
  • Location: South Central Kentucky

Posted April 05, 2011 - 03:34 PM

Sundstrand over Eaton any day in my opinion. Eaton's are good, but just not as good.

#3 NUTNDUN OFFLINE  

NUTNDUN

    Lost in Cyber Space

  • Admin
  • Staff
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 3
  • 10,266 Thanks
  • 15,618 posts
  • Location: Pennsylvania

Posted April 05, 2011 - 03:59 PM

This is funny because I just recently experienced both. While not on a Wheel Horse it still gives the same affect. After having both I prefer the Sundstrand. To me the Sundstrand has the instant power and also goes faster then the Eaton. I think the Eaton is a good unit too, the replacement I got was nice and sensitive and didn't have any slop in the swash plate. It just didn't have the grunt and speed of the Sundstrand.

#4 WHEELHORSE418 OFFLINE  

WHEELHORSE418

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 1055
  • 2 Thanks
  • 65 posts

Posted April 05, 2011 - 04:45 PM

I like Sundstrand hydros over Eaton transmissions in Wheel Horse tractors no reason I just want to make one good tractor out of the C-161 Twin Auto on another C-Series C-125 Auto I picked up for $200 I will need to swap out the Eaton and swap over the Sundstrand with Hydraulic Lift . Ben

#5 WHEELHORSE418 OFFLINE  

WHEELHORSE418

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 1055
  • 2 Thanks
  • 65 posts

Posted April 05, 2011 - 07:27 PM

I thank you everyone for your feedback about the Sundstrand and Eaton Hydro's. I will replace the bad hoodstand on my C-161 with new parts from another tractor C-121 or C-125 Auto I don't know yet I need to think on it . Ben

#6 SnowmanPA OFFLINE  

SnowmanPA

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 2003
  • 12 Thanks
  • 37 posts
  • Location: Mercer PA

Posted April 15, 2011 - 09:10 AM

I'm glad I found this thread. I'm usually lurking around the Bolens forum, but I did a search on "hydros" to find information on my Sundstrand. In the Bolens world (like Masseys) both were used. However, the perception I have from reading the Bolens forums is that the Eaton is preferred over the Sundstrand. I don't know why exactly, as I've never owned an Eaton myself. But I do have a 73 Bolens QT-16 with a transplanted 24-hp Honda and a 3-point hitch. It lifts my 60" York Rake with no problem. I just picked up a one-bottom plow that I'm itching to try out next. One other note: I've been running that 24-hp motor for a year without a cooling fan on the driveshaft. So far I've noticed no trouble with overheating the axle or the hydro.

#7 LPBolens ONLINE  

LPBolens

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 874
  • 1,176 Thanks
  • 882 posts
  • Location: North Central Illinois

Posted April 15, 2011 - 10:39 AM

One of the reasons the Bolens folks seem to prefer the Eatons over the Sundstrand has to do with the bull gear problems that arose with the Bolens Large Frames that used the Sundstrand 15 hydro. Bull gear failures were apparently extremely common with that particular hydro. The Eaton 12 had been nearly bulletproof in the early models of the Large Frames, and of course the Eaton 11 used in the latest Large Frames was a two-speed, which is really nice. The Sundstrand 15 was used in the middle of the model range progression. I think my personal favorite would have to be the Eaton 12. It was so overengineered compared to its intended use that they rarely fail after 50 years of service. Imagine putting a 12 HP Wisconsin S12D in front of a hydro that can take 45 HP input without problem!

#8 SnowmanPA OFFLINE  

SnowmanPA

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 2003
  • 12 Thanks
  • 37 posts
  • Location: Mercer PA

Posted April 15, 2011 - 01:27 PM

Thanks for the input LP. It sounds like the Sundstrand 15 hydro is strong and durable, but as you say, the problem is with the bull gear. The large frame axles themselves are different depending on which hydro it came with. It would appear that the axle that came with the Sundstrand hydros is the weak link, not so much the hydro itself.

So when people say that they prefer the Eaton hydros over the Sundstrand hydros, what they really seem to be saying is that they prefer the earlier and later axles, but as a point of reference, they refer to these problematic axles by simply identifying them by the type of hydro they are equipped with.

(Holy cow...I sound like a lawyer!)

Would you agree?

#9 wilberj OFFLINE  

wilberj
  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 51
  • 4,179 Thanks
  • 5,205 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted April 15, 2011 - 05:05 PM

One of the reasons the Bolens folks seem to prefer the Eatons over the Sundstrand has to do with the bull gear problems that arose with the Bolens Large Frames that used the Sundstrand 15 hydro. Bull gear failures were apparently extremely common with that particular hydro. The Eaton 12 had been nearly bulletproof in the early models of the Large Frames, and of course the Eaton 11 used in the latest Large Frames was a two-speed, which is really nice. The Sundstrand 15 was used in the middle of the model range progression. I think my personal favorite would have to be the Eaton 12. It was so overengineered compared to its intended use that they rarely fail after 50 years of service. Imagine putting a 12 HP Wisconsin S12D in front of a hydro that can take 45 HP input without problem!


I know of a guy who put 15 new eaton 12 in his 1250 back the late 60s. They were not as good as you may think, I have talked to the man who built the first 2 eaton 12's and he said at first they were haveing the rear ends fail befor 15 hours on the tractor. But later when the 1455 came out they fix what was wrong.

Both hydro's had there bad parts.

#10 LPBolens ONLINE  

LPBolens

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 874
  • 1,176 Thanks
  • 882 posts
  • Location: North Central Illinois

Posted April 15, 2011 - 05:48 PM

Yes, I would agree with that. Labeling by the hydro type is a convenience, and can be misleading to the uninformed.

#11 dryrun OFFLINE  

dryrun

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 1559
  • 56 Thanks
  • 342 posts
  • Location: 6 miles northwest of ENGLISH, INDIANA

Posted April 17, 2011 - 08:01 PM

I have a wh d200 and a whd160 that I guess I will part out because of a common problem, worn out splines on input shaft. If I could find some sort of coupler that would tighten up on the worn splines, I love the tractors, but simply do not understand why a company would not offer a quick and simple fix, such as a coupler that would fix the problem. Problem is not with sunstrand, it is a good hydro, the coupling blows.


my opinion, George




Top