Sundstrand and Eaton hydro Transmissions
Posted April 05, 2011 - 01:17 PM
Posted April 05, 2011 - 03:34 PM
Posted April 05, 2011 - 03:59 PM
Posted April 05, 2011 - 04:45 PM
Posted April 05, 2011 - 07:27 PM
Posted April 15, 2011 - 09:10 AM
Posted April 15, 2011 - 10:39 AM
Posted April 15, 2011 - 01:27 PM
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?
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.
Posted April 15, 2011 - 05:48 PM
Posted April 17, 2011 - 08:01 PM
my opinion, George