Jump to content

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



Photo
- - - - -

Goodbye to Horsepower


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#16 DH1 ONLINE  

DH1

    Electric Tractors

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 62
  • 4,587 Thanks
  • 5,295 posts
  • Location: Markham Ontario Canada

Posted September 07, 2011 - 06:42 PM

If I was an engine manufacture and I made a 20hp engine I would make sure that it would produce 22hp
If everybody else has 20hp engines that only produce 17hp or so sooner or later word has got to get around and they would be in demand.

#17 Bolens1054 OFFLINE  

Bolens1054

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Member No: 5772
  • 11 Thanks
  • 35 posts
  • Location: Ringtown,PA

Posted September 07, 2011 - 06:43 PM

10 Wisconsin HP seems to be able to fill all my needs . You best bet is to buy old than you knw what your getting.

#18 caseguy OFFLINE  

caseguy

    Connoisseur of Rusty Junk

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 906
  • 1,624 Thanks
  • 5,600 posts
  • Location: Edinburg, PA

Posted September 07, 2011 - 06:53 PM

And back in the olden days 22hp would pull 3 or 4 bottom plows!


Never gave that a thought but it's very true!


As an example, My 3 year old Zero turn (at 23 HP) has a higher Horse Power rating than my 1952 Case SC! Another factoid about them was that Case rated them at 19 drawbar and 22 PTO Horse Power. They were tested at the Nebraska tests and the tested horsepower was significantly higher than the rating at 27.68 drawbar and 31.71 PTO!

#19 tractorgarden OFFLINE  

tractorgarden

    Junk Whisperer

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Member No: 2291
  • 1,277 Thanks
  • 1,432 posts
  • Location: northwest pa

Posted September 07, 2011 - 06:55 PM

It all comes down to one thing. $$$

Well maybe like the song says, lawyers,drugs and $$$

#20 tractorgarden OFFLINE  

tractorgarden

    Junk Whisperer

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Member No: 2291
  • 1,277 Thanks
  • 1,432 posts
  • Location: northwest pa

Posted September 07, 2011 - 07:01 PM

I also liked the way Oliver corp. did on there tractors before delivery, certified with a dyno and signed.

#21 IHCubGuy OFFLINE  

IHCubGuy

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3438
  • 1,358 Thanks
  • 1,475 posts
  • Location: Northumberland Pa

Posted September 07, 2011 - 08:49 PM

As an example, My 3 year old Zero turn (at 23 HP) has a higher Horse Power rating than my 1952 Case SC! Another factoid about them was that Case rated them at 19 drawbar and 22 PTO Horse Power. They were tested at the Nebraska tests and the tested horsepower was significantly higher than the rating at 27.68 drawbar and 31.71 PTO!



Don't forget to take into account here that our small engine powered equipment is advertised as the engine horsepower and not as drawbar or PTO horsepower. The old SC engine probably puts out more in the neighborhood of 45 or so if you measured its engine horsepower.

Having said that, I agree its a bunch of nonsense that you can't just get something that is a standard unit of measure for power ratings across the board instead of what seems to be constantly changing it the past few years.

#22 IHCubGuy OFFLINE  

IHCubGuy

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3438
  • 1,358 Thanks
  • 1,475 posts
  • Location: Northumberland Pa

Posted September 07, 2011 - 08:53 PM

:iagree: And a 12hp engine ran a 42" deck just fine. Now it takes 22hp to do the same thing. Go figure:anyone:


I think this is mostly due to the fact that our older mower decks were neither mulch capable or high vacuum decks. It takes a few more ponies under the hood to accomplish mulching or run a high vacuum deck. I agree though as my 10HP hydrostat Cub will run a 42" deck no problem.

#23 gimmodog OFFLINE  

gimmodog

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 4860
  • 5 Thanks
  • 57 posts
  • Location: Ky

Posted September 08, 2011 - 11:37 AM

I have to commend Kawasaki for taking the initiative to do this.
  • mikebramel said thank you

#24 gimmodog OFFLINE  

gimmodog

    Member

  • Member
  • Member No: 4860
  • 5 Thanks
  • 57 posts
  • Location: Ky

Posted September 08, 2011 - 11:39 AM

I'd also bet none of the others follow the same guidelines

#25 tinner OFFLINE  

tinner

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • -GTt Supporter-
  • Contributor
  • Member No: 961
  • 502 Thanks
  • 1,561 posts
  • Location: 20 Miles East Of Ding Dong, Texas

Posted September 09, 2011 - 12:09 AM

On the same note, I remember when you could buy a REAL 2x4 stud and a real sheet of 3/4" plywood. I remember years ago when Baby Ruth didn't change the package size but made the bar a little shorter. I noticed last year that toilet paper is 1/2" narrower than it used to be.........glad I don't have an extra wide hand.
:bigrofl:




Top