Jump to content
Stillwaters

Best model for parts availability

Recommended Posts

Stillwaters

Hello all,

 

I am looking at getting a few Wheel Horses for my sons' small yard business. I was choosing Wheel Horse because of ease of repair, simpler design, cool color, lower cost of parts, and attachment options...is there any other brand that compares?  We had a 310-8 with a 48" that we liked but mowed a little slow so we were thinking about a hydro with something that can handle the 48" deck.   I was curious what models you feel have the easiest parts availability.  I was thinking that the newer the better (300, 400, 500 series?)...maybe that isn't the case. Thanks for your time.


Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Racinbob

Getting right down to the bones there really isn't much difference from the 70's on through the 3,4,500 series. As the years went by the electrical systems got more complicated due all the safety stuff so that made them a bit harder to work on. All the attachments that fit a pre 78 B, any C and the 3,4,500 series are interchangeable save for a couple of exceptions. I'm running a 76 48" deck on a 2005 Classic. 12hp will handle a 48" deck fine. I even used one on a GT1100 for years and it was fine. With that said I, and I think most here, will say the pre 78 B's and all the C's were the best ever overall. :D

  • Like 5
  • Excellent 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ebinmaine
32 minutes ago, Racinbob said:

With that said I, and I think most here, will say the pre 78 B's and all the C's were the best ever overall. :D

I'll plus one that !

Power. Parts availability.  Ease of repair. Yepp.

 

  • Like 2
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Stillwaters

Thank guys!  Looks like I am going to do some homework on the pre 78 12 hp+  B and C's!

 

Dave 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
T-Mo

Keep in mind that the late 70s and early 80s B-series were not the same as the earlier B-series.  They were more like the mid 70s A-series.  And the earlier, more desirable B-series top off at 10 hp.

  • Like 2
  • Excellent 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ClassicTractorProfessor
9 minutes ago, Stillwaters said:

Thank guys!  Looks like I am going to do some homework on the pre 78 12 hp+  B and C's!

 

Dave 

Don't discount the later C models, my 81 C125 is my go to tractor for most any job I need to do. Didn't like the looks of the blackhood models at first, but after buying this one they kinda grew on me 

FB_IMG_1511495433047.jpg

  • Like 4
  • Excellent 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ebinmaine
2 minutes ago, T-Mo said:

Keep in mind that the late 70s and early 80s B-series were not the same as the earlier B-series.  They were more like the mid 70s A-series.  And the earlier, more desirable B-series top off at 10 hp.

:text-yeahthat:

 

Good bet to find would be a C120 or larger. 

  • Like 1
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Skipper

It being for a yard business, raises the question: What will it eventually be used for? I mean, I second what has been said, but would like to add this: Hydro for mowing is sweet, and the hydraulic lift mid and rear is priceless. I would go for the biggest single cylinder for lowest maintenance cost, and I would not give a hut if its an early C or a 3-4-5 series. I would find one with an eaton 1100 rearend, and then I would strip all electronics and do a no nonsense wiring for reliability. Just my :twocents-02cents:  The big single will pull the 48" with ease, and till and what not without being strained. In my mind it is better to have power ENOUGH, than to have maybe adequately enough :-). I would suggest C-160, C-165, 414, 416 etc. Yes the 416 can be a single, albeit an 8 speed. ;-)

 

(not saying twins are bad, just a potentially more expensive engine to service.)

 

The above would make a rugged, plenty powerful, no nonsense, lowish cost/price gardening machine, that can last long and do most everything. Again, just my :twocents-02cents: on this specific situation.

 

Edited by Skipper
  • Like 3
  • Excellent 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ClassicTractorProfessor
1 minute ago, Skipper said:

 Hydro for mowing is sweet,

 

 

Both very good points, while I do love the 8-Speed in the C125 for the heavy duty jobs, I do miss the Hydro in my old 1277 for mowing, makes it so much easier if the yard you're working in requires you to back up and mow around obstacles. 

  • Like 1
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Stillwaters

Simple yet powerful...sounds good to me!  Do all the B's (early and later) share the same attachments?

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ebinmaine
8 minutes ago, Stillwaters said:

Simple yet powerful...sounds good to me!  Do all the B's (early and later) share the same attachments?

 

Dave

As stated above. .. caution on the later B.

Earlier is more HD.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Racinbob
1 hour ago, Stillwaters said:

Simple yet powerful...sounds good to me!  Do all the B's (early and later) share the same attachments?

 

 

The B's through 1977 share the same attachments but, as already mentioned, the max hp on a B is 10. In 1978 the B's were changed to lawn tractors.

 

1 hour ago, Stillwaters said:

Thank guys!  Looks like I am going to do some homework on the pre 78 12 hp+  B and C's!

 

 

The 78 up C's are great but on the down side they have the shaker mount for the motors. I personally never liked those and there's a reason they didn't use that system long.  :)

  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Racinbob
1 hour ago, Skipper said:

 then I would strip all electronics and do a no nonsense wiring for reliability.

 

 

I like that line of thinking. That's exactly what I will do once I start having issues with my 2005. :)

  • Like 1
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
oliver2-44

I agree with skipper. so don't rle outthe 3,4,500 series. Just simplify there electronics

  • Like 1
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
oldlineman

I don't know but I have a 1979 c-101 that I bought new and have never had a problem with the shaker mounted engine. Plows snow in western PA and has for the last 39 years. Cut 2 A yard for 25 of those years also. It is one strong tractor and doesn't give me any problems.:twocents-02cents:

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
953 nut

:WRS:           If you can find a 418-C you would have a winner, Simplified wiring, larger front spindles, higher forward speed Hydro with power lift and a Kohler twin engine. They were built specifically for commercial lawn service.

  • Like 2
  • Excellent 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ClassicTractorProfessor
45 minutes ago, 953 nut said:

:WRS:           If you can find a 418-C you would have a winner, Simplified wiring, larger front spindles, higher forward speed Hydro with power lift and a Kohler twin engine. They were built specifically for commercial lawn service.

Hadn't thought of that...for commercial use a 520HC would be a good model as well...provided you don't mind the Onan engine...some guys love them others hate them

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Achto
10 hours ago, Stillwaters said:

We had a 310-8 with a 48" that we liked but mowed a little slow so we were thinking about a hydro with something that can handle the 48" deck. 

 

39 minutes ago, 953 nut said:

 If you can find a 418-C you would have a winner, Simplified wiring, larger front spindles, higher forward speed Hydro with power lift and a Kohler twin engine. They were built specifically for commercial lawn service.

:text-yeahthat:  Both hydro & gear jammer :wh: seem to have the same top speed, except for the 418-C they had a faster top speed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Ed Kennell
6 hours ago, Skipper said:

It being for a yard business, raises the question: What will it eventually be used for? I mean, I second what has been said, but would like to add this: Hydro for mowing is sweet, and the hydraulic lift mid and rear is priceless. I would go for the biggest single cylinder for lowest maintenance cost, and I would not give a hut if its an early C or a 3-4-5 series. I would find one with an eaton 1100 rearend, and then I would strip all electronics and do a no nonsense wiring for reliability. Just my :twocents-02cents:  The big single will pull the 48" with ease, and till and what not without being strained. In my mind it is better to have power ENOUGH, than to have maybe adequately enough :-). I would suggest C-160, C-165, 414, 416 etc. Yes the 416 can be a single, albeit an 8 speed. ;-)

 

(not saying twins are bad, just a potentially more expensive engine to service.)

 

The above would make a rugged, plenty powerful, no nonsense, lowish cost/price gardening machine, that can last long and do most everything. Again, just my :twocents-02cents: on this specific situation.

 

Yep, @Skipper has it covered.    I would also go for the Eaton 1100 hydro with a 12-16 HP single.   Any 3,4,500 series with a hydraulic lift  should have the 1100.  The manual lifts may have the weaker Eaton 700.              I love the sound, power and big tractor feel of the twins,  but IMO, they throw too much heat and use too much fuel for mowing.      I only use my twins for winter work.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Stillwaters

You guys have been a huge help!  Thanks.  Looks like I've got some homework!

 

Dave H.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ohiofarmer

The only thing about commercial mowing and Wheel horses i would wonder about is the height that most of these yard services cut the grass. A wheel horse will cut shorter and will not cut as high as most of the competitors. i think these companies talk their customers into cutting higher simply because if heavy rains put you behind schedule, the taller cut will not clump as readily as the more 'normal' height a homeowner would cut grass.

 

   Many of these customers,. using my sister as an example are very picky about how the string trimmers are used and blowing all the pavement clear of grass clippings. All stuff to think about when buying yard equipment.

 

  Don't get me wrong. I like the height my grass is cut with my Horses.  Just something to think about

Edited by ohiofarmer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
953 nut
3 hours ago, ohiofarmer said:

very picky about how the string trimmers are used and blowing all the pavement clear of grass clippings

I use the rear discharge mower decks, they don't blow clippings to the side so you have a uniform distribution and nothing gets deposited in flower beds or driveways. I don't know of a 48" Rear Discharge deck, just 42" and 36". One other advantage is the clippings don't get picked up by the engine cooling fan on the flywheel.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
EricF

The only drawback to to the rear discharge decks is that the cut isn't quite as nice if the grass is allowed to get too tall between mowings -- which might happen after a bout of heavy rains, or if the schedule gets backed up in a mowing business. It might mean extra passes or more overlap while mowing to get the smooth cut you want, which makes a difference on job times. Just things to think about, and depends on how busy they expect to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Stillwaters
On 4/17/2018 at 8:14 PM, 953 nut said:

:WRS:           If you can find a 418-C you would have a winner, Simplified wiring, larger front spindles, higher forward speed Hydro with power lift and a Kohler twin engine. They were built specifically for commercial lawn service.

I just realized that the C is for commercial...also the 520-HC correct?  Took me awhile... That's pretty cool that they had products rated commercial grade!  Do any other brands do that? I have not seen that on any other tractors.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ClassicTractorProfessor
2 hours ago, Stillwaters said:

I just realized that the C is for commercial...also the 520-HC correct?  Took me awhile... That's pretty cool that they had products rated commercial grade!  Do any other brands do that? I have not seen that on any other tractors.

Yes the 520-HC is also a commercial model

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...