Horse Power ..???

[Tonyp 278]

I am seeing that the early Tractors had lower HP, my 310-8 is 10..( obviously),  the 3 series was 10,12,14 etc, Kohler motors can obviously handle the work and last a lifetime.....the 10 still runs strong as ever some 25 years later..

 

So why the big push for these 18 HP twin cyclinders  and higher,? Not a diss on them just curious, what drove the HP specs up the charts when the single's were doing just fine ?

 

Competition ? We see this big HP motors on Lawn tractors that won't even last 3 or 4 seasons...while I am still using a 10HP garden tractor which is pushing 30 years old ? Others have 8's which are even older !

 

t

[Tankman 3,515]

40 years ago I plowed earth with my Stallion. I forget the Horses model but, was thrilled with the introduction to WH.

That old Horse, which was old at that time, plowed snow, plowed (dug) earth, mowed, pulled gang reels, trailers (loaded). Did everything and didn't asked for more carrots like my 520-8 is always beggin' for (eats a lot!).

Back then, 3 ft (?) decks, now-a-days I use 4 ft decks. All's well.

Interesting subject small hp vs BIG hp, let's see what the forum agrees on.

[Hodge71 663]

This topic has been discussed in the past and its actually one of my favorites to see revisited. I think competition is what drove the quest for more power. But the thing to remember, especially with newer machines, horsepower is measured differently now than it was then. For my money I'd sooner have a 16Hp old K series Kohler "Thumper" versus any new V-twin out there, even my Onan in the 416. But thats where opinion sneaks into the conversation. I'm not a big fan of the Onan. I'd sooner have a 416 with a M-16 or K series Kohler but havent been lucky enough to find one yet. I just think that horsepower sells tractors but torque is what does the work. A big single cylinder makes more torque than a twin thats screaming.  

Edited May 12, 2013 by hodge71

[Tonyp 278]

thanks tankman..you do bring up a valid point..cutting grass...perhaps..

 

I had a small commerical business for about 4 years, approx 12 to 15 yards per week ( acre each)  I used an Exmark 48 with a 13HP KOW...in the middle of the 4th season the KOW gave up....but this was 12 to 15 acres per week for 4 years !    Plus I earned  the cost of the mower in less than 2 months !  Quite the return....

 

 

but..1 acre / week which is typical for a homeowner... I can see the increased torque and HP for commecial cutting grass.. use but  still scratching my head on a 22hp TWIN for a Lawn tractor...other than the spec game.,..  

 

 

Hodge 71...my 310-8 has an M series 10...I don't beleive it will die any time soon....I just recently rebuilt it to regular service after having it sit idle for several years. the good news is I always maintianed it, oil and filters a few times thru each season so  it is still  running like it was when new...25 years ago !

 

I have been reading this forum for about a month now and I clearly understand why fellow WHorsers are chasing those older single cylinder Kohlers...

 

 

TRUE story..

About a month back before I started the rebuild on the 310-8, which was in poor shape, outside under cover, filthy and unmaintained..I was at Lowes and on a impulse came home with a 22HP Twin Cyl Husqvarna Lawn tractor which was a blow out price returned model..it was nice enough..but  the new safety features drove me crazy.  My wife thought I was just over the cliff nuts...as I have been talking about bringing the 310-8 back to life for easily a year now...I bought the Husq on a Wed..looked it over, plastic this plastic that., even pulleys, drive belts that ran all directions...geesh..I returned it on Friday..2 days later, never even cut the grass with it...the following day..Sat.I began the rebuild of the 310-8...also..like a complete moron..I put the 310-8 on Craigslist for 1 day..offered it for $375..thank god nobody called and bought it !

 

Yesterday we cut grass with the 310-8 and that thing rocks...this 10HP machine blows that 22 HP Husq off the planet....  Over this past month I put about $300 into the 310-8, which uncluded $100 for 2 tires and $50 for a battery....and maybe 20 hours of  sweat...well worth it..but before I did  any work I did bring the M10 back to life and made sure it was running fine, which it was...

[Martin 2,130]

i have all hp versions of the k series single in one form or another. i really do love the simplicity and economy of the k series singles........ the higher hp ones really do get the job done, whatever it is, quicker, with less bogging down and hard working than the smaller ones..

i mowed for a few seasons with my boys 875, k181 8 hp with the 36 inch deck and although enjoyable when taking your time, it was a pain with taller grass pushing it, and i felt sorry for the little engine. it was great though for getting into smaller areas and the bigger tractors couldnt touch that tight turning circle.

mowing with the c160, k341 16 hp with 42 inch deck the difference was night and day. and that is where the more hp thing, and bigger engine comes into play...... when it came time to do a big area, or once in a while my neighbors field, the bigger tractors really got a whole lot done so much quicker. the higher hp with a larger size deck just made more sense.

 

then i got myself a twin or 2 and my opinion really changed on the 'twin' engines. the briggs in my gt1848 really is a powerhouse and with the 48 inch deck just plows through thick tall grass. not quite as economical as the singles, especially the 12 hp k301, which is definitely my best as far as power vs gas used, but surprising considering all the bad rap i hear about the economy of some of the 18-20 hp twins out there.

im dabbling in a couple of onans as well (big thirsty ones), but until i have a runner, i will reserve my comments on them.....

 

but my favorite is the kt17 series 2 in my red cub 682 (did i just say something bad.... ).....

the kohler twin is a real nice engine, full pressure lube, plenty of power, really good on gas and very smooth running. the singles cant touch it as far as running smooth goes....

just not so simple come rebuild time though, as the way they are built with the separate crankcase pieces and gaskets everywhere, does worry me somewhat....

 

can't comment on any other engines though, v twins, later years etc, all i have experience with is the engines i have mentioned...... 

Edited May 12, 2013 by Martin

[6wheeler 586]

This is always an interesting subject. I believe the HP ratings (which as Hodge stated, is measured differently now) and "Big Twins" all came out for the "Tim the toolman types". When I lived in town, I had a neighbor that was as it seemed, on a never ending quest for horsepower. Whether it be in his pickup truck or his sled or his lawn tractor. When he first moved in next door he didn't even have a tractor. At that time I had 2 tractors. A Massey 10 and an Ariens F12. Both were good machines. The Massey had the 10hp Kohler and the Ariens  was a rear engine Briggs 8hp. They did a nice job. The neighbor (I'll call him Tim for obvious reasons) went out and bought a 12hp Craftsman. He came over to "show" it to me and proceeded to brag about the 2 hp. difference in our tractors. An auction came up and I bought a 214 JD just cuz it was cheap. That very next Monday, He came home with a Yardman 23hp twin. I can still remember how he said, " Beat that". It still cracks me up. In the go faster, move on to the next job, world of commercial lawn care, was born the 30hp. 60" zero turns. Then John Q. Homeowner decided he needed the go faster, so I can get little Timmy to soccer practice on time,  so these 18 plus HP. 2 cylinder machines were born. On my WH's, I can put the same 48" deck on my C-165 and on my 520H. Both handle the deck with ease. However, the 520 spins it much faster. And though I don't have a little "Timmy" to race off to soccer practice with, I do get done faster. Because the deck spins faster and cuts better, even if the grass is tough. I can drive faster too. The RPM's on the big twins are much faster, translating into everything spinning faster. But , I would bet on pure PTO hp? the 16hp single would have more. Plus much higher torque. The power band would be much broader on the twin. But, it would have no low end "grunt". Just as the single would really have lower top end power. And, I believe the twins drink more gas because you are feeding 2 cylinders to get basically the same hp. as a single but at much higher RPM's. This is why the C-165 is mostly relegated to Garden Duty. The pure power and torque, plus the 8spd. tranny make it a very capable worker. And with the addition of live hydraulics(I am installing) it will be tough to beat.

[WH nut 553]

Whether twin or 1 lunger, the RPM is the same. Rated at 3600RPM . I have never measure the deck speed, but unless the pulley size is different they will spin the same.

[KC9KAS 4,741]

In the words of "Tim the Toolman".......MORE POWER....

[Don1977 604]

The V-twins don't have the torque of the old long stroke K-Series singles. Once you get the RPM up the V-twins will take the load and go with it. I have run Briggs Vanguards for the last 23 years on my C-120. I can't say anything bad about the Vanguard engines. I broke the first one a 16 HP went off a bank and broke the corner off the oil pan. I had it welded and used it for years and was still running great when a crack opened up and dumped my oil. After welding it always leaked a little oil just enough to keep it dirty.

[dsholler 54]

The discussion here is really about engine design, not horsepower. I suspect each of us would take more horsepower rather than less if given the chance up to a point (if you could take a 310 or a 312 in similar condition, which would you choose? )  As one of those busy parents with lots of kid activities to get to, I appreciate the speed that requires lots of horsepower, but that is also a design issue (60" ZTR can do my hard in less than half the time it takes me with my 414 with a 48 inch deck). 
 

If you look at the 80s vintage tractors, for example, there appear to be a lot of the 12hp ones around. How much of that do you think is due to people having a reasoned out that 12 hp is the ideal power to fuel consumption and cost ration for their application, and how much of that is because it was bigger than the 10 and smaller than the 14 or 16 which cost more?

[cdsl810 181]

I have never really had a preference in 1 vs. 2.  I have noticed that the single piston engines seem to have more torque throughout the powerband, but you can bog them down easier--but once the 20HP opposed twin Onan in my 520 is cranked up, that thing will do just about anything... convincingly. At 3600 RPM I don't think you can stop the Onan.  It does use more than twice the fuel to do so, however. I guess I look more at the engineering and performance/longevity of the engine. Nothing lasts like a cast iron Kohler. But the Onan has suprised me with its buttery-smooth running and "quiet" power. It has been dubbed "Onan the Barbarian" around here. Every time I fire up the 520, the neighbors come out to take a look.  They can hear the distinctive exhaust note.  It doesn't sound anything like their buzzy, tinny sounding V-Twins or "popcorn-y" single Briggs or Techumseh motors.  The Onan kind of reminds me of the difference in sound between a V8 and a V10.

 

I recently had opportunity to compete against a brand new 26HP Kohler V-Twin that the neighbor has in his Craftsman. The 520 killed it in every aspect except ground speed and fuel consumption.  The Onan ran quieter and developed more torque than that V-Twin.  We could really put a strain on the brand new V-Twin motor.  The 23-year-old Onan didn't really care much what we threw at it.  We did a tug-of-war with the two machines for the kids (his idea, not mine), and the neighbor ended up putting his in neutral and letting me pull him backwards because he thought I might break his new "precious."  Ha ha... There, of course are differences in how the power is used and transferred between the WH and the Craftsman. The horizontal engine approach of Wheel Horse is still a winner.

 

I have a 15.5HP B&S Vanguard in a Toro/WH 15-44HXL.  That thing sips gas. I can run that tractor for nearly 6 hours at full throttle per 2.5gal tank of fuel.

 

Anyway... enough blabbering

 

Happy Mother's Day!

[953 nut 51,770]

Prior to owning a   I had a 16 HP Lowe's (Murrey) with a 42" deck that was a couple of years old. My first 953 came with a 48" deck, a 9.6 HP Kohler and would cut circles around the Lowe's. Some how I don't think they are telling the truth about the HP ratings! Long story short I gave the Lowe's lawn tractor to the kids and it died after about eight or nine years, the 953 is 50 years old and going strong, got to love it   .

 

[bean 85]

I might be the oddball. I would rather have a 308-8 than my 310-8. I have had both 8&10 hp kohlers, and I just like the 8hp better. it has been adequate for me. I have plowed my garden, used a 42" rd deck, etc with the k181. most of the early garden tractors were 10hp tops.

I think the larger decks brought about the higher hp. a 60" cut would sell me quicker than a large hp number.

on that note, I don't understand the 250hp bass boat thing. I have a 14' alumunim v with a 25hp. it tops out at 22mph, which on the water, is plenty fast. I fish all summer on 12-18 gals of gas. my buddy uses 50 gals a weekend in fishing tournaments.

[oldredrider 2,547]

It's important to note that the Onan "20" has been dyno'd at 28hp...stock.

Could be why Onan was not included in the "horsepower" lawsuit.

[Racinbob 10,295]

I had at least one of all the K series except the 14 when we lived in Indiana. Everything was sold when we moved here about 13 years ago   I bought a big box green toy and quickly named it a junk deere. John Deeres are capable machines but not that 20hp junk deere. I finally found 2005 Classic GT close enough and gave the junk deere to my son-in-law. That 20hp twin Briggs is no match for the 15hp Kohler one holer on my Horse. And it's not even a K series. I think it really has more to do with the gearing.

[6wheeler 586]

Whether twin or 1 lunger, the RPM is the same. Rated at 3600RPM . I have never measure the deck speed, but unless the pulley size is different they will spin the same.

I just read this thread again. WH nut, I am not arguing as to RPM's. But, I would beg to differ on this point. I took the same exact 48" deck from my 1984 C-165 (Kohler 16) and put it on my 1991 520h. I also took the mule drive from the 165 and put it on the 520. Now unless the PTO pulley is different (I have not measured it) to see if its different. But the 520 spins that very deck much faster. As a matter of fact, it sounds like a wind tunnel under the deck. So, am I understanding you correctly? Does the K341 turn at slower RPM's than the P220? Are they both supposed to be 3600 rpm's? Or am I not getting Max RPM's out of the C-165? It doesn't have a tach. But, now you have me wondering. 

[WH nut 553]

 

Whether twin or 1 lunger, the RPM is the same. Rated at 3600RPM . I have never measure the deck speed, but unless the pulley size is different they will spin the same.

I just read this thread again. WH nut, I am not arguing as to RPM's. But, I would beg to differ on this point. I took the same exact 48" deck from my 1984 C-165 (Kohler 16) and put it on my 1991 520h. I also took the mule drive from the 165 and put it on the 520. Now unless the PTO pulley is different (I have not measured it) to see if its different. But the 520 spins that very deck much faster. As a matter of fact, it sounds like a wind tunnel under the deck. So, am I understanding you correctly? Does the K341 turn at slower RPM's than the P220? Are they both supposed to be 3600 rpm's? Or am I not getting Max RPM's out of the C-165? It doesn't have a tach. But, now you have me wondering. 

 

3600 should be governed speed on both

[farmer 1,075]

To try to answer the original question, Id say most likely ego. If Mr Jones turns out on a Sunday with a shiny 16hp its only a matter of time before Mr smith needs 18horse...the old green eyed monster.

[bean 85]

To try to answer the original question, Id say most likely ego. If Mr Jones turns out on a Sunday with a shiny 16hp its only a matter of time before Mr smith needs 18horse...the old green eyed monster.

is your profile pic "wallace" ? the grandkids love his short movies

[farmer 1,075]

Hey Bean, its the same animator as Wallace, this character is farmer, type in 'shaun the sheep'.   

[bean 85]

Hey Bean, its the same animator as Wallace, this character is farmer, type in 'shaun the sheep'.   

shaun the sheep,that's right. we watch that too. the pigs are hysterical

farmer looks a lot like wallace

[Tankman 3,515]

The post, which I responded to earlier, has me very curious. Don't really get it...I think.

My earlier (40 years ago) WH's were 8hp, forget what the engine brand was. Could care less.

The Stallions performed.....well.....did it all and then some.

My current oldest '68 Raider 12, Kohler, does it all and well. I think anyone would, could, run circles around any BIG box store "plastic thingy" with this old Horsey!

The '73 "No Name" 12 hp Kohler, Automatic, really blows my mind. I have never been a fan of automatics but this Wild Horse moves, is a pleasure to run. A machine!

The two 400's I have, 16 hp Kohler and a 14 hp Kohler Magnum are excellent! Run like clocks and, I think could pull a loaded dump truck.

Then, I grab a 520-8 Onan. This guy has the power to pull a house, never wimpers, sings! I am using this "tractor" more than the others regardless of its' thirst for more petroleum. Perhaps the sound or the swept forward axle ride. My big problem with this Horse, fuel gauge doesn't work. So? I'm not losing any sleep over it. My most difficult chore, to date, was puttin' new donuts on the front rims (Carlisle Turf 16 x 7.50 - 8's (Miller Tire). Too many cracks in the old tires but, working, the Horse was livin' outdoors, relaxing indoors now till the (my) end.

I just don't know what, or why, any "lawn" tractor from the BIG boxes is a deal? How could anyone enjoy, use, want, one of those? I find myself correcting the public often, "lawn mower vs. tractor." I guess WH forum members chuckle often driving past neighbors driving their "plastic tractors."

[Tonyp 278]

if given the chance up to a point (if you could take a 310 or a 312 in similar condition, which would you choose? ) 

 short answer..  it would be 312-8 .....only because it's basically the same but ..NOT !  +2 HP , probably not even much noticeable difference......but at the time, which I can barely recall, I went in to buy my 2nd WH from the same dealer in Newtown Ct...If I recall he had some sort of a bundle deal on the 310-8 , I'm not even sure he even had a 312-8  available that day..so I took the 310, the deck and a snowplow/chains  home with me..not sorry at all !...It may have been mid season and thats why the bundle price...Newtown Ct..lots of snow..100 foot driveway..boy that was fun !

 

 

@ Tankman...

 

I think the BIG BOX stores are not really aimed at geeks..or "machine" people...they are aimed at "Cut the grass on Sat"  people. Me, I am seeing that I am like most here..I look at the machine  and enjoy the machine while using it...Although I have not used my 310 for years  for weekly yard maintenance , the machine I have been using ( 36" deck Yazoo-Kees Commecial walk behind )  falls into the same category of 'kool machine'...

 

I have had two mowers over the past 28 years..they both still run great...they are both therapeutic to operate...Before the 310 I had an A Series WH Lawn Tractor, used it for about 10 years and sold it for probably half of what I paid for it new.

 

 With the box stores carrying brands like John Deer it tends to make people feel they are getting a hi quality JD tractor from Lowes for $1499..they are not...they go home saying " I have a Deer "...well they do but they don't...It's Green and Yellow but thats where it ends...I recently , like three weeks ago examined all of the JD's at Lowes along with the Outdoor Dept. guy that I know a little...Up to the $2000 JD machine.." PLASTIC PULLEY'S" . which to me equates to perhaps 3 or 4 years of  quality life..Decks are not floating etc.... these $1400 up to $2000 machines  no way are they going 25 years or more..it ain't happening... About a week ago I stopped in at the real JD dealer...for a quality well built machine, the equiv.  of the 310-8 series that I have ( minus the HP ) we are talking $4500  , quite the stretch from $1400.

 

My take..it's the HP that is driving the BOX store sales...and the cup holder....

[varosd 1,185]

A lot of Garden tractor lines, made by the various companies, are gone.  it's either lawn mower or sub compact tractor.  most of the new generation of folks just mow the grass (since they can't afford to pay someone) then go back inside to their virtual world.

[RMCIII 838]

Tonyp, you ask a question, that begs for a "dictionary" answer. The long and short of it is EPA standards and consumer responses to questionnaires. Personally, I wish that auto makers would bring back the ZL-1 all aluminum block. Only rated at 500hp but turned the 1/4 mile in 10 seconds. It took auto makers 40 years to produce a car that turned the same 1/4 mile time and the Hp of the car was 1000hp. Road and Track Top 20 Super Cars of All Time article. Why did they have to change? EPA standards are stricter these days. Now, it does take more Hp to compete with the "old torque" monsters. How do you make it economical and able to turn blades at the same RPM to produce the same quality cut as the days gone by, more Hp. I personally drool over a 302dz, with the original off road limited cam, or the 427 Cobra, and please don't forget my all time favorite, Lamborghini Countach. Cannonball Run, the original. Same with our garden tractors, or farm tractors. Me I'll take a 1985 Stieger over anything that is produced today, but that is a whole different topic.