snowmoboyle 33 #1 Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) Any major differences between the two? Have a 89, got a chance at a 97 - - 1100 hours on the 97, I have 900 on the 89. 89 has cab, and two stage blower purchased new together 97 has cab, and two stage blower purchased new together. Neither has a mower deck, still working on that lol. Both have chains, 89 has fluid filled tires. 97 does need a battery, and a throttle cable. Thanks for any input - I appreciate it! Edited November 26, 2014 by snowmoboyle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daveoman1966 3,627 #2 Posted November 26, 2014 97 has hyd lift & motion lever on steeriong column. pm being sent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zieg72 209 #3 Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) The 97 has a stronger hydro, forward swept axle and gear reduction steering and wider 8.5" rear rims Edited November 26, 2014 by zieg72 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Theroundhousernr 589 #4 Posted November 26, 2014 The 97 has a stronger hydro, forward swept axle and gear reduction steering and wider 8.5" rear rims Would sure like to know what makes it a stronger hydro? I thought an eaton 1100 was an eaton 1100. Only difference was in gearing in the HC models and the workhorses? Sorry if it sounds sarcastic, just the way texts comes across. I would like to know for my own reference. Thanks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bmsgaffer 2,043 #5 Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) He might have meant stronger because of the gearing. When you change the gearing so your top speed goes from 7 down to 5mph then you have increased your maximum torque by that much through the whole range. So stronger as in more torque hitting the ground, not necessarily longer lasting or anything like that. Edited November 26, 2014 by bmsgaffer 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zieg72 209 #6 Posted November 26, 2014 He might have meant stronger because of the gearing. When you change the gearing so your top speed goes from 7 down to 5mph then you have increased your maximum torque by that much through the whole range. So stronger as in more torque hitting the ground, not necessarily longer lasting or anything like that. That is what I meant, I sure didn't mean to ruffle any feathers 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Theroundhousernr 589 #7 Posted November 26, 2014 But wouldn't a 520h from 89 be geared the same as a 97, unless it was a 520hc? No feathers ruffled just trying to get things straight. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bmsgaffer 2,043 #8 Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) But wouldn't a 520h from 89 be geared the same as a 97, unless it was a 520hc? No feathers ruffled just trying to get things straight. You may be on to something... It I know all the C series with the eatons had the 7mph top speed... the later ones my knowledge gets a little fuzzy. Zieg? Edited November 26, 2014 by bmsgaffer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Theroundhousernr 589 #9 Posted November 26, 2014 I pretty sure they where geared down unlike the later c series where. If i was home i could check some parts manuals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zieg72 209 #10 Posted November 26, 2014 My 92 was a whole lot faster than my 97. I ran them side by side down the driveway when I had them both. To make sure I compared reverse which was comparable in speed with the 92 a hair faster.... I checked the linkages, nothing different that I could see so I made that assumption that the newer ones were beefed up some. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Theroundhousernr 589 #11 Posted November 26, 2014 Looking at the parts manuals now. Not sure I see anything different other then the gearing in the 520h and 520hc. I thinks its the same in 97..... Still looking. ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bmsgaffer 2,043 #12 Posted November 26, 2014 I know the swept axle was available WITHOUT the gear reduction steering on the HC's at some point. Gear reduction + swept axle on all models after 91. There were differences in the gauges, and chrome and such too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zieg72 209 #13 Posted November 26, 2014 Looking at the parts manuals now. Not sure I see anything different other then the gearing in the 520h and 520hc. I thinks its the same in 97..... Still looking. ... Or could a HC unit be under my 92 and I didn't know it??? I have had a bunch of 520H's but never had 2 at a time side by side running them down the driveway. I also have never owned a 520HC... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bmsgaffer 2,043 #14 Posted November 26, 2014 520 drag races! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Geno 1,928 #15 Posted November 26, 2014 We can do that at the Spring meet + greet here Brandon. The 89 I had that KyBlue bought was way faster than my 91 and 93, no comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shallowwatersailor 3,213 #16 Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) There are two different sheave/pulley part numbers which could explain the difference in top speed. The variance is going to be small though. The belt number is the same but the idler pulley could adjust for the individual application. This would apply to the 1988-1989 models. But with the larger diameter tires on the 1990 + 520-H, it should increase the speed as well. The HC was sold as a commercial unit and faster speed made it more productive. The additional grease points for a longer service life, and the auxiliary fuel tank was designed for the HC for that reason also. Edited November 26, 2014 by shallowwatersailor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 616 #17 Posted November 27, 2014 Below are the top speeds on some of the C's and 520's. All have Eaton 1100 Hydros. In general, newer is slower These numbers are from the sales brochures: 1984 C-145 top speed 7.1 1984 C-175 top speed 7.1 1984 C-195 top speed 6.6 1988 520HC top speed 7.5 1988 520H top speed 6.4 1994 520H top speed 5.6 1995 520H top speed 5.6 The top speed on the 1980 C's and D's with the Sundstrand Hydros was 6.3. Except for the D Series which continued with the Sundstrand Hydros, 1980 was the last year of the Sundstrand Hydros for the other models and in 1980 there was a mix of Sundstand and Eaton Hydros. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bmsgaffer 2,043 #18 Posted November 27, 2014 Thanks for that! I had no idea there were so many different gearing combinations over the years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ericj 1,576 #19 Posted November 27, 2014 my 73 16 auto is one of the fastest stock tractor that i've driven it a sunstrand hydro. i don't know how many mph it will go but it flat out flies eric j Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snowmoboyle 33 #20 Posted November 27, 2014 Thanks guys - that was fun to read! I checked out the 97 last night, little too rough to be worth considering it an "upgrade" So I'll be sticking with the 89, I'm out of town today but will be coming home on Sunday to around a foot of new snow so I'll get to play in that. Also, my buddy gave me a yellow rotating beacon light - 12v - going to impress the neighbor with that (a deere guy) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ericj 1,576 #21 Posted November 27, 2014 more the merrier you can always buy the 97 and have 2 tractors then you have gear reduction steering . your 89 sounded like a better tractor then the 97 but you can never have enough wheel horses eric j Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snowmoboyle 33 #22 Posted November 27, 2014 more the merrier you can always buy the 97 and have 2 tractors then you have gear reduction steering . your 89 sounded like a better tractor then the 97 but you can never have enough wheel horses eric j Welllll at the point that my finances are in, there was going to be alot of begging pleading borrowing and finagling to make it happen. I was almost relieved... HA! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ericj 1,576 #23 Posted November 27, 2014 i hear you on the finances. they claim the economy is getting better but it's not in my house lol eric j 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites