[AT] OT(?) Cub Cadet 1812 Hydro question

Wed Jun 10 04:28:49 PDT 2009

B&S makes some good engines and they make some crap.  I don't know how
to tell the difference.

SO

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:36 PM, charliehill<charliehill at embarqmail.com> wrote:
> Like I said,  I have no experience with their equipment.  I was just passing
> along what I know.  The one thing I like is that you can buy it with ZERO
> interest for 6 months and the option to send it back to them for a full
> refund (less shipping) for a year.  Even if you intend to pay cash if you
> can buy something and try it for six months basically for free it's worth
> looking at.  The thing supposedly has a 2 year warranty even for commercial
> use as well.
>
> I think you are missing the boat if you think the pro grade B&S engines are
> no good.  I'd just as soon have that V-twin, cast iron sleeved 22 HP B&S as
> any thing there is out there.  Look at what Lincoln and Miller
> welding/generators use.  B&S is one of 2 engine options on both of those as
> well as Champion welders if I'm not mistaken.
>
> Anyway,  have fun figuring it out.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stephen Offiler" <soffiler at gmail.com>
> To: "Antique tractor email discussion group" <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [AT] OT(?) Cub Cadet 1812 Hydro question
>
>
> Thanks Charlie.  The conversion to walk-behind is kind of an
> interesting option.  But I was disappointed to see the Briggs engine.
> And while my brush mower is a solid piece of equipment, they dropped
> the ball on the design of the 42" finish mower deck for it.  It uses
> two 21" blades side by side where many mowers this wide will have
> three blades staggered into a triangle to get overlap between them.
> On mine I get a poor-quality cut in the center of the deck as a result
> of no overlap.  This does not appear to be an issue on those
> convertible z-turns but unfortunately my experience is now that DR is
> capable of missing BIG details.
>
> SO
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:50 PM, charliehill<charliehill at embarqmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Steve, If you like the DR equipment maybe you should try their ZTR.
>> They've been advertizing some good incentives on them lately.
>>
>> http://www.drpower.com/z-mower.aspx?ln
>>
>> they are showing a 1 year hands on trial for some of their equipment. It
>> looks like maybe the ZTR's aren't in that deal now but I think they were a
>> while back.
>>
>> Charlie
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Stephen Offiler" <soffiler at gmail.com>
>> To: "Antique tractor email discussion group"
>> <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 7:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: [AT] OT(?) Cub Cadet 1812 Hydro question
>>
>>
>> My walk-behind is actually a DR brush mower with an optional 42"
>> finish mower deck:
>>
>> http://www.drpower.com/TwoStepModelDetail.aspx?Name=FABCommercial17HP&p1Name=field-brush-mower-w&Page=fabmodels&ln
>>
>> DR clearly engineered this thing for brush mowing and the finish deck
>> is an afterthought. It seemed like a good idea at the time (and I do
>> get a lot of use out of the brush deck, so the purchase was not a
>> total mistake). Running with the longer, wider, heavier finish deck,
>> it is relatively hard to steer, not too bad in the first hour, but by
>> hour five your arms are beat up, and I have to wear thick gel-padded
>> long-distance bicycling gloves or else my hands scream for two days
>> from the effects of all the downpressure exerted on the bars to
>> maneuver it. My wife would not last twenty minutes on this machine,
>> and she's no wimp (born and raised on a dairy farm). I have actually
>> been forced to add a 45-lb counterweight to the bars which has made
>> quite a difference when using the finish mower; I neglected to make it
>> quick-change, so now I almost have to lift UP on the bars when running
>> the brush deck. Out of impatience, I also tend to drag it backward
>> while maneuvering, because shifting from one of the forward gears to
>> reverse is a somewhat clunky process. That takes a physical toll
>> after a while too. I'm sure the Exmark is a fine machine, but that's
>> not what I am dealing with here.
>>
>> SO
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Mark Greer<markagreer at embarqmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> My wife has run our walk behind for years. It is an Exmark Metro 48" belt
>>> drive unit.
>>> http://www.exmark.com/metro.htm
>>> They really are pretty easy to run.
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Stephen Offiler" <soffiler at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Antique tractor email discussion group"
>>> <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 11:52 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [AT] OT(?) Cub Cadet 1812 Hydro question
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Mark. In fact I am considering a zero turn. However, a big
>>> commercial walk-behind doesn't work because my wife wants to pitch in
>>> and help with the mowing chores. Any machine has to be something she
>>> is comfortable running. It doesn't have to be *extremely* speedy
>>> although speed will be a prime consideration if we end up selling the
>>> Cub Cadet 1812 that has been the subject of this long thread and
>>> laying out cash for something new.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Steve O.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Mark Greer<markagreer at embarqmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> If you can walk a 48" or larger commercial walk behind mower will work
>>>> great
>>>> on sloped ground. I've been mowing that way since the early 90's and
>>>> would
>>>> never consider another riding mower unless it was a zero turn. Riding
>>>> tractor mowers are way too slow.
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Stephen Offiler" <soffiler at gmail.com>
>>>> To: "Antique tractor email discussion group"
>>>> <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 9:21 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [AT] OT(?) Cub Cadet 1812 Hydro question
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These inputs on mowing side-slopes are all very interesting and useful
>>>> to me. Here's a question for the group: What if I could fashion a
>>>> mowing pattern that ensured I was always running essentially straight
>>>> up or straight down my slopes, and never running side-slope? Fact is,
>>>> I am reasonably sure I can do this and it will be foremost on my mind
>>>> the next time I mow (with the old, slow, but functional equipment).
>>>> Wouldn't that bring the ZTR back on the table? (And there's always
>>>> the advice to replace the tires with something more ag-oriented...)
>>>>
>>>> SO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 9:40 PM, charliehill<charliehill at embarqmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I'm not that familar with front deck mowers and I agree that ZTR's
>>>>> sometime
>>>>> struggle on slopes but the town I live near has/had a mower that I
>>>>> guess
>>>>> you
>>>>> would call a front deck. I think it might have been a Deere. It had a
>>>>> single rear wheel that was more or less a caster wheel. I don't know if
>>>>> it
>>>>> had any steering control or not. I just remember laughing at the guy
>>>>> trying
>>>>> to use it on a highway shoulder slope. He was trying to mow around a
>>>>> bush
>>>>> or pole or hydrant or something (I don't remember). The thing had a
>>>>> mind
>>>>> of
>>>>> it's own. He'd start up the hill and it would spin around and come back
>>>>> down. Going sideways on the slope was out of the question.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Steve Sewell" <sewell at ohio.edu>
>>>>> To: <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 10:43 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [AT] OT(?) Cub Cadet 1812 Hydro question
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --On Friday, June 05, 2009 7:24 AM -0400 Stephen Offiler
>>>>>> <soffiler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John, Larry:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think much of Briggs engines these days, and I'm VERY
>>>>>>> dismayed
>>>>>>> to hear about Kohler! Plastic camshaft, you say?! I can't imagine
>>>>>>> how that could work. Are the lobes metal?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Cub Cadet zero-turn I am considering is one of their commercial
>>>>>>> models with a very heavy fabricated deck (that is, welded together
>>>>>>> from flat pieces of heavy steel, not stamped) and powered by a 19HP
>>>>>>> Kawasaki V-twin. I hear generally good things about the Kawasakis.
>>>>>>> In fact that's what I have on that 17HP 42" walk-behind I mentioned
>>>>>>> earlier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Steve O.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve: Having the pleasure of visiting your home I don't think a
>>>>>> Z-turn
>>>>>> would make you happy. As others have said they don't like much other
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> flat ground. If I were you I would be looking at a front mower with a
>>>>>> 5'
>>>>>> deck. I have used both and would much rather have the front mower. We
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> a mid 90's JD F1145 at work with a 6' deck that we use around the
>>>>>> runway
>>>>>> /
>>>>>> taxiway lights and nav-aids that has wheel brakes so it's 'almost' a
>>>>>> z-turn. With your flower beds, rock fence, driveway and those rocks
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> planted in the yard I think you would be happy with a front mower.
>>>>>> With
>>>>>> either one there is a learning curve on mowing around several things
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> are close together. As it pivots on the drive wheels under your
>>>>>> seat,the
>>>>>> rear swings around, you have to get the hang of it. I have a JD 445
>>>>>> lawn
>>>>>> tractor at home with the V-twin Kawasaki. Good engine, lots of power.
>>>>>> No
>>>>>> problems with 600+ hrs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve Sewell
>>>>>> Albany, Ohio USA
>>>>>> sewell at ohio.edu
>>>>>> sewell at atis.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> AT mailing list
>>>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> AT mailing list
>>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AT mailing list
>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AT mailing list
>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AT mailing list
>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AT mailing list
>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>