I run a King Kutter 5 foot brush hog on my 1025R without any issues. Plenty of power. Loader is necessary for counter ballast. It won't lift very high but that is not usually a problem
I am the same. I run a 48" on my 1025r, and I can make it grunt in heavier grass/brush. It might be able to handle a 60" in light/thin grass, but not if the grass got very tall. I agree with 636mullet...a 48" is the right size for this tractor. I too need to get a weight bracket on front, because I don't like having the loader on while mowing. And, because in this forum threads are worthless without pics, here is my 1025r and 48" Howse rotary cutter:My 48" mower is right at the limit of what my 1026R on level without front ballest. With the loader on the front the 1 series is a long machine. This coming year I hope to get a front weight bracket and some suitcase weights.
I want to see if I am correctly understanding a specific portion of your comment, which I have copied above.Drive takes a lot of the power away from the PTO.
What Fred is saying is a real and common occurrence with low HP tractors. There's only so much horse power available and running PTO driven attachment plus moving the tractor/implement itself frequently exceeds the HP capabilities of the engine. I guess I'd have to ask why you think the HP demands of the hydrostatic drive would be ANY different than the PTO in it's ability to lug down the engine? And there is a VERY substantial difference in the load placed on the engine moving the tractor/implement up hill verses down hill. That difference is plainly seen with both hydrostatic and gear driven tractors, trucks, cars, etc.I want to see if I am correctly understanding a specific portion of your comment, which I have copied above.
When you have the PTO engaged and the tractor is not in forward or reverse motion, the PTO seems to lose power once you begin to move the tractor by pushing on one of the Hydro drive pedals?
If that were the case, I would be concerned with something being wrong in the hydro system.
While we have all experienced the difference on power draw on the engine once you engage the PTO and it comes up to speed, I can't say that I have ever noticed any decline in the PTO operational speed or power once I began to move the tractor with a Hydrostatic drive.
Or am I misunderstanding your comment?:unknown: