New to Wheel Horse-What to do?

[manahale 9]

Hello everyone,

My old Craftsman yard tractor bit the dust. Kohler Courage 21 hp cracked crankcase. Using a 1997 Toro Recycler to mow the lawn for now. I don't have a ton of cash to spend and really don't want to drop 2k on something from Home Depot. I like older things and I like maintaining them, or at least trying to. I started seeing used Wheel Horses on FB marketplace and Craig's list. My biggest question is "What to buy?" My main use would be to cut an acre of grass, haul firewood and wall stones. If I had a blade I would probably use it for snow in the driveway. If I got a loader I would consider that to be a tremendous windfall. A 42" deck is the widest I can go.  Will the 300 series be powerful enough to do these simple tasks or should I look for a 400 series? Any advice will help me focus my search. I see many WH out in the midwest, I am in Connecticut. Thanks for any help. 

 

 

[Sparky-(Admin) 21,169]

  A 300 series would be great for all of that except maybe the loader. Never owned a loader before so maybe a loader owner will chime in and correct me. 
  For a 42” deck I recommend a 10hp at least. A few guys mow with a 42” and an 8 hp but I think that’s asking a lot of the engine. 
 

[Ed Kennell 37,586]

to the  Second what Mike said above.

 

I have a 310 8speed gear drive with a 42" deck that mows and tows any thing.  The limiting towing  factor on these tractors is usually the traction and the braking.

I also have a 312 Hydro that mows with a 48" deck and plows snow with a 48" blade.   I highly recommend  the Hydro If you plan to use it for snow removal with a blade or blower.

 

 

[SylvanLakeWH 25,219]

 

I prefer gears, but echo both Ed and Mike's comments above.

[rjg854 11,265]

Not much to add to the discussion so I'll just say   

[ebinmaine 66,712]

 

 

15 hours ago, manahale said:

A 42" deck is the widest I can go.

 

Be sure to understand the full width of what the SHELL is. 

 

A 42" REAR Discharge is several inches  narrower than a 42" SIDE Discharge. 

 

 

15 hours ago, manahale said:

 Will the 300 series be powerful enough to do these simple tasks or should I look for a 400 series? Any advice will help me focus my search. I see many WH out in the midwest, I am in Connecticut. Thanks for any help. 

 

The Herd on our acreage is predominantly from 1965/6/7  and  1974/5.

We do have a 1986 416-8 with a Front End Loader and Backhoe. 

 

The frame and transmission of a 300 to 400 is the same. A 300 is certainly capable of utilizing a Loader. 

 

My understanding of the POWER difference between the 300 and 400 series is that the HP begins lower on the 300 and ends higher on the 400 but they do cross over.

There are 314 models both Manual and Hydro. 

There are 414s this way well. 

 

A very important consideration for a 300 series if you get a hydro is the type of transmission. 

A 321A is much lighter duty than a 312H because of the transmission rating. 

 

ANY hydro in a 400 will be the heavy duty one. 

 

Other series differences are related to options like seats and steering wheels or dash lights. 

 

 

I personally would avoid a 500 series for several reasons.  Most importantly,  ease of repairs and maintenance. The wiring alone on a 500 is..... alot.  

 

@JCM and @PWL216 both are 80s and 90s + gurus. 

Maybe they have more to contribute or even a line on a good tractor. 

 

 

 

[Pullstart 62,239]

  Don’t discount the predecessor to the 3 and 400 series, the C series.  A C-101 through C-161, a C-105 through C-165 if you like the black hoods, etc.. are all great choices for you.  They came in hydro or gear jammer flavor, and are much simpler with less wiring and such, and easier to maintain in my opinion.  They even had 8 hp models if you like your tractor to sip the petro, but that would be asking a lot for a 42” deck.

[JCM 9,087]

    I am a big fan of 300 series for mowing as it uses a 1/4  tank of fuel as compared to a 400 series at over double that mowing a DRY lawn at 3/4 throttle on both machines. 300 does well with a 48'' dozer blade for plowing snow with rear weights and chains as well. The 400 series is a beast for most tasks compared to a 300. Both are great tractors. 1 of each is the way to go eventually.

[PWL216 871]

For mowing and snow removal, I’d look for a 300 series, a 314-H would be perfect - powerful, single cylinder Kohler for easy maintenances. For a bucket loader, you’ll need to have a separate dedicated machine. I’d go with a 520 since it has gear reduction steering (similar to power steering) and a swept front axle that provides better stability. 

[squonk 40,819]

I prefer the pre 300-500 and black hood series tractors. Better paint, thicker (and less of it ) sheet metal and easier to work on around the tunnel area .

Edited August 26 by squonk

[PWL216 871]

1 minute ago, squonk said:

 

I prefer the pre 300-500 series tractors. Better paint, thicker (and less of it ) sheet metal and easier to work on around the tunnel area .

 

I like the electronic ignition too. No points and condensers to deal with. In some cases, more safeties. The trade off is the wiring is a little more complicated. 

[953 nut 54,515]

15 hours ago, manahale said:

really don't want to drop 2k on something from Home Depot.

Any Wheel Horse will outwork and outlast any of the Big Box offerings.   The 310-8 is my go-to mower/tower. I mow about an acre of lawn with some substantial elevation changes and it has no problem climbing the hills while mowing. For snow plowing you would want to add wheel weights and chains but the 310 is very capable there too. If you decide to go with a Hydrostatic transmission I would suggest looking at a twelve horsepower or larger engine. I also have a 418 (eighteen HP) which is used as my snow mover, it is great for that but uses more gas than the 310 for mowing.

The frames, transaxles and most parts on the 300/400 models are the same, front spindles and wheel assemblies are larger on the 400 and I have converted my 310 to the 400 spindles and wheels for a better ride and steering on rough terrain.

I have a loader on a GT-14 (larger than the 300/400) but it would also work well on them. For a loader unit I wouldn't go with less than fourteen horsepower due to the added weight and the need to push into material being scooped up.

When you have narrowed down your selection stop by and ask any questions you may have.

[JCM 9,087]

29 minutes ago, squonk said:

 easier to work on around the tunnel area .

[ebinmaine 66,712]

47 minutes ago, squonk said:

I prefer the PRE 300-500 and black hood series tractors. Better paint, thicker (and less of it ) sheet metal and EASIER TO WORK ON around the tunnel area .

 

 

18 minutes ago, JCM said:

 

 

And again... 

 

 

The angled steering tower and less sheet metal overall getting in your way makes maintenance and repairs infinitely easier. 1977 and earlier is what I would look for.

 

C120 or C160. 

[Ed Kennell 37,586]

Another plus for the pre 300series is the fuel tank is higher than the fuel pump making easier starts.

 

If you are going hydro,  And IMO the only way to go for snow removal, A big plus for the 300 series with the Eaton 1100 transmission.   The pre 300 hydros will have an older weaker Sundstrand hydro.

 

Another plus, after 1987 the 300 series have Magnum engines...no points, coils, or condensers.

 

 

 

[parsonsponyz 101]

Welcome to the forum.  Everyone has good points now it's time for you to think and buy a tractor or two, or three or.........      Be careful they are addictive.

[ebinmaine 66,712]

15 minutes ago, Ed Kennell said:

Another plus for the pre 300series is the fuel tank is higher than the fuel pump making easier starts.

 

If you are going hydro,  And IMO the only way to go for snow removal, A big plus for the 300 series with the Eaton 1100 transmission.   The pre 300 hydros will have an older weaker Sundstrand hydro.

 

Another plus, after 1987 the 300 series have Magnum engines...no points, coils, or condensers.

 

 

 

 

 

Seems like the best possible combination for a hydro would be a later model with older sheet metal. Now ya got me thinking. Thanks Ed.

[JCM 9,087]

3 hours ago, ebinmaine said:

 

 

Seems like the best possible combination for a hydro would be a later model with older sheet metal. Now ya got me thinking. Thanks Ed.

[Achto 27,364]

[Lane Ranger 10,867]

I have always been a fan of the single cylinder motors on the Wheel Horse and Toro models.   Easy to take care of a Kohler K and/ or Kohler Magnum motor.  Maintenance, parts and good guidance are readily available.   The 14 and 16 hp motors give you good power for 42 or 48 mower decks.

 

 

 

[oliver2-44 9,478]

[jay bee 892]

 to 

As usual, all good information above. I prefer the C Series tractors but also have a 314-8 speed that I now use for mowing and snow plowing. I use a B-100 for snow blowing and have never had an issue unless the snow is just plain slop. The 1977 and earlier are definitely easier to work on in the tunnel area. 

[manahale 9]

You all are amazing! Thank you for your replies. Going to start putting feelers out for a 1987 or newer 314H with hydro and an Eaton 1100 trannie. I'm pretty sure I can find a 42" rear discharge deck and the plow separately or maybe get lucky and get the whole package. All in good time. Thanks again, much appreciated.

[lynnmor 7,259]

A loader pretty much demands a heavy duty front axle, the 520H is the only one with heavy spindles, tie rod ends and roller bearings in the front wheels plus a special gear reduction steering system so the steering isn't extremely difficult. There is also needle roller bearings where the spindles meet the axle.  On many tractors the 520H parts can be fitted but it will cost you hundreds for used.  You might want to skip a loader unless you come across an extremely rare great deal for a complete tractor and loader.   I would want 12 horsepower or more for what you want to do.

[WHX?? 48,249]

The guys got you covered so I'll just  and add that a tractor with a loader is pretty much a single purpose machine. Sounds like you are gonna need two horses...