[Farmall450]

Originally Posted by Sergeant

Most of the 1st Garden tractor were not shaft driven, Many of the first field Tractors were not even shaft driven. The ST54 is a Lawn tractor with a K46 transmission and Bigger rear and front tires

A belt transfer horsepower more efficiently than a drive shaft, but belts do wear over time and lose some of that advantage. But you can replace that belt and gain that advantage back. Shafts are usually constant and don't need to be replaced that often. The 1st IH Cub Cadet garden tractor was belt-to-shaft. Why do you think IH stayed with a mule drive for mowing and many attachments! While they did look at doing what Bolens did with shaft-driven mowing decks for the 70/100 and decided their design couldn't support a shaft-driven mowing deck (easier for mowing deck changeover than a Mule drive). Wheel horse, while they did make some shaft-driven garden tractors. A majority of their garden tractors were belt-driven until Toro (which bought Wheel Horse in 1986) stopped production of lawn and garden tractors. Their 5Xi production was stopped before the 400XT series.

I replaced the drive belt when my John Deere GX335 was 15 years old. Not the norm; usually I have had to replace a drive belt about every 9 to 10 years on many of my belt-driven machines. I prefer shaft-driven just because it's one less thing to replace , but I do currently have 5 belt-driven garden tractors and one is an IH Cub Cadet (original model); the others are a Wheel Horse 416H; a Deere 110 Round Fender; a Deere 112 Square Fender; and a Deere GX335. I also have one Garden tractor that is Hydraulic driven a Ingersoll 3016PS No shaft or Belt . I have Two IH shaft driven, 2 MTD Cub Shaft driven 2 Deere shaft driven and 1 MTD/White Shaft driven

While it's certainly true the Original started with a belt (albeit a small one, functioning more as an adapter between the engine and driveshaft), what's the weakest point of the original's drivetrain?