Cub Cadet styles

[ol'George]

I couldn't agree more, but things change over time.
And some like newer stuff.
Me, not so much.
Everything i have, is old like me, and in good shape.

[Farmall450]

Originally Posted by 1711Cub

This is obviously more aerodynamic over this:


But I know which one my ass is going to be attached to.. The newer units were being modernized to be more car like. I want a garden tractor to look like a tractor, hence why my fleet is 30 plus years old. The driveline and chassis durability is a side bonus with the vintage stuff.

That has as much if not more to do with modern style than aerodynamics.

Note the rest of the market. Not unlike automobiles, which were also much more streamlined in the 40s and 50s than 70s and 80s (look at Chevy trucks, for example).

I don't think anyone at CC is comparing the Cd of their hood designs

[MSS7120]

From the front hood standpoint it has more to do with the sight lines than aerodynamics. See my attached photo to illustrate this on my 3000 series. If you are really long in the torso it's less important. If you are shorter in the torso it makes a large difference when working close to another object. This is also important with less experienced operators. The same is true in the larger tractors as well. The hoods are all curved in the front to allow better visibility close up to the front end.

Woody compare this view to the snowblower in your profile pic. The blower disappears in-front of the grill.



PS: I put a lot of hours on a red 682 and love the looks of them.

[1811woody]

I digress, maybe it is more about sight lines and less about aerodynamics. My point is, I would prefer a tractor to look like a tractor and not a import sports car. For me I prefer the garden tractor style of yesteryear. Back to sight lines, it has never been an issue judging where my attachments are on such a small piece of equipment, of course I am old school and stubborn and don't adapt well to change so the EX says lol.

[Rex B]

Something to be said for some styling

[Billy-O]

Seems to be eye appeal versus functional reliability appeal. I'm with the later.

[Farmall450]

Originally Posted by Rex B

Something to be said for some styling

Orchard models? Specifically built to not snag on branches.

[thecause17]

I would tend to agree, I don't mind the cyclops tractors, but newer than that I'm generally not a fan.

I like a lot of the older boxier stuff too, but honestly, there were some duds back then too. I owned a 1650 Quietline for a little while. Was never a big fan of the front end of that tractor.

[Farmall450]

Originally Posted by thecause17

I would tend to agree, I don't mind the cyclops tractors, but newer than that I'm generally not a fan.

I like a lot of the older boxier stuff too, but honestly, there were some duds back then too. I owned a 1650 Quietline for a little while. Was never a big fan of the front end of that tractor.

That's probably my least favorite series as well. That and I don't see a ton here.

[ol'George]

I have a 1650, not a bad machine for the $85 I paid for it,
but sure as hell not as smooth as both my opposed 782 twins.
As far as looking over the hood, at my age my outlook is dim anyway with them dam floaters in my eyes.