I was reading the article done about the rubicon today (little late, hey i'm busy) and then i got to the transmission. This thing sounded like it would be pretty cool, no belt, still an auto. Then i read it, Hydrostatic...? They seemed to brag this hydro up alot, but i'm not so sure. This is just another lawn-mower transmission, whats so revolutionary?? Is this hydro gonna have all the problems that have plagued hydro's in the past. Like the tendancy to not keep a steady speed, and speed up by themselves? Also, usally hydro's tend to be slower engagers, and take ALOT of power. Such Transmissions have been tried in and failed in larger eqiupment purposes, becuase of the large amount of power they take. It will be Alot more than a belt. I don't think you'll ever see this transmission on a 350, it will be a big dog if it does happen. Also tho there may be no belt wear or belt slippage, but what happens when these machines age? When the gaskets start to give away, and water starts to get in this thing? that can't be good news for it. I guess you can't convince me this is a superior transmission before i actually drive one.
One last thing, if the front differential is anything like the Rancher's, its no better than any other limited slip
Not trying to make anyone angry, just my thought

What you guys think???

 

Hermz,
Your right on about the hydrostatic units using alot more power to move. I think the speed changing will not be a problem as they use a electric motor to adjust the swash plate, that whould hold the position.
They also make alot of heat that needs to be rejected.
Yes bigger equipment tried that transmission 30 yrs ago and gave it up. Lets se how Hondo can reEngineer an old subject.

 

Yeah, it's a horrible idea. Wonder why Honda did that? I guess some folks want a $7000+dollar lawn tractor You might email the author of the review and see if they can add your amendment.

 

Hermz

not tryin to get you angry either but have you ever been on a rancher???? the diff is ALOT better than the conventional limited slip. the front wheel with the most traction has gotten the power on mine every time. if it didn't at first simply saw that handle bars back and forth and walla.....granted it probably isn't as good as AWD but much better than the conventional limited slip.

 

Well Fellas, I drive a CAT Loader that is Hydrostatic 4X4 and it has no problem keeping up. This machine has been going steady 24 - 7 for the last 2 years.
The Honda design is not Hydro-static , but rather Hydro-mechanical as stated by Honda. I'm not exactly sure what the difference is so I'll leave that to those who know.

jeff

 

Actually yes, i've done a good amount of riding on a rancher, a bud of mind has one. one time where i saw this system fail was when he slipped off a a trail in the winter, and into the snow. The wheel that was almost off the snow, was the one spinning. I've seen that machine stuck several time's becuase of this.

And if it does use hydrualic motors, it is a hydrostatic, honda just prolly doesn't want people comparing it to lawnmowers. No matter what they call it, its just a hydro (as stated in the article about it on here)So what, a hydro in a loader has lasted for 2 years, and has other things going for it. The rubicon isn't gonna be 80hp+, so its not comparable. Anyway, how much hard acceleration and driving threw water do you do with it? My pop's is a mechanic at a Case IH dealer, and back in the the 70's they used some hydro in these things, most of them have had to be totally rebuilt, or junked completely. And this was already happening 10 years ago, there aren't many around anymore.

 

I can't comment on the rubicon's tranny, because I don't know alot about hydos. But time will tell I guess. As respects your comments on the ranchers front end - you don't have a clue! I've been riding my rancher for the last 5 months and the new ap front end works as advertised, way better than the traditional slip. We're sorry the rubicon is so offensive to you, I realize also it's nothing like a mid-80's trail blazer. HaHa!

 

Nothing constructive (as usual) to add; however, the a priori denunciation, that is, condemnation before any operational experience, of the Rubicon transmission, interests me.

Yet, Aesop's fox once determined grapes were sour without tasting them.

From an overall corporate standpoint, Honda traditionally made few mistakes--in motorcycles, automobiles, or ATV's--I suppose in power generators and other equipment also. Why, then, does the Rubicon's drivetrain innovation appear uniquely doomed, literally before it hits the ground?

Mark Twain, upon hearing an account of a fatal accident, said, "Reports of my death have been exaggerated." The same may be true of the Rubicon's transmission. Let's wait and see.

Tree Farmer

 

My freind has a 1665 Massey Furgusson tractor it has a new 20hp Onin twin motor and a rebuilt hydulic pump and low and high range hydulic drive with 3 point hitch.When we over work the tractor the engine will not lose rpm but the wheels stop and the tractor hyudulics make a squeel sound he says it a relief valve the causes a blow by of the hyudulic fluid when the tractor is push over it's limit its not a bad thing because if it was a grear driven machine it would lose engine rpm and stall instead.Will the Rubicon be something like this and not lose engine rpm no matter how heavly worked?

 

Hermz, Tell your buddy to take his Rancher to the shop. If it is spinning the wheel thats in the air, something is wrong. Mine works as advertised and is a big improvement over the other limited slip diff systems.