1. Thank you for visiting HeavyEquipmentForums.com! Our objective is to provide industry professionals a place to gather to exchange questions, answers and ideas. We welcome you to register using the "Register" icon at the top of the page. We'd appreciate any help you can offer in spreading the word of our new site. The more members that join, the bigger resource for all to enjoy. Thank you!
  2. ALL NEW MEMBERS READ THIS FIRST!! Thank you for joining Heavy Equipment Forums! If you are new to forums we communicate with "Threads", please search our threads to see if your topic may have already been answered and if not then click "Post New Thread" in the appropriate forum. This will allow all of our members to see your question and give you the best chance to be answered. After you've made a number of posts you will graduate to Full Member status where you'll see a few more privileges. Following these guidelines will help make this the best resource for heavy equipment on the net. Thanks for joining us and I hope you enjoy your stay!!

transmisions?

Discussion in 'Forklifts/Telehandlers' started by Nac, Apr 10, 2005.

  1. Nac

    Nac Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Messages:
    566
    Occupation:
    Construction
    Location:
    NJ
    I was at the Atlantic Builders convention Yesterday (FRI) And there where a couple Manitou forklifts. I was intrested thay had a MLT526 it is a compact telascoping forklift would be great for moving keystone block and gravel even looks good for snow work. It has a torque converter trans how does this compare to a hydrostaic trans any pros or cons?
     
  2. 9420pullpan

    9420pullpan Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,162
    Location:
    Central PA
    i would have to say that it would depend on your application. a hydrostat would be smoother in lifting near a building or an application that would be critical to a smooth operation. the only con that i can see to hydrostat may be the speed of the machine.a powershift with a torque converter would be faster than a hydrostat. but a powershift may have a clutch which would be slightly more difficult in lifting materials around buildings. this may be something else to consider with a hyrostat, check and see if the hydrostat runs off of the same hyraulic tank. if it does and there is a failure or contamination in the implements is could wipe out your hyrostats as well. and that is not cheap.

    hope that helps.
     
  3. mrnick777

    mrnick777 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    florida
    anyone know where i can find a reman trans for a 586g case, carraro transmission?
     
  4. Framer

    Framer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    Messages:
    46
    Location:
    Alberta - Canada
    I have an 07 mt1745 Hydrostatic. Here is what I will say. It is safer than a torque converter machine. It is less stressfull on the operator( idiot proof) The operator does not have to think about the gearing at all unless he is going to road the machine. This is good when you've got lots of people, cars, concrete truck etc around. If it were for agriculture, don't buy it. But I love it for construction and wish more machines had it. Different sound to it. No jerk from first to second. No hitting a hill and your machine wont move till you gear down. No brakes needed. No speeding up after bumps. No dropping loads when a someone jumps in front of you and you get scared and tap the brake. No brake wear and tear. If you put it in gear it does nothing till you hit the pedal.