Tom Joslyn, Groundsman Harper Adams University
General comments/summary
Overall it was a good quality and well built utility vehicle that was fast and comfortable to ride in, however for the sort of work that is carried out on a day to day basis around the college grounds, the power of this machine would be a little wasted as would the four wheel drive and the suspension. The rear capacity is also too small (in terms of length) for what we require here and the vehicle overall is slightly too wide. For work over rougher terrain and more heavy duty work, the machine would come into its own and perform extremely well.
Overall Rating: 4.1 8) Operator comfort -D
Does the machine
respond quickly to gear/speed changes, does the seat offer a comfortable operation? Does the driver feel safe in operation? Do pedals require additional exertion than would be expected?
TJ: Comfortable machine to use due to a good suspension. However, it was slow when responding to speed changes. Due to the low sides the driver could feel exposed, especially at higher speeds. Rating: 4
RW: The seats are very comfortable and function well with the suspension. The machine is quick to react when throttle gets pushed down quickly. The seatbelts, and the ‘cage’, give the driver a feel of security. (5)
IS: The following day I took it over the school’s farm to see what it would be like for conservation work. Some of the fields had recently been ploughed, so I put the Cub through its paces over the furrows. It had 4-wheel drive but we didn’t need it. The drive was fairly smooth with the suspension taking the worst of the bumps. It also has a very good ground clearance which certainly is an advantage on the rough ground or in the woods. (5)
JC: Acceleration is fast, there are no gear changes as it has hydrostatic transmission, the deceleration was excellent with steady braking coming from the transmission. The driver seat was of the highest quality and should be standard for the passenger seat. The driver would feel safe when operating the machine, they are well protected by the rollbar. Control pedals are easy to use. (4)
KB: Operator comfort was ample for type of vehicle, felt safe while driving, brake and accelerator pedals no problem. Responded well to speed change. (4)
SJ: Comfortable to drive, good seating position and brakes. My negative point would be that you have to give a reasonable amount of throttle to get the
100
Ronald Werkman, Groundsman Rugby School
General comments/summary
The machine was easy to use, and gave an overall good impression. But the noise that it makes while in operation is a sticking point. So, whilst we did like a lot of aspects of this machine it wouldn’t be my personal choice.
We are using the Toro Workmans and, as these vehicles are battery powered, it is very hard to draw comparisons between them and the Cadet.
I would suggest that they reduce the noise of the engine by better insulation; levers for the indicators rather than switch on panel; widen the entrance on the drivers side.
Overall rating 4.1
hydrostat to drive, so it isn’t particulary smooth and, going back to my last point, because of the extra throttle needed the machine is too noisy. (3)
9) Manoeuvrability of the machine -g bad or indifferent?
good
TJ: Manoeuvrability was heavy and quite stiff even when moving and this would have been partly due to the four wheel drive capability. If power steering were to be added then the steering and manoeuvrability would be significantly improved. Rating: 4
RW: The machine is overall quite manoeuvrable, it is very sturdy on the road and hardly diverts to the left or right. If equipped with different type of tyres (turf friendly) then probably shorter corners can be taken without having an impact on the surface. (4)
IS: The machine is overall quite manoeuvrable. (4)
JC: Turf tyres were not fitted to the demonstration vehicle and would be essential in our environment, the tyres fitted did leave an imprint. (2.5)
KB: Machine manoeuvrability was good, only problem I found was starting off in reverse the vehicle tended to jerk causing the driver to lunge forward slightly. (4)
SJ: Poor, the turning circle is the poorest I’ve used in a golf course machine, even in the yard I was finding myself doing three point turns. (1)
10) Does the UTV leave a large tyre imprint or is the weight/ground ratio just about right?
TJ: It was found that the weight/ground ratio was very good and although tested in dry conditions, there was little or no tyre imprint from the vehicle. Rating: 5
RW: Tyre imprint is negligible - would be even better with different type of tyres. (4)
IS: The tyres we had were quite chunky
Ian Smith, Head Groundsman St Albans School
Here at St Albans we are fortunate to have a lot of new and up to date kit. But, with a programme of rolling replacement on everything we have, we are always looking forward to our next purchase.
I am now also in charge of conservation, not just on the 73 acre sports fields but also the school’s 390 acre farm.
General comments/summary
To sum it up it is a little noisy and I would want an electric lift bed but, apart from that, it is fast and rugged and certainly gets the thumbs up from all my staff and me.
Overall Rating 4.4
which was fine for us as we need all terrain, but, for sports turf, you would want turf tyre. (4)
JC: Slight imprint left from tyres. (3)
SJ: Difficult to say, when I tested the machine, the ground conditions were dry so an imprint was not left on the turf. However, the machine was delivered to me with tyres less than ideal and definitely not suitable for turf, more agricultural or estate suited. (3)
11) Cleaning down of the machine. A job we all hate but it has to be done, is it any easier now?
TJ: Cleaning down the machine would be easy and relatively quick due to the small surface area that needs to be covered. The surface of the Cub Cadet was generally smooth and free of small hard to reach areas and gaps which reduces the time needed to clean it. There is also the added bonus that all the materials are washable and water resistant, with no fabrics or wooden parts which again makes cleaning easier. Rating: 4.5
RW: It is easy enough to clean the machine. (4)
IS: It is easy enough to clean. (4) JC: Not a problem. (4)
KB: Machine was easy to clean, access to areas where dirt gathers was good. (4)
SJ: Didn’t actually need to clean down, but it didn’t look any more or less difficult to clean than other machines. (3)
12) Engine power and performance? Is 4- wheel drive a requirement for your application?
TJ: The machine was a little too powerful for what was needed around the grounds of the college and the four wheel drive would be virtually obsolete and not necessary due to most of the work being carried out on flat ground. Rating: 4.5
RW: It has plenty of power, you can tell
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115