Grettings Newman007,

This is a great question, especially with the prices of fuel today. But I've been concerned a long time about fuel use, especially wasted fuel use. I've always felt there was no use pouring a gallon in if a quart would do the Job as well. On the other hand, if you really need the work done that a gallon will do, there's no sense using four quarts: it will just take a lot longer.

But you are right in thinking that more cylinders means burning more fuel and more moving parts means there is more that can go wrong.

But to mow 1/2 to 1/3 acre one cylinder on the right riding mower will be more than enough. The HP ratings are mostly hype. 12 to 15 HP is plenty unless you want to mow with a 60" deck.

I just came in from mowing the old horse pasture (no horses anymore). I'm doing it with a 15HP JD GT225 with a 42" deck. In some places it is 24" high or better, and includes small trees. It's about two acres more or less and I'm only half done. I leave the places where the wild flowers are thickest for later in the summer. I didn't mow it at all last year as the drought never let it grow much.

JTB

JTB:

I agree completely. My father had an old Craftsman with a 10 h.p. that he used for years. Older Snapper riders had 8 hp. I even have an old newspaper from the 60's with an ad for a rider with a 4 hp!! While that may have been an extreme example that I would not recommend for anyone, it does show how horsepower has inflated over the years. There may be reasons for buying a 2 cylinder such as less vibration and noise and better balance, but the extra horsepower is not one of them when talking about a small mostly level residential lawn.

IF it will make you feel better, on that twin cylinder Intek, connecting rods and crankshaft are only available as a complete set.

Walt Conner

The way I see it, 7 HP is getting a bit much for a 21" walk behind. A 15HP/42" rider would probably be about right, since it has to carry you.
If the grass gets a little too thick/tall/damp etc., you can always cut a narrower swath.

I agree with everything that was said above, but keep in mind that the mysteries of the internal combustion engine often defy theory. In theory, a smaller engine will be more efficient, and in theory, a single will be more efficient than a multi cylinder engine.

In actual practice, some engines are just happier combinations of combustion chamber shape, intake and exhaust porting, carburetor efficiency, ignition timing, cam profile, and quality control. Sometimes the only disadvantage to the larger engine is the purchase price.

Actually a single cylinder engine is less efficient than a twin from a fuel consumption perspective. It takes less fuel to power 2 small cylinders versus one large one, or so the reports I've read say. In terms of HP . . . well HP is HP. Single cylinder engines are noisier and not as smooth as a twin generally speaking. For your specific need a single cylinder engine will be fine. Just make sure it uses a spin on oil filter and a cast iron cylinder sleeve.

I agree that one can not reach a fits all engine conclusion about 2 cylinder verses 1 cylinder. I have an 18 HP B&S 2 cylinder opposed flat head engine on a Craftsman GT, old machine, and a 18.5 1 cylinder on a much newer Craftsman DYT. the newer has overhead valves and is, I believe a more efficient and cleaner engine, even though it has 1/2 more HP.

I'd look for the best buy, and not concern myself with 1 or 2 cylinder, nor would I reject an 18 to 20 hp engine. A 42" deck with a tight turning radius such as is on most Lawn and Yard tractors should meet your needs well I believe.

i have an old Sears 8 HP mower (30 inch deck about 2/3 of an acre... Its a single cylinder and it just sips gas ... i dearly love this old clunker, but this mower is rather old and I need to have a backup plan.

Last fall I picked up a HP Scotts Briggs Intek twin w a 46 inch deck (10 years old)... Its a great running machine - but guess what - it doesnt sip gas ... I actually mowed with it today with freshly sharpened blades. I let the motor idle and it did wonderfully - rarely do I need to go much above idle. so this allows me to conserve some gas...

My next mower is going to be something like this...
- Single Cylinder engine with over head valves and a pressurized oil system ... (Personally I prefer Briggs - but I would not walk away from my dream machine if it had a Kohler...
- Im not worried a bit about horse power - I would be interested in roughly 10-18 HP - and I have some STEEP inclines on my property.
- 42 inch deck - my Scotts 46 deck is just a bit too big and I cant get it in the shed.
- I MUST have a heavy duty trans - Im in need of a ground engaging tractor actually - so this is important to me.

It is my feeling that a manual shift gear tranny would be more rugged than the new fangled hydromatic stuff... But then again; I really dont know the capabilities of these tuff-torq trannies. (I have no problems with the tranny on my 2046 Scotts at this time.

I had to sharpen blades today - and I got the deck off the machine. I had pretty good access to the front half of the FILTHY tranny ... (cooling fins were badly clogged on the front not good - as the transmission mounted fan can not do its cooling job effectively. It is these types of maintenance issues that can turn around to bite you years down the road... I bought this mower used last fall - so little by little im going over it and giving it what it needs.

You might want to consider how handy you are - will you be maintaining your stuff ?

i would advise - that you NOT get caught up in the HP wars. and concentrate on the other important factors like deck size (will it fit in your shed :) and purposes beyond mowing the lawn. Plowing and towing rock and wood can kill the tranny on a regular riding mower - if you over do it.

Others will argue im sure - but unless your dealing with steep hills on property you do NOT need 20 HP... It is a rugged tranny which will do your mountain climbing for you... But most peopler will have you believing that the biggest motor is what is required to get up the hills. (this simply is not true) - Although generally speaking you get the bigger trannies with bigger motors.

where my ideal next toy has a heavy duty tranny with a little gas sipper motor... ( im actually considering a small 1965+- Wheel Horse ) As this machine has the small motor (+- 8HP) - and the beefy tranny im looking for...

Think small - Hopes this helps a bit.

Dave

Thanks all. I agree for my property and needs, high HP isn't a top preference. I just want something that will last, cut faster than now, and not spend too much. Should be easy, right?
My original post was based on the Craftsman but am considering the Deere, Cub, and Husky in the same price range. Seems when on sale the Sears mowers suit me as well as any. I've found many mixed reviews on the budget Deere's, not much good on the Cub's and the Husky's are a bit pricier. If I was an impulse buyer, the Cub would be in my garage.
Any further feedback is appreciated. Thanks!

I don't have any input regarding the relative fuel usage between a single or Twin, but when I was shopping for a lawn tractor about 3 years ago, I did some shopping including test drives. I ended up making my final decision between three different John Deere models, the L111, LT150 & LT160.

The LT150 & LT160 had a Kohler Command single cylinder engine (15 & 16 Hp respectively), and the L111 had a Briggs Intek 20hp V-twin. There were certain aspects of build that I preferred on the LT series tractors, but the decision really boiled down to the engine for me. The V-twin was significantly smoother and quieter than the single on the LT tractors. I decided to purchase the L111, and have enjoyed using it the last 3 years. If I had a decision to make again, I would most likely again favor a V-twin to a single.

Personally, the fuel savings will be negligible as the single will be doing alot more work than the dual (pehaps not quite twice the amount). As far as balance is concerned, the dual wins evey time. Not to mention the noise factor and vibration factor. There is absolutely no 'benefit' to a single cylinder engine over a dual (perhaps cost to some degree and size). The size really does not matter as you wont be carrying it on your back. As far as cost, well that's totally up to the individual. There was no mention of initual purchase cost in the original question. What you find when you look at all the models is that the lower cost tractors have single cylinder as the cost is substantially less (almost half the parts.) Bottom line, if you can afford a dual-->Get it.

Before I bought my GT225 I first test drove a GT235 twin, and I fell in love with it. That's what I thought I wanted. I mostly liked the way it fit me, and the way it handled. I was doing research on that opinion site on posts of owners of the GT225 and 235. The 225 owners just gushed praise on the tractor. The 235 owners did to, but one or too did mention that they thought it used too much gas: as compared to what I don't remember them saying.

I don't know how much smoother a twin is than a single. I think it is a non-issue on a riding mower as long as the engine is balanced. All I know is that I don't notice any vibration I could ascribe to the engine.

That and I have been extremely happy with the fuel use on the tractor. The only thing I have sort of wish was different is that I wish I had a 48" deck that I could switch to when I am going out to mow the field, but not enough to buy one.

JTB

My neighbor just bought a JD LA115 with a 19.5HP Briggs single on it and it is extremely loud, it sounds like an airplane is getting ready to take off. I have a 15HP Kaw. Twin on mine and it purrs like a kitten and sips gas. I enjoy mowing and would not want the ride ruined by all that noise (I am not saying all singles are noisy, but his is bad). Of course, plenty of people buy noisy Harley's and seem to like them just fine.