Stupid ish question. Obviously having front and back mover takes half (ish) the time. Does it also mean you use half the fuel (or does the extra power needed use about the same? )
Good question! 😀I would assume it will be less, it will take x amount of power to move the wheels, run the aircon etc, so if your doubling the output yet keeping those nearly the same. Fuel is really a low cost though compared to, the depreciation per hour/ labour costs, and it will lower that significantly.
You use less fuel per acre, but more fuel power hour. The mowers take more driving, 8-10 horsepower per foot used to be the recommendation depending on crop, whether it’s conditioned, how hilly the land is etc.
Good evening joe I'm out of hospital just came home tonight
Great video Joe
When you said about the view what direction we’re you looking at because all I could see was rooftops
the last time you was in that field mowing it was set on fire
Mowing so satisfying
You ever do the danger shift last?
Stupid ish question. Obviously having front and back mover takes half (ish) the time. Does it also mean you use half the fuel (or does the extra power needed use about the same? )
Good question
Good question! 😀I would assume it will be less, it will take x amount of power to move the wheels, run the aircon etc, so if your doubling the output yet keeping those nearly the same.
Fuel is really a low cost though compared to, the depreciation per hour/ labour costs, and it will lower that significantly.
@@joeseels great answer Joe 👍😊😊
You use less fuel per acre, but more fuel power hour.
The mowers take more driving, 8-10 horsepower per foot used to be the recommendation depending on crop, whether it’s conditioned, how hilly the land is etc.
Second
Don't think much for the music your playing
first lol