Rob,
Thanks for the good link to the Textron/Jacobsen site and the information from your experience with them. They have a Jacobsen model HR 4600Turbo that I've been looking at for quite some time. It would do well, converted to electric using the heavy duty Elec-Trak deck motors, however, it is already over $20K so we'd have to find a good source for used ones of these in good condition, to convert. It would be nicer to have it operate on 48 volts, however, as a lot of more high tech controllers, etc. will be available to us in that voltage. I've included a link to it for "re-enginering" evaluation. http://www.ttcsp.com/2/products4b.asp?Product_Id=12&search.x=9&search.y=13
Gary Woodard
Rob Hahn <rhahn execpc com> wrote:
I just checked the site and they are still advertising the Ransomes model.
I had little to do with this product as the design originated before the
merger.
Bear in mind this is a professional piece of specialized equipment and
priced accordingly. The only thing this machine was designed to was to cut
grass very, very short.
They also sell an electric version of a Trap rake. This is used to maintain
the sand trap. Another company, Smithco, also sells a similar machine.
For your information, I have included a link to the mower data.
http://www.ttcsp.com/2/products4b.asp?Product_Id=34&search.x=11&search.y=11
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: (ET) Jacobsen Electric Mower
> hi, thanks for the info on these machines. so you think they still make
an
> electric mower like the one you describe? i was also wondering if there
> would be any advantages of this machine over an electrak.
> the et's were made near here, albany ny, so they're not too hard to
find
> here. i've been using them for 10 yrs, and never enjoyed the chore more.
> the kids hardly get a chance.
> i have 2 not yet running machines that might be good for someone with
> electrical experience. but even novice that i am., they're pretty easy to
> get running.
> the fusible link on the et is pretty much off by itself, i didn't know
> why till your note. thanks for the info, jon k
>