Talk:Lawn mower/Archives/2015

This is an archive of past discussions about Lawn mower. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Can we add section for lawn mower parts and accessories

Beindustrial (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

What sort of information had you in mind? You could add extra information on parts and accessories available for each type of mower. (If you meant an advertising section, then don't bother because any commercial additions will be reverted.) Dbfirs 14:36, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I am thinking about specific parts and accessories for each type of lawn mower, with brief description. This is because I am planning to create separate articles on lawn mower parts and accessories that covers broader horizons. Nope, I am not planning to add commercial and promotional links, don't worry about that. Thanks again! (Beindustrial (talk) 14:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC))

Hello! I've added the "Main Parts" section for the Reel mower and Rotary Mower. You may check it and see if there is something you want me to remove or add some info. Here are my sources for the "Main Parts"section ^{[1] [2] [3]} By the way, as I was researching, I've also found some info for the "Safety" section you have. Can I add those information as well? I saw it from a publication from National Safety Council. Beindustrial (talk) 15:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I've made a few minor adjustments. Are hydraulic drives common? I would have thought that they would be used only on the very largest machines. By all means go ahead with your safety section as long as you don't just copy text from the publication. Dbfirs 02:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The smallest hydrostatic drive machine was the Dynamow.[1] This was a UK machine, developed specifically as a ride-on for UK gardens. These are smaller and more densely planted than US gardens, so ride-ons are very rarely useful here in the UK. They don't fit in the space and they can't mow close enough to borders or planting. The Dynamow was approximately a tricycle, driven by a front wheel that could swivel far enough to allow a turn almost within its own length.

The wheels were small diameter and little more than rollers - mostly because of the British obsession with striped lawns. As a result they didn't have good rough ground performance and could only mow a lawn that had already been mown quite recently. If a lawn was neglected for a while, a different mower might be needed to give it the first cut. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:25, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I changed the wording in the article to say that battery disposal was "problematic". The reason I did this was because the article said "Disposal of worn-out batteries may negate the environmental advantages".

The main environmental advantage of electric/battery mowers is that they use electricity, which, when combined with renewable power sources, makes it a zero-emission (zero carbon dioxide produced) mower.

The problem of battery disposal does not "negate" the zero-emission advantage at all. So long as battery disposal is done properly, no damage to the environment need result. But even if the batteries did damage the environment (eg by leaking chemicals) carbon emissions still remain potentially at zero. --One Salient Oversight (talk) 06:40, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

While battery lawn mowers are a good idea but the problem with disposing old batteries, is not environmentally friendly compared to an all 120volt electric mower, that's the most earth friendly mower you can buy.--198.23.70.235 (talk) 23:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

(Pedantry warning:) The 240v mower that I use is more earth-friendly by a very tiny margin because of lower losses in the cable. Dbfirs 07:03, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Electric-powered mowers are only more environmentally friendly than fuel-powered ones if the electricity comes from renewable sources, otherwise they're still using fuel, albeit at the power station rather than in engines. As far as I'm aware, the distribution of electricity results in a not insignificant wastage of energy, so it's possible that, from the point of view of energy efficiency, electric-powered mowers may be less efficient than fuel-powered ones. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 02:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

That just doesn't stack up. The inefficiencies in electrical distribution are far small than the inefficiencies in small engines. There's also the issue of pollution, something that petroil-lubricated two strokes are terribly bad for. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:59, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

You may be right. I only said "it's possible". My main intention was to counter any notion that electric mowers are somehow automatically carbon-friendly. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, electricity in general is not entirely carbon-friendly, but old-style lawn-mower engines are notoriously inefficient and unfriendly to the environment. Dbfirs 07:03, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Would it be worthwhile to add a SHORT section on the previous means of mowing lawns? eg sheep, scythes, shears and geese. Thus showing what the invention of mechanical lawn mowers achieved. SovalValtos (talk) 00:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I support the addition. (Please see wikt:shear and wikt:sheer.)—Wavelength (talk) 00:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I would think that a sentence, rather than a separate section, would be adequate. Dbfirs 06:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

One of the inventors mentioned in the article John Burr was an African American. I added that information into the article.

 - Wouldn't that be a reel mower he developed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.179.126 (talk) 03:03, 20 December 2015 (UTC)