Ha! That argument will drive you crazy as there is no set-in-stone definition and many will define it based on the equipment they personally own. The last thread discussing that devolved into "Nothing but a SCUT is a GT" It was strange and I just showed myself to the door before I became too irritated.
Here's my OPINION
on new GTs: No new GT is gonna be like the old GTs. For new GTs I look at the weight of the machine and the hydrostat. The Husqvarna has the hydrostat of a light GT but the weight of a lawn tractor. I wish that all new GTs could be like the heyday of older heavy GTs but that day is gone and the closest thing to that nowadays is the JD X700 series and Simplicity Legacy series. Cost on those is so close to SCUT territory I'd rather buy the SCUT and have a PTO if I needed that much more power.
For a MOWER for bigger properties, the TS Husqvarna is a good deal. If you want a GT, buy something older with more weight and steel in it.
You get it, Husqvarna miss-represents their product.
And, as for your opinion, I respect that, especially when it's given as such, up front. That's the whole stance (just be up front or properly represent your product) I promised Husqvarna I would take when "they" chose to not honor my warranty with their written lies, I confronted them with. (I told them "I'm left with no other choice but to warn people as much as I can" to beware (be aware) of Husqvarna Garden Tractors and their worthless warranty).
(all I've asked since then from Husqvarna, a public apology to my Wife and I, and to properly represent their product, if that's tooo hard for them, at least publicly debate my accusations, and their written statement of reasons for warranty denial, and my evidence, out in the open, a year ago. Husqvarna's response.....yeah, that's too hard for them too. I'm keeping my word)
About the definition.....
The manufacturing secter has specific rules in order to be in compliance. I have many credentialed places I can point to that are regulated by our Government and by themselves through agreements, but this is enough, for now.
It's really as simple as starting right here,
1) Is there an official organization that is responsible for defining and compliance of safety, and for what?
YES! Even John Deere advertises openly in their compliance with OPEI.
Outdoor Power Equipment Institute. OPEI.
2) If it matters to the manufacturers, then it should probably matter to the customer.
3) Who within this organization creates the definition for US manufacturing compliance?
The list of manufacturers are in the pdf I supplied and look in particular to......Husqvarna. Yep, they are on the list of contributing manufacturer members. Also, it would be illegal for Husqvarna to sell one tractor out of compliance with OPEI, so how do they skirt the definition and compliance part? Ever notice what the TS354D is listed as by category of tractor? Yeah..."Riding Lawn Mower" and their warranty has zero allowance for using Garden Tractor implements, all other use is denied by abuse or modification clauses (and others), and has zero classification for Garden Tractor, in the warranty they are Ridding Lawn Mowers only, again in compliance with OPEI. I think the answer is somewhere in here.
But, remember, OPEI defines Garden Tractor with it's own definition! Husqvarna miss-represents their Garden Tractor for many other reason's, too include their unwaivering support for their unethical Dealers. (there are ethical one's too)
When a person buys a Chevy 3500 (1 ton+ classification) the customer can look up what the official standards for manufacture are and have a reasonable expectation that it will safely and competently haul 1 ton as it's payload. When it doesn't in accordance with the warranty period, the customer has a reasonable expectation that the warranty will be honored when their truck failed while using it in compliance with industry standards and the manufacturing standards, clearly defined. It's tooo easy.
Also, this definition has become stronger or more clear since 1979, maybe earlier, but I'm not listing a fact without holding the proof, as for me, opinions cost too much, and so, don't work for me, only proof. The definition with engineering standards is what the machine should be "capable" of, not opinion. That's the reason for the title, so as to keep it in line with the official definition. These aren't my words, and the evidence of OPEI's importance for manufacturing compliance is numerous, just look.
The ASABE has responsibility for engineering standards and force specifics for implements and the Garden Tractor (or Lawn Tractor). OPEI is responsible for the definition of Lawn or Garden Tractor, and the agreement for compliance of engineering standards according to their definition and the safety equipment for compliance.
There is a Lawn Tractor according to official standards. Fact.
There is a Garden Tractor according to official standards. Fact.
There is "no" defined official standards for, Light Garden Tractor (LGT), Yard Tractor (YT), or any other combination of marketing strategies. These categories are completely up to the manufacturer, to mean whatever they want. Fact.
It would not surprise me in the slightest if Husqvarna would not be interested in their customers knowing there are actual industry standards
. Don't worry, I have been doing my homework as promised, so I can make people "aware" of when they are being fleeced with or how at least, then it's up to them, at least they will have actual facts to be able to make their purchasing decision for themselves.
A copy is given to those that want the whole definition.
There have always been groups of people, ok with just belief. Right?
I've offered actual evidence. More than I can say for other's.