Big Bud guy

There is this. A JD 330 painted IH red from the factory for the Ohio Highway department because head of the department was an IH guy and would only take on the 330s if they were IH red. There was 4 total.

Honestly, to me the 4020 is like the Farmall M or H and JD B or A. They made so damn many of them I really don’t care to own one again or even drive one again. There are a couple other 20 series I would rather own before a 4020.

No doubt synchros were more popular but our 4020 was a powershift. I’ve run into several more 4020s and other 20 series with powershifts. I’ve even run into a few 40 series with powershifts not counting the 4840. What’s funny is redpower is the only place on the internet were “powershifts were nonexistent in my area”. I bet JD built just many powershift 4020s as IH built 806s.

Running a pump and being able to use other functions at the same time. CC hydraulics might not have been a huge advantage in 1971 but by the 1976 that’s were the industry was heading. Even Versatile and Steiger had to add them in the 80s. Plus if you were one of those that kept a tractor for 20+ years but updated implements JDs were more capable.

The syncro shift pattern didn’t bother me because you couldn’t shift up or down anyway once the plow was in the ground. For transporting or hauling I always thought being able to start in 6th and go to 8 was handy or when pulling a heavy load start in 4th and go to 7th. The thing you forget is if you didn’t like the syncro you could always get the powershift. IMO, JD gave you superior choices. I would much rather have to decide between a syncro/quadrange and powershift vs a 16 speed TA and hydro.

I think I've seen before why you prefer the 66 series but if you had to farm the way we did, which is spending hours, days, and weeks on tractors there is no way in he!! you would want a 66 series. Everyone one I see around here has the cab trashed and doors taken off. Tells me they weren't a good cab in the first place. Only way I would take a 66 series is for stationary PTO work.

Not saying you said any of this but the internet is a funny place because likewise I didn't know doorposts, mystery synchro shifts, curved glass, front mounted fuel tanks, and overlapping gears was an issue either.

The 30 series came out in 72 so the 86s would have only had one year alone. My beef really isn't with the cab which I can tolerate easy if I'm not getting in/out 100 times a day. Problem is for a series introduced in 1976 to still use a dry clutch TA open centered hydraulics was just lacking. Its amazing that it took IH 5 years to replace the 66 series when all they did was put a good cab on a 66 body. Heck JD was ready for to put he SGB on the market during the 4020 days. I've always wondered if screwing around with the 2+2 development and trying to push hydro tractors took away from time and money that should have been spent on the regular row crop tractor lineup.

The 55/95 got the 303 in both gas and diesel in 1967. I have a 1969 55 diesel 303 and 1967 95 303 gas. JD did away with those 2010 engines in the tractors in 65 or 66 when they switched over to the 20 series.

So which combine was the roundback?? I've only seen three 105 roundbacks. 2 of them had Chevy 327s or 350s cobbled in. 95H with a diesel would be a rare bird. For others who don't know, the regular 55/95s up to 1967 and round back 105s used the 6 cylinder version of the engine used in the 2010. And the 2010 was one of the worst tractors JD ever made. You only see gas 95s around here and they help up alright. I know few were still running into the early 90s. It was the diesel version on the tractor side that was supposedly junk and so I assume the diesel 248 wasn't any better.

There is a reason why don't see any of these headers too. The 410 was supposedly the first 4 row corn header on the market and could be mounted on the 95 or 105. This header is actually two 210 headers hung onto the feederhouse. The feederhouse remained stationary and each header could be independently moved up/down. The header was driven off of the cylinder shaft and from what I read used a sh!tload of chains. And took some much horsepower to run that it would kill a 95 if you didn't have the engine full throttle.

Picked this up too. Manual for a round-back JD 105. Real roundback 105s are hard to come since they weren’t near as popular as the squareback ones. It was a combination of them not being a very good combine and probably being super expensive for being top of the line. Took a few years for combines this size to catch on. BTW, the 105 was initially built in response to the IH 181.

So were did the New Idea balers come in? Were they offered the same time as the Hesston made balers?

We traded our 760 off for a 8820. We bought the 760 new but because JD's were so much more expensive we traded for a used 8820 that had the same separator hours as the 760 which was about 900. At those hours the flighting on all the augers on the 760 was wore paper thin, the bottom of the feederhouse was almost wore through. The 8820 still had square edges on the augers and didn't look anywhere near wore out across the machine. We had both combines parked together for a few days and you could just tell the 8820 was built heavier so it didn't surprise me to find out a 7700 weighed almost as much as 760. Thats why I can't fathom how you guys in rice country got any life out of a Massey. My opinion the only thing Massey had on JD and the competition was the high inertia cylinder. That was handy picking up swaths.

New idea also made round balers for either IH or CIH.