Jump to content
SuperWD9

Tractors that weren’t made but should have been.

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, sandhiller said:

I don't know what this is or if it even existed, but I kinda want one. 

da22afaa3b48229c1f5aed94bdaf9872.jpg

Could someone tell me more about this wanna be IH Uni system clone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, dale560 said:

Our local John Deere owner a few years ago had a jd elevating scraper. He said it was the 5020 industrial tractor(  700 maybe) but had full power shift. He always said imagine jd had a 125 hp powershift in 1970 already.

Put the 6030 powershift on the "Tractors that weren’t made but should have been" list.  I think someone over at YTmag is actually trying to make one.  According to my info JD was fully capable of producing a 5020 powershift.  Reason they didn't was because the NA 531 was operating right at the upper end of its power and couldn't be pumped up any further to overcome the parasitic losses associated with the powershift and match the drawbar pull of a syncro.  Essentially a 5020 with a powershift would turn it back into a 5010.  For wheatland farmers who wanted maximum power all day in one gear, that would have been an issue.  Maybe not so much in scraper duty were you are changing speeds constantly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dale560 said:

Our local John Deere owner a few years ago had a jd elevating scraper. He said it was the 5020 industrial tractor(  700 maybe) but had full power shift. He always said imagine jd had a 125 hp powershift in 1970 already.

4520 PS     ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had 3 JD  (8 speed) powershift tractors. In ways I think that transmission is crude but it's ok but....... every green and yellow guy I know HATES these powershift tractors. The green guys that I know wouldn't have bought them at all

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 1480x3 said:

4520 PS     ?

4520/4620 are 4630 size 5020 6030 were all by themself. He always told me it was 5020 size. He knew his John Deere’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, dale560 said:

4520/4620 are 4630 size 5020 6030 were all by themself. He always told me it was 5020 size. He knew his John Deere’s.

Agree but I believe the 45 was 122 hp which to me puts it in the 125 hp category of tractors is what I was getting at .   But I could be mistaken on the 45s rating

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TP from Central PA said:

Could someone tell me more about this wanna be IH Uni system clone?

I don't think there is much more to it than the prototype drawings-  when the Unis took off, IH considered getting into the market but decided there wasn't a future for two companies and New Idea had too much of a head start.  Just as well far as I'm concerned,  probably would have diverted resources from Axial Flow development

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1480x3 said:

Agree but I believe the 45 was 122 hp which to me puts it in the 125 hp category of tractors is what I was getting at .   But I could be mistaken on the 45s rating

I think you're right.  I remember always hearing how gutless the 45 was, although I never ran one myself.  Same friend I mentioned earlier ran a 4520 power shift for a guy - trying to pull 6 - 16s in gumbo.  Mile long rows in first gear made it really hard to stay awake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1480x3 said:

Agree but I believe the 45 was 122 hp which to me puts it in the 125 hp category of tractors is what I was getting at .   But I could be mistaken on the 45s rating

The scraper tractor dale is referring to was the 760A.  It was a 5020 with a powershift modified for a scraper.  https://www.johnnypopper.com/weirddeere/NG/The_JD760.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a while I’ve wondered why IH had the 100 and 130 series tractors from 1954-1958 and didnt just build one series and run for it for that period of time. Nothing against the two tractor series’s but just what I’ve thought. 

This kinda goes with what was said earlier but it would have been interesting to see the 706 and 806 introduced in 1958 and maybe the 1206 in 1960? Then they would have really stayed ahead of the game I think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bitty said:

We had 3 JD  (8 speed) powershift tractors. In ways I think that transmission is crude but it's ok but....... every green and yellow guy I know HATES these powershift tractors. The green guys that I know wouldn't have bought them at all

Compared to the 15 its crude, IMO compared to the Quad it's amazing..........the field speeds aren't the greatest, but it's sure a tough setup.    I not a massive fan of them, but the 40 series with an 8 spd was hard to the competition to beat,  especially the 4440,4640,and 4840.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 660 driver said:

The 560 rear end debacle likely wouldnt have happened then too and IH woulda weathered a letter series debacle much better i believe since the entire letter series was bulletproof.

I was watching my Farmington Implement videos last week, one said 10% or less of the 560's actually had rearend problems, but IH rebuilt them ALL. I bet more than 10% of Deere 3010/4010's had rearend & transmission failures and all Deere did was hand the owner a huge bill.

If IH would have built a bigger rowcrop it would definitely had a stronger transmission & rearend, it would have had more gear speeds, IH was playing with 8-speeds around 1950. Live hyd, live pto, and an early version of the TA.

The lower market share companies would have never stood a chance. I think IH spent too much effort competing against a horse or mule on small farms, they let the BIG rowcrop farmer get away from them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TP from Central PA said:

Compared to the 15 its crude, IMO compared to the Quad it's amazing..........the field speeds aren't the greatest, but it's sure a tough setup.    I not a massive fan of them, but the 40 series with an 8 spd was hard to the competition to beat,  especially the 4440,4640,and 4840.

I would never own a quad range. The only thing appealing to those tractors was that powershift transmission (that's it to me)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was a 826 hydro,,,1026 hydro,,,, how bout a 1226hydro???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, IHhogfarmer said:

For a while I’ve wondered why IH had the 100 and 130 series tractors from 1954-1958 and didnt just build one series and run for it for that period of time. Nothing against the two tractor series’s but just what I’ve thought. 

This kinda goes with what was said earlier but it would have been interesting to see the 706 and 806 introduced in 1958 and maybe the 1206 in 1960? Then they would have really stayed ahead of the game I think. 

The 100 series was a facelift with some improvements in hydraulics ect freshend up the line enough to generate some sales.  In YOUR area and say from Kansas Dakotas Colorado and west  im guessing in 1958 a 706/806 size tractor would have been a hit. But in from say Iowa on east there were a lot of smaller farms and guys who been thru the depresion and were not gonna spend money on some big fancy tractor and the equippment to go with when the old M was paid for and big enough to meet their needs, they might buy a 560 but an 806 might have been too big a step for many in 58. Gotta remember there were some old guys having retirement sales in the early 70s that still had Ms as their big tractor. I bought a 3 bottom plow 15 or 20 years ago from an old fellow who ran 2 M's and a 37 ih disc and the plow till he retired. Dont recall what year he quit but had to be late 70s at least. One friend told about his wifes grandpa still farming with horses into the late 60s iirc. Unusual in iowa at that time but there were a few hold outs. Easy to look back 50 plus years and say what should have been but things were a bit diff then. 58 may or may not have been a bit too early for the 806. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a bit directional tractor that is not articulated? A 966 sized tractor you could drive backwards would have alot of uses.

IH had industrial power shifts as well. A friend had a large IH scraper with a power shift.

The JD power shifts were. Not liked here until the 15 speed came out

Thx-Ace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iowaboy1965 said:

The 100 series was a facelift with some improvements in hydraulics ect freshend up the line enough to generate some sales.  In YOUR area and say from Kansas Dakotas Colorado and west  im guessing in 1958 a 706/806 size tractor would have been a hit. But in from say Iowa on east there were a lot of smaller farms and guys who been thru the depresion and were not gonna spend money on some big fancy tractor and the equippment to go with when the old M was paid for and big enough to meet their needs, they might buy a 560 but an 806 might have been too big a step for many in 58. Gotta remember there were some old guys having retirement sales in the early 70s that still had Ms as their big tractor. I bought a 3 bottom plow 15 or 20 years ago from an old fellow who ran 2 M's and a 37 ih disc and the plow till he retired. Dont recall what year he quit but had to be late 70s at least. One friend told about his wifes grandpa still farming with horses into the late 60s iirc. Unusual in iowa at that time but there were a few hold outs. Easy to look back 50 plus years and say what should have been but things were a bit diff then. 58 may or may not have been a bit too early for the 806. 

The 100 was a totally different tractor than a Super A.  larger engine, fast hitch, available spin out wheels, different gearing. The 130 was a DuPont makeover to look like the rest of the line.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eason said:

The 100 was a totally different tractor than a Super A.  larger engine, fast hitch, available spin out wheels, different gearing. The 130 was a DuPont makeover to look like the rest of the line.

Totaly misread that thought he was including the 300/400s as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What they should have done is get Harry Ferguson, the folks that designed the DT466, the guys who built the first power shift from both Ford and Cat. Toss these guys in a room, give em a build/test facility and crew there and see what they would come up with.

 

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the 8 speed M.  They made an experimental that's still around.  It would have been great back then especially if they had adapted it to the T/A.  I imagine the introduction of the T/A is why they never made the 8 speed in production.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ihcubguy said:

How about the 8 speed M.  They made an experimental that's still around.  It would have been great back then especially if they had adapted it to the T/A.  I imagine the introduction of the T/A is why they never made the 8 speed in production.

Agree with you, but how about more reverse speeds? A single faster reverse would have been nice. Heck even though the 60’s the 504 only had one reverse and TA, so slow and slower. Oliver had two reverse speeds on the Fleetlines or maybe before?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, 12_Guy said:

Agree with you, but how about more reverse speeds? A single faster reverse would have been nice. Heck even though the 60’s the 504 only had one reverse and TA, so slow and slower. Oliver had two reverse speeds on the Fleetlines or maybe before?

That is what I didn't like about my 504, was the ultra slow reverse and using the front end loader.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ihcubguy said:

How about the 8 speed M.  They made an experimental that's still around.  It would have been great back then especially if they had adapted it to the T/A.  I imagine the introduction of the T/A is why they never made the 8 speed in production.

I thought M&W was the answer to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bitty said:

I would never own a quad range. The only thing appealing to those tractors was that powershift transmission (that's it to me)

The thing I didn't like about the Quads is stopping(or you should) between ranges, and the gear steps if you look at it on a chart does not make a ton of sense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a glorified quad range (24-speed actually) in 8960 . The thing I absolutely hated about that if you're backing up you have to shift it up through first gear to get to neutral...... I don't think they could ever put in neutral at a stupider place even if they spend a whole lot of time to figure out where it could be worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...