Jump to content

Off color - Oliver 1655 diesel?


Recommended Posts

Have friend that is considering a 1655 diesel.  He is small hobby farm.  Had 6-8 cows, bales a little hay, but buys most of his feed.  Tractor would do light tillage, firewood duties, and mostly be used for plowing snow and feeding hay in northern MN.

i haven’t been around any Oliver other than a gas 1550 that I drove twice.

condition aside, is there anything to look out for on these?

he looked at a 674 diesel, but the guy wanted too much and it had issues. He has also looked at a  656 gas that was way too high but in good condition.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the Waukesha engine.  I don't hear about much trouble with these on the 1655 but the bigger ones with turbos liked to break wrist pins and connecting rods. They are handy tractors for yard work. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Worked on a lot of Olivers and the 1550-1655 are my favorite and the engine is the most trouble free. Basically the same engine reliability as the 77-880's engines. Came down to no turbo-no trouble. The same can't be said for the larger chassis Olivers. Pulled a lot of those with ventilated blocks. Even patched a few when the crank was ok. I would put bearings and rod bolts in it if it hasn't been done. I have a 656 Hydro and love it. But between a 656 gear drive and a 1655 Oliver, the Oliver would be my choice.

As far as things that with age like any thing can give trouble. The pto drive hub in the flywheel. There's an elbow update under the seat casting that can break and you loose 3 point. probably been done. O/U shift if its been neglected(no oil/old filter). Chain couple sprockets/chain. If it has the optional hi-speed transmission(19-21 mph range) I would shy away from it. The input gear would go bad with high hour tillage use and as far as I know they are NLA. You can convert it by changing the gears, but they will go 28-30 mph when your done because of the R/P.  

Hope this helps.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

image.thumb.jpeg.cbb87326146116ab3ee06e537c69ee70.jpeg

here is a screenshot of what he is looking at.  I don’t think he’s been there in person.  

Other than general condition and confirming function of hydraulics, gears, brakes, hitch, pto, etc.

anything to really check out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, cedar farm said:

Worked on a lot of Olivers and the 1550-1655 are my favorite and the engine is the most trouble free. Basically the same engine reliability as the 77-880's engines. Came down to no turbo-no trouble. The same can't be said for the larger chassis Olivers. Pulled a lot of those with ventilated blocks. Even patched a few when the crank was ok. I would put bearings and rod bolts in it if it hasn't been done. I have a 656 Hydro and love it. But between a 656 gear drive and a 1655 Oliver, the Oliver would be my choice.

As far as things that with age like any thing can give trouble. The pto drive hub in the flywheel. There's an elbow update under the seat casting that can break and you loose 3 point. probably been done. O/U shift if its been neglected(no oil/old filter). Chain couple sprockets/chain. If it has the optional hi-speed transmission(19-21 mph range) I would shy away from it. The input gear would go bad with high hour tillage use and as far as I know they are NLA. You can convert it by changing the gears, but they will go 28-30 mph when your done because of the R/P.  

Hope this helps.

Never been around a Oliver diesel except a 1850 with a Perkins. Have worked on a bunch of gas engines ones and they are a nice tractor. Want to buy a 2/85 or 2/105 white sometime just to have one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like a 2-105 myself to plant/spray with. I use a 706D/4020 now but as I get older the springs are getting colder and the summers are getting hotter. My tillage tractor is a 2-135 and I like their cab. If they just would have put that Perkins in the 1855 with its improved brakes/hydraulics it would have saved White a lot of grief.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, cedar farm said:

If they just would have put that Perkins in the 1855 with its improved brakes/hydraulics it would have saved White a lot of grief.

+1, that would have been a heck of a tractor.  I love the '55's, but the big ones with that stupid 310 was dumb from the word go, atleast they should have took a road trip to visit the Krauts to understand how to build a 310 cube engine that you didn't need to cross your fingers every time you started it that it would not do block renovations.  

Late 1850's with an over/under were a heck of a tractor, the brakes and closed center hydraulics of a 55 with the 354 Perk would have made a great tractor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That tractor is pretty much bulletproof. Not enough horsepower to hurt that Waukesha. 

The ones that ate wrist pins are the 1855’s. Turbocharged that motor and they just grenaded themselves. 

There is/was a new rod update that took care of that issue if you ever need to go into that motor.

The 3 speed freewheels in UNDER drive. So be aware of that. That’s probably going to be as decent tractor for the money as your going to find.

I’m not certain but those ‘55 series should have hydraulic brakes which in my opinion is more desirable than the dry “ maybe I’ll stop, maybe I won’t “ brakes of the ‘50 series.

 I wouldn’t be afraid of it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ihfan4life said:

That tractor is pretty much bulletproof. Not enough horsepower to hurt that Waukesha. 

The ones that ate wrist pins are the 1855’s. Turbocharged that motor and they just grenaded themselves. 

There is/was a new rod update that took care of that issue if you ever need to go into that motor.

The 3 speed freewheels in UNDER drive. So be aware of that. That’s probably going to be as decent tractor for the money as your going to find.

I’m not certain but those ‘55 series should have hydraulic brakes which in my opinion is more desirable than the dry “ maybe I’ll stop, maybe I won’t “ brakes of the ‘50 series.

 I wouldn’t be afraid of it.

Thanks.  Exactly the kind of information I’m looking for.

please keep information coming if you have it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe the 15's and 16's had the hydraulic brakes?  17's and up were the ones I believe unless my mind is failing again, which it might be, although in a 1655 and 656 size tractor isn't not a big deal.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the larger chassis 55 series got the hydraulic brakes. 1755-2255. If I remember correct when they came out with the 60/80 American series in the late 80's then they added hyd brakes. Those were based on the 1655 chassis but with a Cummins 4BT.

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

the brakes and closed center hydraulics of a 55 with the 354 Perk would have made a great tractor.

That IS a 2-105 lol! Great tractors! The 1650/55 are also fantastic 70hp tractors, which lived on as the 2-70. The NA 283 Waukesha rarely gave any trouble at that power level. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, TP from Central PA said:

I don't believe the 15's and 16's had the hydraulic brakes?  17's and up were the ones I believe unless my mind is failing again, which it might be, although in a 1655 and 656 size tractor isn't not a big deal.  

I guess I expected that they updated the whole series? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, cedar farm said:

60/80 American series in the late 80's then they added hyd brakes. Those were based on the 1655 chassis but with a Cummins 4BT.

We have an 80 on the farm, toughest hardest pulling little tractor you could ever want. Brother owns it now (7000+ hard hours) and wants to convert brakes over to "wet" as they are the same old dry brake that Oliver used for years and the worst problem with the tractor. 

Dad was on a trip years ago and we installed a 2nd turbo on it and was injecting water in the intake while on dyno. Dad came home a day earlier than we thought, walked in the shop as we where pulling its guts out 189 hp. He only said "boys put that tractor back right" walked out the door. To this day he has never said another word about it. I think he was secretly impressed. 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Injpumped said:

That IS a 2-105 lol! Great tractors! The 1650/55 are also fantastic 70hp tractors, which lived on as the 2-70. The NA 283 Waukesha rarely gave any trouble at that power level. 

I understand that, but it was alittle late and had no style like the 55's did........they were a good looking tractor IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CIHTECH said:

We have an 80 on the farm, toughest hardest pulling little tractor you could ever want. Brother owns it now (7000+ hard hours) and wants to convert brakes over to "wet" as they are the same old dry brake that Oliver used for years and the worst problem with the tractor. 

Dad was on a trip years ago and we installed a 2nd turbo on it and was injecting water in the intake while on dyno. Dad came home a day earlier than we thought, walked in the shop as we where pulling its guts out 189 hp. He only said "boys put that tractor back right" walked out the door. To this day he has never said another word about it. I think he was secretly impressed. 

I knew they were still dry brakes, but I thought they had a hydraulic piston instead of an actuator. My memory is fading.  Went to service school on them when they came out. I was really surprised they didn't sell better as the MFD models were pretty handy and bullet proof . The only complaint was the early one's did not have the Cummins with the internal balancer and would vibrate a bit. Its funny with 189 hp it probably would have held up pretty good unless you weighted the snot out of it. Its great when dad can be impressed whether he says it or not.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read through threads , excellent review of this tractor by everyone. 
I was a fan of the 1855 . I just liked the style . Had never heard of the rod problems . 
I heard they are a easy and comfortable tractor , which mean a a lot baling  all day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, 560Dennis said:

Read through threads , excellent review of this tractor by everyone. 
I was a fan of the 1855 . I just liked the style . Had never heard of the rod problems . 
I heard they are a easy and comfortable tractor , which mean a a lot baling  all day. 

Neighbor had an 1850 which he than traded for an 1855 four wheel drive.

The 1855 had a rod come out the side. If I remember right I think the rod bolts would break and than it would grenade itself. Some of the other guys probably know for sure.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Ihfan4life said:

Neighbor had an 1850 which he than traded for an 1855 four wheel drive.

The 1855 had a rod come out the side. If I remember right I think the rod bolts would break and than it would grenade itself. Some of the other guys probably know for sure.

That’s a crying shame

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Grampy had a Cockshutt 1655 he bought new, my cousin owns it currently 

It was a great tractor, it was one of my favourites at his farm, it really boogied down the road, he bought it in 72 iirc, he later bought a 2-105, 2-85 and an Oliver 1850, all three of them left the farm in time and he still had the 1655, It would be safe say he liked the Cockshutt
 

I mowed about 60 acres of field gone to weed, full of mustard, with a 1650 and a 10 foot bush hog, I was going a little slower to be easy on equipment and conserve fuel, running in underdrive, when it started getting boring I would shift to direct, it got a little louder and had some black smoke, shift to over, rolling the smoke, sounded amazing, feel the heat coming off the exhaust manifold side, then shift back down to under for another ten rounds, I really like them

I’m not an expert mechanic for these models but I have found a heavy pull/early shift into road gear can show a bad over/under

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago I went to a tractor pull and one farmer had a 1950 with the Detroit  4-53 2 stroker. Had a curved straight pipe aimed right into the roof covered grandstands. People were coughing and gagging and holding their breath. :o

  • Haha 2
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...