Jump to content
oldtech

Article on "Repairable Tractors" you might like

Recommended Posts

Cam across this on my facebook feed posted by a friend.

These guys mention John Deere but I think its an issue with all the manufacturers, right?

Vice Magazine - Repairable Tractors

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure I've read something similar to this a while back.

Something about a court case springs to mind??????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much stuff is throwaway now. Creates so much waste. I try and repair everything where possible. I don’t think the big tech. Companies should have such a grip on diagnostics. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, England806 said:

Too much stuff is throwaway now. Creates so much waste. I try and repair everything where possible. I don’t think the big tech. Companies should have such a grip on diagnostics. 

When someone purchases an item such as a piece of equipment, tractor, planter, etc. OR a vehicle, they assume they’re also purchased the right to repair it. It’s an issue that needs to be resolved. It’s one thing to get into the licensed software to change something, it’s something else to be able to access that software in order to fix something. There needs to be clear laws pertaining to these issues. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Pid 1831 said:

I'm sure I've read something similar to this a while back.

Something about a court case springs to mind??????

Yes, and for some reason Farm Bureau (aka Rural Insurance) has decided that they agree with the manufacturers.  Again and again my opinion of that outfit has gone steadily down.  Who buys their stupid insurance if not farmers?

https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pid 1831 said:

I'm sure I've read something similar to this a while back.

Something about a court case springs to mind??????

There is legislation in limbo involving right to repair. I know because it was only the second time in my life I've written my rep.

It's plainly unamerican to prohibit an owner from repairing his own property. American ingenuity can't be underestimated and shouldn't taken for granted. It should be encouraged and fostered -dare I say, cultivated. (groan)

 

https://repair.org/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KWRB said:

There is legislation in limbo involving right to repair. I know because it was only the second time in my life I've written my rep.

It's plainly unamerican to prohibit an owner from repairing his own property. American ingenuity can't be underestimated and shouldn't taken for granted. It should be encouraged and fostered -dare I say, cultivated. (groan)

 

https://repair.org/

The problem is that they are exploiting loop holes created by the fact that copyright laws never anticipated involvement in mechanical devices.  I dabble in theater a bit and I know that when even a community theater group puts on a show they are obligated to follow the script and then it has to be the correct licensed script too.  Recently there was a blow up over the new official script for the stage version of To Kill A Mockingbird where some high schools had licensed the original version but because a deal was cut between the author of the new one and the book's author's estate they schools were then banned from presenting that version.  The new version's agents did then allow the schools to do the new more expensive version without additional charges.

Copyrights also allow the authors to demand that you make no modifications to the show.  You cant alter the music or the dialogue to suit your own desires.  On a stage with a show that has a particular message I can see how that could be abused.  Its putting words in the mouth of an author.  But making field mods to equipment for entirely practical reasons is an entirely different matter.

I have a problem with that on several levels because it just screws the original play writer over by effectively banning his work from the stage forever.  I think that's wrong!  Imagine if Deere decided to contract with some new software firm to rewrite the control system.  Under that theory they could tell you that you cant use your machine unless and until you did the upgrade and they could charge whatever they wanted for it!  That would be like saying that we changed tire vendors and you have to take your Firestones off and put on new Good Years!

And what if someone wrote a completely new control package for your tractor?  Can Deere then sue you for that?  That would be like Case/IH suing you for putting M&W pistons in your old Farmall.

As this article points out, a ban on all modifications also means you can alter anything even to comply with things like new emission standards leaving you caught between the manufacturer and the government.  You can argue about the emissions issue but you see what the problem is none the less.

https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As eluded to, the problem arises because of modification.

Working in a dealership environment, I get a front row seat to both sides of the coin. We are stuck between customers, the manufacturer, and EPA regulation.

Granting the end user electronic access to repair generally also grants access to modify. Not only does this neuter EPA compliance, but it opens the door to run things outside the design limits. Any easy access to such parameters becomes a liability. If someone gets hurt or worse due to an unauthorized modification, who is going to be liable when the litigation starts?

I admit I don't know much about Deere, but with Cat and Agco, much of what you need to know in order to repair things is all accessible through the monitor in the cab. There are numerous aftermarket scan tools also available for diagnostic use. So when I hear people complain about the right to repair, I question whether it a lack of access to the electronics, or a lack of understanding the machine and systems?

For yrs in the auto industry people complained about the electronics in cars, pulled the EFI off and put carburetors back on. Now hot rodders are putting EFI on their old hot rods.

I agree that a person should be able to fix it themself rather than having to wait/pay for a dealer mechanic to come out and diagnose something. But as I ask before, at what level of repairs should a person be responsible for? 

Share this post


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

As eluded to, the problem arises because of modification.

Working in a dealership environment, I get a front row seat to both sides of the coin. We are stuck between customers, the manufacturer, and EPA regulation.

Granting the end user electronic access to repair generally also grants access to modify. Not only does this neuter EPA compliance, but it opens the door to run things outside the design limits. Any easy access to such parameters becomes a liability. If someone gets hurt or worse due to an unauthorized modification, who is going to be liable when the litigation starts?

I admit I don't know much about Deere, but with Cat and Agco, much of what you need to know in order to repair things is all accessible through the monitor in the cab. There are numerous aftermarket scan tools also available for diagnostic use. So when I hear people complain about the right to repair, I question whether it a lack of access to the electronics, or a lack of understanding the machine and systems?

For yrs in the auto industry people complained about the electronics in cars, pulled the EFI off and put carburetors back on. Now hot rodders are putting EFI on their old hot rods.

I agree that a person should be able to fix it themself rather than having to wait/pay for a dealer mechanic to come out and diagnose something. But as I ask before, at what level of repairs should a person be responsible for? 

Simple disclaimer signed before you got access could and should limit the manufacturers liabilities. However, with that being said it falls upon what is being modified and or altered. Are you trying to hot rod something, turning horsepower up, or are you looking to get a piece of machinery back into service? I can see your point, but it’s similar to any other thing you modify. IF modifying from its original intent than the person doing the modifications are responsible. 

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...