I love 86s

[SDman]

Does anybody else find it somewhat ironic that I made a comment about how the www makes it sound like operating an IH 86 series tractor is a form of torture...then somebody else "calls me out" on it....then that poster proceeds to make post after post that reinforces my original statement?

Thanks for proving my point.

[Reichow7120]

53 minutes ago, pete23 said:

Their better than thou art attitude just turns me off. 

You said it there. 

God help them green guys if Deere ever goes down like the other makers did back in the 80s. All the crap they spread will come back to haunt them big time.

[B.B.]

1 hour ago, SDman said:

Does anybody else find it somewhat ironic that I made a comment about how the www makes it sound like operating an IH 86 series tractor is a form of torture...then somebody else "calls me out" on it....then that poster proceeds to make post after post that reinforces my original statement?

Thanks for proving my point.

For what's it's worth you guys are my entertainment here at work, so I actually enjoy some of the arguing back and fourth!   You all make this hobby enjoyable to me, and I learn so much from you all, even when you're "negotiating" about which tractor is best!

 

 

 

Now the part where I spend money I shouldn't cause I read on RPRU forum about boxcar Magnum's being the best tractor ever built, and now I own one......  well that wasn't so nice! LOL   I blame 95% of that on 856Custom though!!!   In my mind it's his fault! 

 

You all are a bad influence on ole BB!   

[hillman]

3 hours ago, B.B. said:

4020???  Never heard of her???

 

 

I had too, it was too easy!    I haven't even sat on a 4020 as you just don't see too many around where I'm from.   That said I wouldn't mind to drive one for a bit so I can say I have!

if you cannot drive one pickup Farmington's #8 video with the 806 VS 4020 comparison. its the only comedy in their entire catalog of videos

 I do not understand the few haters on the 66 or 86 series

[TP from Central PA]

I would take a side console 4020 or heck even a early one if any of you haters need to remove yourself from one   I could probably sell it where I am and have enough to buy a 4050 from elsewhere, or maybe the 3488 hydro I don't need  I like a 4020, but guys around me think they are god's gift to the earth.

[hillman]

14 minutes ago, TP from Central PA said:

I would take a side console 4020 or heck even a early one if any of you haters need to remove yourself from one   I could probably sell it where I am and have enough to buy a 4050 from elsewhere, or maybe the 3488 hydro I don't need  I like a 4020, but guys around me think they are god's gift to the earth.

if I won a lottery I would own every tractor mentioned in this thread. don't know how some guys would react if they were ever around a pis$ poor tractor

[TP from Central PA]

Since everyone is argueing............Lets really light this up and get it taken down!

 

[TP from Central PA]

Before the picture above there just wasn't enough go in the 6 holes, couldn't keep winning, winning, winning..................

[gafarm49]

i will have to admit that the 8 speed powershift is pretty awesome. I have 2. easy to run, just need a strong neck

[superih]

6 hours ago, pete23 said:

 

I have told many people.  Deere made and makes a lot of good tractors and machinery , but I never liked Deere  and never will.  Their better than thou art attitude just turns me off. 

Exactly

[Big Bud guy]

3 hours ago, TP from Central PA said:

Before the picture above there just wasn't enough go in the 6 holes, couldn't keep winning, winning, winning..................

 

 

 

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.  

[ZG6E]

11 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

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.  

There might be something I’m not thinking of but I’m having a hard time coming up with something used in the 70s that required running a hydraulic motor and using another function. 

[KWRB]

10 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

 

 

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.  

Props to JD for doing this. I think it's a hilarious and I respect anyone who's gonna stick it to their competition!

[B.B.]

12 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

 

 

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.  

In fairness it looks good in red!

[TP from Central PA]

My brother has owned some of the "Vertical" 20 and 30 series 2 cylinders.................I don't know how they ever sold any of those POS, with Ford and IH, you would need your head examined to buy one.  

[Big Bud guy]

20 minutes ago, TP from Central PA said:

My brother has owned some of the "Vertical" 20 and 30 series 2 cylinders.................I don't know how they ever sold any of those POS, with Ford and IH, you would need your head examined to buy one.  

They did have a live PTO which IH lacked.  If you want to say Ford was better then both of them I could go with that but IH had nothing on JD in those series.  I know because I own a 240.  

[TP from Central PA]

3 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

They did have a live PTO which IH lacked.  If you want to say Ford was better then both of them I could go with that but IH had nothing on JD in those series.  I know because I own a 240.  

I don't really consider that half A$$ed setup they had on them live..............They sucked front to back, only good thing on them was the 3pt.  Even my die hard Deere green brother felt the same, he sold all the vertical 2 cylinders he had.  

[hillman]

6 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

They did have a live PTO which IH lacked.  If you want to say Ford was better then both of them I could go with that but IH had nothing on JD in those series.  I know because I own a 240.  

I like 86 series? do you like any IH tractor?

[Big Bud guy]

2 hours ago, hillman said:

I like 86 series? do you like any IH tractor?

I have 7 IH tractors, 2 combines, S-110 pickup with a hoist installed at the dealer, 1600 loadstar truck and various misc IH pieces ranging from grain drill to a electric cream separator.  All working. Couple of the tractors are family heirlooms but I went out and bought the rest myself because I wanted them.  Also have various JD/Massey/Oliver/Case/AC/Ford and one Gambles Farmcrest 30 tractor.  I pick and choose which tractors, and which series I like because I don’t wear any color of glasses when comes to classic or antique iron.  I like to talk about the pluses and minuses of machinery and I don’t credit any line of machinery for the success of the farm like some do on here.  I don’t think the 86 series are bad tractor.  We bought a new 4640 back when the 86 series were out.  We ran that tractor almost 20 years with zero downtime.  After being exposed for a very short time to my neighbors 1086 before he left, I saw no reason to want one now or back when they were new over a 40 series.  I would almost put the 86 series third on my desirable list for a late 70s tractor. 

[hillman]

thats a good answer, whats your #2 choice

 on the 240, I picked one up 3 years ago with a stuck engine and bad rims. I put 2 good rims on it and a good pair of unmatched tires and it sat there waiting for the spare engine I had to put in it. I grew tired of it and parted it out, I don't know why they would need live shaft. they were and are too small to pull a baler and 150 bales of hay. In 1958 what else would you need live shaft in that little tractor and there was the option of the 340 ( 5 hp more) which would be much more suitable for anyone wanting live shaft. there was also the B275 ( 2 stage clutch) which despite its reputation of hard starting ( they started good if the glow plugs worked even if the engine was wornout) was a tough tractor and I would put it up against a Ford

 I have zero use for Fords or 2 lunger Johnny Poppers. you don't have to convince me the 4640 was a good tractor to you

[Big Bud guy]

14 minutes ago, hillman said:

thats a good answer, whats your #2 choice

I don't know why they would need live shaft. they were and are too small to pull a baler and 150 bales of hay. In 1958 what else would you need live shaft in that little tractor and there was the option of the 340 ( 5 hp more) which would be much more suitable for anyone wanting live shaft. there was also the B275 ( 2 stage clutch) which despite its reputation of hard starting ( they started good if the glow plugs worked even if the engine was wornout) was a tough tractor and I would put it up against a Ford

 I have zero use for Fords or 2 lunger Johnny Poppers. you don't have to convince me the 4640 was a good tractor to you

No 2 would depend on the jobs.  If strictly a pto/loader/haying tractor wouldn’t bother me to run a IH hydro.  But if it was drawbar work then it would be Case.  Not a fan of AC engines and we already had a Massey at time which was nothing special. The White series notably the 2-180 would have my attention too.  180 hp, CC hydraulics, 18 speed transmission.  
 

Also, the 240 is not too small to pull a baler. Light balers like JD 14/24Ts don’t take that much horsepower.  We had a 24T and we used the 240 on it a few times.  I see hobby cidiot farmers pulling balers smaller then a 240 on YouTube.  Plus I think another job that a live PTO would be useful is mowing hay??  Especially thick heavy hay.  We did that with our 240 too and I still have the IH mower that goes with it.  And speaking from experience if you put a loader on a tractor and for some reason have to use a PTO pump, it would be handy if it was live.

 

 

 

[Sledgehammer]

On 9/22/2020 at 12:16 PM, B.B. said:

4020???  Never heard of her???

 

 

I had too, it was too easy!    I haven't even sat on a 4020 as you just don't see too many around where I'm from.   That said I wouldn't mind to drive one for a bit so I can say I have!

My brother has one. I thought the same thing, let me drive it to see for myself. The dyslexic zipper shifter on the dash is ridiculous. (Some had a different shift setup) 4cyl bs 6 makes them feel much different to me. They don’t rev like our 6cyl machines which makes them feel gutless to me. They will lug differently because of that.

I know they aren’t the same size machine but I would almost tie my 686 off to his 4020 diesel just to see what would happen. The 4020 should mop the 686 because of factory HP rating but after running his I had to wonder....

[hillman]

8 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

No 2 would depend on the jobs.  If strictly a pto/loader/haying tractor wouldn’t bother me to run a IH hydro.  But if it was drawbar work then it would be Case.  Not a fan of AC engines and we already had a Massey at time which was nothing special. The White series notably the 2-180 would have my attention too.  180 hp, CC hydraulics, 18 speed transmission.  
 

Also, the 240 is not too small to pull a baler. Light balers like JD 14/24Ts don’t take that much horsepower.  We had a 24T and we used the 240 on it a few times.  I see hobby cidiot farmers pulling balers smaller then a 240 on YouTube.  Plus I think another job that a live PTO would be useful is mowing hay??  Especially thick heavy hay.  We did that with our 240 too and I still have the IH mower that goes with it.  And speaking from experience if you put a loader on a tractor and for some reason have to use a PTO pump, it would be handy if it was live.

 

 

 

I think you base your opinions on 2020 views that would be make your decisions in 1958. 1958 decisions were made in 1958 .1945 decisions were made in 1945 with that perspective- it seems peeps forget that train of thought 

we had a neighbor who baled with a JD 40 and if you want to take all day to bale a couple loads thats your tractor. Like I said the 340 was there on the sales brochure for a little more money but in that era I am sure I would pass on it as well. IH sold a lot of British tractors here and most of them were equipped with a loader. 10 times the loader tractor a 240 was. The hp race was on by 1958 and the 240 was stepping down in hp for anyone. there are guys on here complaining IH should have introduced larger  tractors sooner and now they needed to refine the baby in the line up. the 240 was there because it was easy to build with some existing components for a cheap tractor.  it did not sell well because there was not a huge market for that size tractor as farms were increasingly getting larger. should they have invested in refining a tractor with very little sales prospects? no

 WFE never made a quality tractor in the league of the 86( IMHO) I think your bank account would agree after 5000 hrs if you were running both. you may like the cab better but I can put up with the IH cab if it is in the field where it belongs and my money in my pocket where it belongs. Never run a 2-180 but did run a 2-105 and I am sure an 806 would run circles around it. No I am not color blind - I have a MM g1000 and its cool to own in 2020 but in 1965 it would not be here 

  btw I have no issue with your opinion just you do seem to have a hate on for IH. IH equipment gave 1000s of hours trouble free operation and RED POWER is the busiest brand specific forum in the web which speaks volumes 

[cedar farm]

I sure don't want to change direction on this post. White did make a quality tractor in the time frame of the 86 series. Not really a fair comparison as the 2-135/2-155/2-180 are large frame tractors like a 4640/4840/IHC 50 series. They were a very stout tractor. The 2-105 was a small frame tractor. Really just an Oliver 1855 with a Perkins engine. There are things I wish my 2-135 had from an 86 series. Transbrake. Hyd clutch assist. DT466 from a 5488. Like IHC in the 70's White's other ventures, specifically trucks, siphoned off the R & D cash from the AG division. Like the axial flow combine, Whites 5100 planters kept their fat out of the fire.

[Reichow7120]

1 hour ago, hillman said:

WFE never made a quality tractor in the league of the 86( IMHO) I think your bank account would agree after 5000 hrs if you were running both. you may like the cab better but I can put up with the IH cab if it is in the field where it belongs and my money in my pocket where it belongs. Never run a 2-180 but did run a 2-105 and I am sure an 806 would run circles around it. No I am not color blind - I have a MM g1000 and its cool to own in 2020 but in 1965 it would not be here 

Ill agree with the statement on White tractors. Someone mentioned the larger frame tractors being more trouble free than the smaller ones. I declare BS on that one. At one time there were 3 farms running Whites of that vintage. All hit that 5000 hr mark and they started to nickel and dime them to death. One farm bought Magnums when they got fed up. ( they were running 2 2-135s and a 2-105 along with a 1850 Oliver, still have the Oliver) the other farm switched his Whites to a Deere 8200 and a 7810. The last farm still has them but he admits that he's always working on them and that includes a 2-180. That's our neighborhood.