Jump to content

Farmall 560 - Opinions?


leeave96
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just asking, not planning on buying one...

Once IH got past the rear end issues, how were the Farmall 560 (and 460) tractors on the farm back in the day?

Never been around them, but have been enjoying reading about these 60 series tractors.  Seems like they were kind of an in-between tractor, post M and H legacy and pre-06 and later series tractor design - sort of an orphan?  Fancy sheet metal, paint scheme and bling IMHO.

Were these good/useful tractors on the farm back in the day?  Anyone use one today around the farm, if not, would you buy one?

Just curious.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, leeave96 said:

Just asking, not planning on buying one...

Once IH got past the rear end issues, how were the Farmall 560 (and 460) tractors on the farm back in the day?

Never been around them, but have been enjoying reading about these 60 series tractors.  Seems like they were kind of an in-between tractor, post M and H legacy and pre-06 and later series tractor design - sort of an orphan?  Fancy sheet metal, paint scheme and bling IMHO.

Were these good/useful tractors on the farm back in the day?  Anyone use one today around the farm, if not, would you buy one?

Just curious.

Thanks!

  They were pretty good for what they were but the rest of the industry had moved past the tech in them.  Larger displacement engines, power brakes, and fully integrated 3 point hitch are a few examples that customers demanded which the 60 did not offer.  When JD came out with the 4010 and Oliver the 1800 and Case the 930 there was a ready market for those tractors.  IH simply did not read the tea leaves very well during the late 1950's as to where the market was heading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a late 560 Diesel bought new in '63 they are tough tractors had a loader on mine fed cattle with it everyday for years , It was not a good cold starting tractor I had a block heater on mine and anything near 30 degrees or lower in the mornings was a must to have plugged in Power steering wasn't the greatest but acceptable the hydraulics about the same  My loader on mine was a farmhand with a PTO pump so that didn't matter brakes required frequent adjustment also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of farms in my area liked them for loader use.   Easy on and off the seat, plenty of engine and hydraulic capacity for hauling manure, moving snow etc.  Fast hitch is handy for moving things around the shed/ yard.   Easy on fuel for raking hay,  etc.  Lots of them used to cultivate with a front mounted unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a 460 Diesel since 1996, bought it off a farm in Southern Indiana. I wanted a 560, but every one I looked at was ragged out and I finally found my 460.  I use mine mostly on grain augers as it sips fuel and I can start it from the ground and engage the PTO as well. The 2 point fast hitch is handy for moving equipment around the yard.

20201005_135816.jpg

20201005_135053.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were no different from an operational perspective than a Super MTA, 400, or 450. Just a different engine sound and a few more HP.

If you'd think a Super MTA, 400, or 450 was a useful tractor, then a 560 would be equally useful, really. You could even extend that statement to the M and Super M.

We had a 560 from about 1978 to 1996. Kind of a love/hate relationship with that tractor. The biggest problem with the tractor was, if I understand it correctly, the ring gear bolts shearing off in the differential. That happened on a couple of occasions over the years. The thing never shifted into 5th right, but Dad bent the fork so it would at least stay in 5th to go up and down the road. You could easily float it from 4th to 5th without even a tick. It also had a lot of use before we got it and a lot of use while we had it so pretty much everything was loose, floppy, worn out. My brother recently mentioned that shortly before Dad traded it, they fixed something in the shifting mechanism with baling wire.

Shortly after he painted it in the late 1980s:T

20210906_134731.thumb.jpg.91fb6e2192a3ea01433791bbacb14f27.jpg

Last summer:

20210722_163443.thumb.jpg.e79b843f991f1c36d42f047b78a315f8.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were a step in the progression. Seemed like there were a lot of them around in the 60s and 70s and beyond. I bought a well used 560 diesel a few years ago and I like it well enough tho it could stand a lot of freshening up. Seat is junk and paint rough. But I enjoy running it now n then tho it doesn't see a lot of use on my very small time operation. I don't mess with it in the winter but I don't have too either. Not nearly as good a cold starter as my 400 or 826, but I'm sure not everything is up to snuff either. 

20170707_150958.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Matt Kirsch said:

They were no different from an operational perspective than a Super MTA, 400, or 450. Just a different engine sound and a few more HP.

If you'd think a Super MTA, 400, or 450 was a useful tractor, then a 560 would be equally useful, really. You could even extend that statement to the M and Super M.

We had a 560 from about 1978 to 1996. Kind of a love/hate relationship with that tractor. The biggest problem with the tractor was, if I understand it correctly, the ring gear bolts shearing off in the differential. That happened on a couple of occasions over the years. The thing never shifted into 5th right, but Dad bent the fork so it would at least stay in 5th to go up and down the road. You could easily float it from 4th to 5th without even a tick. It also had a lot of use before we got it and a lot of use while we had it so pretty much everything was loose, floppy, worn out. My brother recently mentioned that shortly before Dad traded it, they fixed something in the shifting mechanism with baling wire.

Shortly after he painted it in the late 1980s:T

20210906_134731.thumb.jpg.91fb6e2192a3ea01433791bbacb14f27.jpg

Last summer:

20210722_163443.thumb.jpg.e79b843f991f1c36d42f047b78a315f8.jpg

And would ya just look at the Honda ATC in the background! :)  I think every farm had one of those in the 80's! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B.B. said:

And would ya just look at the Honda ATC in the background! :)  I think every farm had one of those in the 80's! 

Those were so handy to have... I put a Calc-an-Acre on mine for quick and easy test plot changes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a late 560 Diesel bought new in '63 they are tough tractors had a loader on mine fed cattle with it everyday for years , It was not a good cold starting tractor I had a block heater on mine and anything near 30 degrees or lower in the mornings was a must to have plugged in Power steering wasn't the greatest but acceptable the hydraulics about the same  My loader on mine was a farmhand with a PTO pump so that didn't matter brakes required frequent adjustment also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Matt Kirsch said:

They were no different from an operational perspective than a Super MTA, 400, or 450. Just a different engine sound and a few more HP.

If you'd think a Super MTA, 400, or 450 was a useful tractor, then a 560 would be equally useful, really. You could even extend that statement to the M and Super M.

We had a 560 from about 1978 to 1996. Kind of a love/hate relationship with that tractor. The biggest problem with the tractor was, if I understand it correctly, the ring gear bolts shearing off in the differential. That happened on a couple of occasions over the years. The thing never shifted into 5th right, but Dad bent the fork so it would at least stay in 5th to go up and down the road. You could easily float it from 4th to 5th without even a tick. It also had a lot of use before we got it and a lot of use while we had it so pretty much everything was loose, floppy, worn out. My brother recently mentioned that shortly before Dad traded it, they fixed something in the shifting mechanism with baling wire.

Shortly after he painted it in the late 1980s:T

20210906_134731.thumb.jpg.91fb6e2192a3ea01433791bbacb14f27.jpg

Last summer:

20210722_163443.thumb.jpg.e79b843f991f1c36d42f047b78a315f8.jpg

I remember when you posted seeing/identifying that. Looks good 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, B.B. said:

And would ya just look at the Honda ATC in the background! :)  I think every farm had one of those in the 80's! 

I know a guy if your looking. 😆

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, iowaboy1965 said:

I know a guy if your looking. 😆

Grew up on a 185S the nostalgia of one gets me in the feels 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im with @Matt Kirsch both of them we had were love hate relationships, favorite thing was the 6cyl sound and fuel sipping, not so fav were teh issues with the D282 in them. One ran ok and started better, the other was a constant issue with head gaskets and they never were worked crazy hard. One had a loader one didnt. It was hard going from a torquey 400 to a not so torquey 6cyl diesel - rarely if ever used the TA on the 400 was always grabbing it on the 560. One had the larger hydraulic pump in it that was nice for sure. 

they required teh glow plugs for starting and when cold a long time on the button, so you better have them working properly and good batteries. 

hated the tele-depth on the 560 

i dont think the 560 had any more power than the 400 especially plowing or in thick rotary cutter duty the torque difference was noticeable. 

All of ours had PS, the 400 had no live power and no teledepth. 

To each his own, sold our 560s, if I were to get anything going fwd it would be a Bitty00 or a Bitty50. 

I dont miss the 560s at all but I miss the 400 at times. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still have the 560 diesel my Dad bought new when I was a year old.  It has 6100 hours on the meter and it quit counting in the early 70s.  Still gets used almost every day.  Will still pull 7x14 high sided silage wagons up the steep hill to the pit.  For some reason it will get around better in a muddy cattle yard pulling a feeder wagon than the 806 with nothing behind it.  Has had a little engine work and one clutch but still on the original ta.  Love the fast hitch for hooking up stuff.  After my oldest son ran it a fair amount he said it was his favorite tractor, that makes the third generation to say that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, B.B. said:

And would ya just look at the Honda ATC in the background! :)  I think every farm had one of those in the 80's! 

I still have it. It doesn't run. Actually it never did run right and nobody could figure it out but we used it for 20 years before replacing it with a Honda Recon, which is also starting to get long in the tooth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, searcyfarms said:

im with @Matt Kirsch both of them we had were love hate relationships, favorite thing was the 6cyl sound and fuel sipping, not so fav were teh issues with the D282 in them. One ran ok and started better, the other was a constant issue with head gaskets and they never were worked crazy hard. One had a loader one didnt. It was hard going from a torquey 400 to a not so torquey 6cyl diesel - rarely if ever used the TA on the 400 was always grabbing it on the 560. One had the larger hydraulic pump in it that was nice for sure. 

they required teh glow plugs for starting and when cold a long time on the button, so you better have them working properly and good batteries. 

hated the tele-depth on the 560 

i dont think the 560 had any more power than the 400 especially plowing or in thick rotary cutter duty the torque difference was noticeable. 

All of ours had PS, the 400 had no live power and no teledepth. 

To each his own, sold our 560s, if I were to get anything going fwd it would be a Bitty00 or a Bitty50. 

I dont miss the 560s at all but I miss the 400 at times. 

 

The 560 diesel we had was a power house it would pull just as much as a 656 diesel Now a Gas 560 is a different story they never had the lugging ability that the diesel version had even thou I think they were rated slightly more hp The 560 we had came with that working 3rd gear which  was rare

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dad uses his 560D all the time. We now use it as a loader and raking tractor. He used to run his JD530 round baler until we got the 1086. We had to rebuild injector pump and then motor. It had been well used before we got it. He also reworked the glow plugs and it’ll start when cold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am the second owner of a 59 diesel model I bought in 1972.  For years it was the planting/feed grinding/cultivating general go to do anything tractor.  We gave it an overhaul in 1976 when the head proved to be cracked and leaking coolant into number three.  Put a new cylinder head on it.  It still gets used on the grain auger at harvest and other general tasks.  Maybe we were just lucky, but this tractor will start down into the single digits and run for a week on a tank of fuel.

I have no complaints.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dad had a gas, and diesel 560 bought new, both worked great on the 1,000 acre farm . Uncle had 2 560 D with turbo ran 90 hp and didn't have any problems running with. 4010. . 4020 was another story but then the 806 and 856 took over which a 4020 couldn't hang with in heavy tillage. You had to have good working glow-plugs or plug the 560 in to start in cold weather..  I started going to tractor pulls in the late 50's and one of my friends had a 560 with a turbo off a IH   crawler ran 116 hp had 16.9 farming and 18.4-38 or 30.5 pulling, didn't get beat pulling very often but head would cracking was a problem. He turned it down to 90 hp.  and just farmed with it for years, No rear end or TA problems but did crack axle housing once running 30.5  at a dead weight pull running through  some deep holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, midnightman said:

Brother has one he uses on hay rake and post driver. No power steering on his though 

I thought power steering was standard on them. Mine quit working years ago and i put a new hand pump on it in the early 80's and if i remember correctly it was around $400 then. Hard to tell the price of one now

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...