Jump to content

IH 15 Chopper Video....


Recommended Posts

This video turned out good. The record was well kept & there is just the slightest hues of cyan & yellow left in the film strip.

Enjoy!!

Mike

P.S. Anyone here use one of these? They don't look to have much capacity to them. Would an H with SH Fire Crater pistons have enough beans to run one in hay or with the one row head??

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 766 Man said:

  61 forage wagon on a 141 gear in a couple of segments.  

Is the first wagon shown a 61? The front looks different.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Absent Minded Farmer said:

P.S. Anyone here use one of these? They don't look to have much capacity to them. Would an H with SH Fire Crater pistons have enough beans to run one in hay or with the one row head??

 

Well my 240 brochure shows one pulling that chopper so I would think so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neighbor had a IH chopper decades ago, can’t remember the model, needed a ‘recutter’ at the silo, used a D17 gas on the chopper, a WD with a belt drive recutter. Wagon was open top, rear gate lifted with floor chain and used a long handled ‘silage fork’ to pull the silage into the trough fed recutter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

Well my 240 brochure shows one pulling that chopper so I would think so. 

  Not to be disagreeable but I think manufacturers back then were a tad optimistic when figuring production on equipment.  The specs for the 240 show a 122 CI engine.  I think that tractor would stall if a slug (wad of material) went through that chopper.  The farm that had the 15 with a M in front of it also had a Super C.  I don't think the Super C touched that chopper other than to pull it out of the shed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  Not to be disagreeable but I think manufacturers back then were a tad optimistic when figuring production on equipment.  

You think.  JD thought you could run a chopper with a 25 hp B back in the day.  Wasn’t just forage chopping either when it came to this.  I’ve never seen nor heard of a JD 730 or 560 pulling a 5 bottom plow day in day out either.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  Not to be disagreeable but I think manufacturers back then were a tad optimistic when figuring production on equipment.  The specs for the 240 show a 122 CI engine.  I think that tractor would stall if a slug (wad of material) went through that chopper.  The farm that had the 15 with a M in front of it also had a Super C.  I don't think the Super C touched that chopper other than to pull it out of the shed.

I had to smile when they talked about 40 tons per hour with the row crop head.  We used a 1456 with a 2 row Hesston chopper and would put out 35-40 tons per hour!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dver said:

I had to smile when they talked about 40 tons per hour with the row crop head.  We used a 1456 with a 2 row Hesston chopper and would put out 35-40 tons per hour!!

  That's probably figuring an empty wagon right there when the one behind the chopper gets full.  That would be around 5-6 loads with the IH 61's dad had per hour.  Ten minutes per wagon would have been a fairly fast fill.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That filmstrip brought up an interesting thought related to our discussion on the 816. That direct cut head has a very "haybine-ish" looking reel on it, during the late 50's. So it's not like IH didn't have the technology or couldn't use a reel. I wonder if New Holland's patent was not on the reel itself, but the combination of reel, sickle bar, and/or conditioner rolls that caused IH to try the "flicker bar."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Matt Kirsch said:

That filmstrip brought up an interesting thought related to our discussion on the 816. That direct cut head has a very "haybine-ish" looking reel on it, during the late 50's. So it's not like IH didn't have the technology or couldn't use a reel. I wonder if New Holland's patent was not on the reel itself, but the combination of reel, sickle bar, and/or conditioner rolls that caused IH to try the "flicker bar."

JD had a NH type mower conditioner in the 60s.  So either JD licensed the patents or IH was stubborn in trying to find a “better” way.  Or both 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Matt Kirsch said:

That filmstrip brought up an interesting thought related to our discussion on the 816. That direct cut head has a very "haybine-ish" looking reel on it, during the late 50's. So it's not like IH didn't have the technology or couldn't use a reel. I wonder if New Holland's patent was not on the reel itself, but the combination of reel, sickle bar, and/or conditioner rolls that caused IH to try the "flicker bar."

  It was on the combination including conditioning rolls.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

JD had a NH type mower conditioner in the 60s.  So either JD licensed the patents or IH was stubborn in trying to find a “better” way.  

  I believe that the patent expired by the late 1960's.  Everybody was using the NH design more or less including Hesston, IH, and JD.  Had NH developed an entirely new conditioning process that might have meant the others would have waited longer to build their own.  Granted I was not in the boardrooms of these companies back then but I was told NH and IH were very adversarial to one another (predating the rotary combine) so I am skeptical that the 2 would have come to an arrangement on using NH's design if it came down to it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Dad and uncle bought a new #15 cutter in the early 60’s.  I was too young to help much with corn chopping then,but one of my memories was of one of the cast knife holders breaking and peeling out the bottom sheet of the cutting chamber.  It stopped the 400 dead as told by uncle Wendell!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, axial_al said:

My Dad and uncle bought a new #15 cutter in the early 60’s.  I was too young to help much with corn chopping then,but one of my memories was of one of the cast knife holders breaking and peeling out the bottom sheet of the cutting chamber.  It stopped the 400 dead as told by uncle Wendell!

  I wonder if the 16 also had the cast holders as the 50 did as well?  The 55 went to steel holders but retained the apron chain.  All was well when IH introduced the 550 which also had all feed rolls along with the steel knife holders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chopped 20-30 acres for years 20 plus yes with a # 15 with all 3 heads updated to 16 about 1988 pulled with SMTA all those years when we downsized in 1995 Folks SMTA had 30,000 houds on dad tracked all the hours on frrom when they bought on 1961.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a #16 (not sure what's different,looks identical).  Back before we grew sorghum/Sudan grass to greenchop for the cows when the pasture petered out in late summer we used it to greenchop corn.  If that was thought to be high capacity I hate to see what low capacity was.  Definitely  needed that reverser alot as it does not like eating modern corn crops.  

Last time it ran was 2005 as we had a super dry late summer.  

I get the itchto hook it up now and again behind the 656 for a retro chopping experience.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 766 Man said:

  I believe that the patent expired by the late 1960's.  Everybody was using the NH design more or less including Hesston, IH, and JD.  Had NH developed an entirely new conditioning process that might have meant the others would have waited longer to build their own.  Granted I was not in the boardrooms of these companies back then but I was told NH and IH were very adversarial to one another (predating the rotary combine) so I am skeptical that the 2 would have come to an arrangement on using NH's design if it came down to it.  

 

IMG_6870.jpeg
 

New for 1967.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

we had a 15 in the sixties corn head direct cut head we chopped corn with 656 but we could green chop with direct cut head with 300 in light crops, not in sudan grass. it was a better chopper then anything we had before and was a snap to change heads.

it was also the one i chopped my fingers off with not choppers fault stupid know it all operator.

pete

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

 

IMG_6870.jpeg
 

New for 1967.

  I've heard of the 483 and 485 but not the 480 until now.  I'll have to check it out further when I get home from church later this morning.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2023 at 1:17 PM, Big Bud guy said:

Well my 240 brochure shows one pulling that chopper so I would think so. 

That almost looks like a 240 at 3:48 in the film. Is that the same image as what's in your brochure?

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Absent Minded Farmer said:

That almost looks like a 240 at 3:48 in the film. Is that the same image as what's in your brochure?

Mike

No my brochure shows it pulling the chopper in corn.  I could get a picture tomarrow  if you like.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Big Bud guy said:

No my brochure shows it pulling the chopper in corn.  I could get a picture tomarrow  if you like.  

I'd appreciate it when you get time. I haven't seen a 240 brochure. Just that tractor listed in the full line catalog for '60.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2023 at 2:27 PM, Big Bud guy said:

I’ve never seen nor heard of a JD 730 or 560 pulling a 5 bottom plow day in day out either.

Have you checked with Billonthefarm? He could probably pull 5x14s with a 560 & maybe put an extra bottom on in that potting soil of his. :vD

Mike

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...