Jump to content

International 574 thoughts


vtfireman85

Recommended Posts

I have sort of fallen in love with the idea of a 574 Hydro, which, in the states, I am unlikely to find, were the TA model’s mechanical or hydraulic TA? Is there a good reason to stay away? I really like the British IH tractors, (Have 2 here)  and a row crop tractor, while attractive to the eye is of little use to me. My father always had his heart set on a 464 but I think the 574 has much more to offer. 
Just curious what people’s thoughts were on them as I really don’t know anyone locally who has one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were very popular around here when they were introduced. Many dairy farms used them for loader work,so they spent most of their lives in the barnyard. It was probably the most popular tractor sold at our dealership back in the seventies, we had alot  of small dairy operations. Very good tractors. When the 84 series came out then front wheel assist became the norm for loader work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a similar fascination with the Doncaster Utility tractors myself. Though, my taste leans more toward the late 84 series and newer when they switched to the double-H shifting. Ideally I'd like a 4230 with the XL cab and a 2255 loader, mostly because it's an "almost John Deere" model number. There were quite a few 574's and 674's around, and it seemed like every farm had an 84 series or two. Neighbors have a 684 with about a million hours and a 784 4x4. Always thought the ROPS and canopy made them look sharp.

My understanding is the TA on these completely incorrect. Before the internet I never knew these could have a TA in them. I don't think it was a common option. I'd rather have a reverser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't recommend the ta. DD is hydraulicly applied. TA is spring applied. Same piston operates both. Makes clutch pack clearances when rebuilding critical. If you shim one to tight then there is not enough travel to properly apply the other. It still uses a sprag for TA. Makes them hard to shift as releasing one clutch applies the other. Sometimes necessary to shift TA back and forth to get out of gear.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, snoshoe said:

Can't recommend the ta. DD is hydraulicly applied. TA is spring applied. Same piston operates both. Makes clutch pack clearances when rebuilding critical. If you shim one to tight then there is not enough travel to properly apply the other. It still uses a sprag for TA. Makes them hard to shift as releasing one clutch applies the other. Sometimes necessary to shift TA back and forth to get out of gear.

We had a 544 here for a hot minute, Dad practically gave it away then it got flipped. I did not like the TA/ freewheeling situation for out application. For field work it might have been great. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, vtfireman85 said:

We had a 544 here for a hot minute, Dad practically gave it away then it got flipped. I did not like the TA/ freewheeling situation for out application. For field work it might have been great. 

These do not freewheel until the TA clutch is shot. I personally much prefer the 544 setup. Be aware of the freewheeling and don't let it do it. On the Doncasters. Just avoid the TA. I would love to have a 574 myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our 574 was around a good many years. Quick road gear for hauling loads (wore out two sets of rears and more fronts) while filling silo and sat nice and low for fitting under feed conveyors while cleaning the cow yard with the 3pt blade. Great for mowing and raking. I do remember having much trouble with the sway back axle. That seemed to be under constant rebuild. The shift linkage was a pain as well. Constantly stuck in two gears at once. New parts never seemed to fix either problem. Got to the point Mom wouldn't drive it anymore. Underslung exhaust on a diesel meant you took a breath and held it whilst hooking or unhooking anything.

Replaced it with an 885. The 885 was much more tractor with much less trouble but used much more fuel too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dzldenny said:

Our 574 was around a good many years. Quick road gear for hauling loads (wore out two sets of rears and more fronts) while filling silo and sat nice and low for fitting under feed conveyors while cleaning the cow yard with the 3pt blade. Great for mowing and raking. I do remember having much trouble with the sway back axle. That seemed to be under constant rebuild. The shift linkage was a pain as well. Constantly stuck in two gears at once. New parts never seemed to fix either problem. Got to the point Mom wouldn't drive it anymore. Underslung exhaust on a diesel meant you took a breath and held it whilst hooking or unhooking anything.

Replaced it with an 885. The 885 was much more tractor with much less trouble but used much more fuel too.

Mine had a upright muffler in the hood.Never had a bit of trouble with the shifters.Brakes were only thing to be desired after thousands of hours.But with big hills,baling,raking and hauling silage wagons and such a small tractor I couldn't expect them to last.But great little tractor on the blower,fill 70 ft silos with ease.But then again I didn't have the wagons on sweep from the get go either.Great fuel economy like you said also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/7/2023 at 6:30 AM, Dzldenny said:

Our 574 was around a good many years. Quick road gear for hauling loads (wore out two sets of rears and more fronts) while filling silo and sat nice and low for fitting under feed conveyors while cleaning the cow yard with the 3pt blade. Great for mowing and raking. I do remember having much trouble with the sway back axle. That seemed to be under constant rebuild. The shift linkage was a pain as well. Constantly stuck in two gears at once. New parts never seemed to fix either problem. Got to the point Mom wouldn't drive it anymore. Underslung exhaust on a diesel meant you took a breath and held it whilst hooking or unhooking anything.

Replaced it with an 885. The 885 was much more tractor with much less trouble but used much more fuel too.

Any tractor i ever have will have vertical exhaust, even if it looks goofy. I developed a strong hatred of underslung because of a 2N Ford. Every cycle of the wood splitter was another puff of blue smoke To gag you. Plowing the driveway meant stinking to high heaven and having a terrible headache. Brush hogging wasn’t as bad because I think the weight box caused it to linger, and it blew right past the hog. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a few 574 and 674 over the years. Most of them had been abused before I got them. They were always cheap to buy in that condition and always cheap and easy to fix. Used them for pretty much everything they would cope with. Loved the manoverability of them.   Used to use a hydro for raking and baling (not my tractor tho) it was ideal for those jobs  never gave any trouble I would love to get a hydro one day  did come across a cheap hydro 84 but the charge pump had broken up  pretty hard to find and expensive and wondered how much other damage it had done when it failed  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a 574 gas for about 10 years.  Very good machine.  Like mentioned they were super popular here also.  Lots of configurations.  I had a straight axle row crop utility model.  Wish I still had it.  Had the underslung exhaust.   Would make the platform good and hot in the summer.  Known for fuel tank rust and crud problems, sloppy shifter linkage,  and gear noise at high speed (the way they are).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I like them and am working on one now, the Hydro usually run about 10hp less that the standard though if the power is important to you. A lot of them were used with loaders and can have issues with front axle and spindles, usually not too expensive to fix so long as you don't need new stub axle housings or hubs. The Diesel 674 is the same Neuss D279 engine tuned to get an extra 10 horses but has a stronger front axle setup. Also check the fuel tank for leaks, its a saddle type and can have leaks between the side walls and mudguards. It can be refurbished but expensive to get a new one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have Dad's 464. He bought it new. It has worn a Kelly loader most of its life. Swept back axle that was greased has never been touched but probably needs to be checked. Loaded thousands of round bales. Stacked them in the barn as high as the loader would allow. Thousands of hours. Early in it's life it plowed with 3-16", planted and cultivated. Mowed, raked and baled. We would remove the loader for field work. Later it was always on. Don't remember how many clutches 5-6? Been overhauled maybe twice. The clutch pedal wore through where the linkage attaches. Been great tractor. It has a good semi-retirement home as long as I am around. It deserves a little rest. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have one that I currently use as a loader tractor for feeding and running the haybine. Owned it for 10 years. Only 2 things I have had problems with is keeping the steering cylinder from coming loose from the Clevis and leaking past the prong and preventing the fuel filters from leaking. I have looked for a used screw in style filter housing like on the 584 but haven’t had any luck other than buying new. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2023 at 8:13 AM, vtfireman85 said:

Any tractor i ever have will have vertical exhaust, even if it looks goofy. I developed a strong hatred of underslung because of a 2N Ford. Every cycle of the wood splitter was another puff of blue smoke To gag you. Plowing the driveway meant stinking to high heaven and having a terrible headache. Brush hogging wasn’t as bad because I think the weight box caused it to linger, and it blew right past the hog. 

All depends on the situation - using a loader to clean out a low barn, you will find that exactly the opposite is true.  The underslung is much better than breathing the exhaust directly from a cut-off short vertical stack.   

I get you on the other though - hooking up the PTO was always "exhausting".....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i no this is a 574 topic , but i changed out my underslung IH 504 utility exhaust with a vertical one , stainless muffler and pipe , kept catching the fields on fire and always tired of smelling like exhaust at the end of the day , i dont have to go under any low overhangs so it works great for me 

IMG_8590.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2023 at 6:19 PM, RedMillennialFarmer said:

I like them and am working on one now, the Hydro usually run about 10hp less that the standard though if the power is important to you. A lot of them were used with loaders and can have issues with front axle and spindles, usually not too expensive to fix so long as you don't need new stub axle housings or hubs. The Diesel 674 is the same Neuss D279 engine tuned to get an extra 10 horses but has a stronger front axle setup. Also check the fuel tank for leaks, its a saddle type and can have leaks between the side walls and mudguards. It can be refurbished but expensive to get a new one.

D239 ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dad had a gasser 574, he bought new off the lot in 78. It had a Dunham Lehr 22 loader on it. When I was a few years older, I asked him why he bought a gas instead of a diesel, he said that he needed a loader and that’s what was close by. Probably got a good deal on it because it had been on the lot for a while too. It left in 85 at the foreclosure auction. It sowed a lot of wheat and beans with a 510 21 hole drill and pulled the 15’ 315 cultimulcher. Don’t have a clue how many hours it had when it left, it never had any issues. It scraped the feedlot 2-3 times a week too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/10/2023 at 5:34 PM, 12_Guy said:

I have Dad's 464. He bought it new. It has worn a Kelly loader most of its life. Swept back axle that was greased has never been touched but probably needs to be checked. Loaded thousands of round bales. Stacked them in the barn as high as the loader would allow. Thousands of hours. Early in it's life it plowed with 3-16", planted and cultivated. Mowed, raked and baled. We would remove the loader for field work. Later it was always on. Don't remember how many clutches 5-6? Been overhauled maybe twice. The clutch pedal wore through where the linkage attaches. Been great tractor. It has a good semi-retirement home as long as I am around. It deserves a little rest. 

There is one been sitting beside the road for years i could probably have cheap. But i know the repair bill will surpass its value. I know the owner well, if it would move, it wouldn’t be sitting 

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...