Jump to content

Stolen off of FB….915 combine


Big Bud guy

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, IH Forever said:

I don’t remember any IH conventional combines around my area as a kid. Never really saw an IH until the axial flows. So enlighten me, what was changed from the high profile to the low profile to lower them?

  Mostly 715's around here.  Probably more Gleaner F's around than 715's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IH Forever said:

I don’t remember any IH conventional combines around my area as a kid. Never really saw an IH until the axial flows. So enlighten me, what was changed from the high profile to the low profile to lower them?

My Grandpa had an IH 715 gas Hydro.  There was a local farmer who had a 915 gas also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dale560 said:

Almost everything from feeder chain, feeder house and header attachment, I think front final drives, frame, rear axle mounting and axle. Straw walkers are different and a bunch of stuff. 

 

IMG_6301.jpeg
 

I didn't know it was that extensive.  I thought they just lowered the machine and the cab a few inches somehow.  My one and only big critique of IH conventionals was the engineers never seemed to know how to make a combine with a lower grain tank and center of gravity like Massey and JD.  Maybe not a big deal to flat landers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

 

IMG_6301.jpeg
 

I didn't know it was that extensive.  I thought they just lowered the machine and the cab a few inches somehow.  My one and only big critique of IH conventionals was the engineers never seemed to know how to make a combine with a lower grain tank and center of gravity like Massey and JD.  Maybe not a big deal to flat landers.  

The 915 low profile shares some parts with the 1460.  Sieves , trans, hydro pump elevator chains and such . The early 15 shares a lot of that stuff with 503 or they resemble 503 style parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody out there still got a old 915 they got videos of it doing what it was made to do, I always thought they were sharp looking ole beast.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

715s were popular here as new combines. In the late 70s a couple neighbors bought new 815s, I think clearance sales after the AXIAL-FLOW came out. Still a lot of gleaners and Masseys back then.

After 1980 only one new combine has been bought, a 1460. Everybody started buying used combines out of eastern Arkansas.

By the late 80s the bottom fell out of the 915 market and a lot of them showed up. Most were still in good shape. The specialty rotor finally made the AXIAL-FLOW great in rice. The 915 would out cut a 1460 in rice unless it has a specialty rotor. Lots of 915 combines with 16.5 810 headers 

Dad bought a 915 at a neighbors estate sale in 92? For $1200. He didn't have a combine shed. Combines die quickly here unless they are shedded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet I combined over 15,000 acres of small grains and about 1000 acres of sunflowers with dads 915 he bought in late 85. He had the 1460 and a 815 until 83 and sold the 815 to pay bills. His 815 was really a nice looking combine. The 915 he bought from dealer going broke. They traded it on one of their last used 1480s and dad bought it before it was traded for 5000. The 1480s at that time were 20,000 on a cash outright deal. The 915 could do 80 acres a day of 25 bushel wheat in swaths, or 40 to 50 bushel barley or 60 bushel oats. Anything in straight cut slowed it immensely. 35 to 40 acres a day in better wheat or durum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dale560 said:

 The 915 could do 80 acres a day of 25 bushel wheat in swaths, or 40 to 50 bushel barley or 60 bushel oats. Anything in straight cut slowed it immensely. 35 to 40 acres a day in better wheat or durum

Just for comparison if no breakdowns we could do ~160 acres in a very long day with our 760 in the same yields straight cutting.  Kept two trucks busy 3 miles from home.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big Bud guy said:

Just for comparison if no breakdowns we could do ~160 acres in a very long day with our 760 in the same yields straight cutting.  Kept two trucks busy 3 miles from home.  

Yes the 760 was twice the machine of a 915 or even 1460. The Massey header was better cutting and feeding than an early 810 IH. The only thing better on IH was sickle drive. Our neighbor ran 850 combined forever even had new later ones. He ran 24 ft headers they would out work the 1460 any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

 

IMG_6301.jpeg
 

I didn't know it was that extensive.  I thought they just lowered the machine and the cab a few inches somehow.  My one and only big critique of IH conventionals was the engineers never seemed to know how to make a combine with a lower grain tank and center of gravity like Massey and JD.  Maybe not a big deal to flat landers.  

Yes, it was quite extensive. Probably the #1 thing from a sales perspective was that IH finally moved up into the world of quick-attach headers with the low-profile machines. I think IH was just about the last combine manufacturer to have quick-attach headers. That was also when IH released the 800 series headers, with the corn heads leading to a big lawsuit from Deere over patent infringement.  IIRC, the straw walkers had an increased crank throw when they went to the Low-Profile models. Wasn't that also when IH went to the 400 series IH engines in place of the 407 engines used in the early 8/915s which came from the 56 series tractors? I know I've seen some very early 8/915s that used the double-row chain for driving the cylinder like the 03 series, later ones used a belt-drive. IIRC, the 1974 IH Buyer's Guide had a 2-page listing of all the changes with the Low-Profile models.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea @SDman and @dale560have it right from the IH film of low profile combines I’m thinking about. They were introduced in 1974. The cleaning fan chute was able to be unhinged easily for maintenance. There was a service deck and ladder below the engine fan and the fan ran of suction and no belts. There was also an optional service deck under the improved unloading auger. There was also a new swing down ladder. Final drives were improved on the 915 and I think were adjustable. 

Thats what I recall from the film without watching it again. Also btw @Big Bud guy from anything I have found 1970 is when IH started painting the augers red instead of white. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2023 at 8:32 PM, jass1660 said:

I think the 815 had the 345 that was probably 392.

IIRC the 815 had a 304 and the 915 had a 345

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, SDman said:

Yes, it was quite extensive. Probably the #1 thing from a sales perspective was that IH finally moved up into the world of quick-attach headers with the low-profile machines. I think IH was just about the last combine manufacturer to have quick-attach headers. That was also when IH released the 800 series headers, with the corn heads leading to a big lawsuit from Deere over patent infringement.  IIRC, the straw walkers had an increased crank throw when they went to the Low-Profile models. Wasn't that also when IH went to the 400 series IH engines in place of the 407 engines used in the early 8/915s which came from the 56 series tractors? I know I've seen some very early 8/915s that used the double-row chain for driving the cylinder like the 03 series, later ones used a belt-drive. IIRC, the 1974 IH Buyer's Guide had a 2-page listing of all the changes with the Low-Profile models.

The 414 was available in the high profile also. There was one at a consignment sale 15 years ago or so and it had the 400 series engine.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, dale560 said:

Yes the 760 was twice the machine of a 915 or even 1460. The Massey header was better cutting and feeding than an early 810 IH. The only thing better on IH was sickle drive. Our neighbor ran 850 combined forever even had new later ones. He ran 24 ft headers they would out work the 1460 any day of the week.

The 760 doubled a lot of combines to start with.  Massey built their capacity by making wide body separator and but IH just made longer walkers.  I think Massey had the right idea.  It for sure did the work of our two 510s which Massey claimed in their advertising.  Our 760 was a 79' grey cab last year they made them.  Basically an 860 with shorter walkers.  But our 760 still used the old 510 style header and it worked alright but the electric variable speed reel was a joke.  I'm assuming the 9000 series headers came out on the 850/860.  Those were more like the JD 200 series.  The 810 on my 715 likes to bunch up between the feeder house and auger sometimes but I consider it better than what Massey had at the time especially the reel drive.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

 

IMG_6301.jpeg My one and only big critique of IH conventionals was the engineers never seemed to know how to make a combine with a lower grain tank and center of gravity like Massey and JD.  Maybe not a big deal to flat landers.  

IH must have caught some flak over that issue as well. About 10-15 years ago in one of the issues of Harvester Highlights magazine, a former East Moline plant guy had an article where they took an 8 or 915 combine, put a scale underneath all 4 wheels, and weighed the combine with both an empty grain tank and a full grain tank. According to him, the %s from front to back, and side to side were virtually the same regardless of the grain tank being empty or full. Seems like this machine was an early/Hi-Profile model as well. They then did the same procedures with either a MF or Deere combine, and showed how the combines with the front-mounted engines had a much bigger % of the grain tank weight get transferred to the front axle. They were trying to show how the IH combines with the rear-mounted engines were much more stable/balanced regardless of the grain tank being full or empty.

Seems like maybe the guy said IH even made this into an advertisement as well at the time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had 2 815 high profiles, one gasser on Diesel. The gasser died a fiery death like most did and the Diesel was traded on a 1480 in '78. The gas was a 69 and the Diesel was a 70 if I remember right. 

815.png

815-2.png

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMG_7117.jpeg

 

 

IMG_7118.jpeg

 

 

IMG_7116.jpeg

 

I think JD caught some flack early on how tall their combines were too and I mean back in the 50s with the original 55 because in the late 50s they came out with the Hi/Lo series which widen out the grain tank but made it lower.  And I mean the lowered the grain tank by almost a foot.  I don't know why IH never did that.  My 715 stacks the grain above your head and the only way you know it's full is because of the aftermarket buzzer it has.  JD also advertised their combines had almost equal weight distribution on their 55 through 105 series too.  But then they changed tactics on the 00 series and as you can see they give a reason why they moved the engine up front.  To make room for a bigger grain tank without saddle tanks like Massey.  And you can see they weren't afraid to say their combines were front heavy.  These pics are out of the first set of brochures JD put out for the 00 series.  You look at my picture above with the 2 combines, you can see the 715 stands a hair taller, piles the grain a little bit taller then the 7700, but has the same tread or even slightly narrower.  Again not a big deal for flat ground but in some hills like we have it would get unsettling.  Starting with 510s Massey made it so you could fill either side of the grain tank first if you were on a hill.  We still have the sliding gate for that in the old shop.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SDman said:

IH must have caught some flak over that issue as well. About 10-15 years ago in one of the issues of Harvester Highlights magazine, a former East Moline plant guy had an article where they took an 8 or 915 combine, put a scale underneath all 4 wheels, and weighed the combine with both an empty grain tank and a full grain tank. According to him, the %s from front to back, and side to side were virtually the same regardless of the grain tank being empty or full. Seems like this machine was an early/Hi-Profile model as well. They then did the same procedures with either a MF or Deere combine, and showed how the combines with the front-mounted engines had a much bigger % of the grain tank weight get transferred to the front axle. They were trying to show how the IH combines with the rear-mounted engines were much more stable/balanced regardless of the grain tank being full or empty.

Seems like maybe the guy said IH even made this into an advertisement as well at the time?

1972 Summer/Fall Buyers Guide

44F81619-6977-4594-B314-D2D18DB66375.thumb.jpeg.10f30214fb69f787f2097a9986f48859.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

Ever since I started this thread I've been trying to find early low profile 815/915 literature and other stuff and it's been difficult almost like IH buried these combines.  

When I get home from college here in the near future I have a 1970 brochure of the 8 and 915’s and all summer fall guides from 69-73 that those combines are in. I can make a dedicated thread….. or post them here in one shot. First is also from 1972. It’s interesting that all IH Summer/Fall guides have a combine on them. Guess just like Spring guides had a tractor on the front, it was seasonal.  
8B4B75A0-4E98-457F-9067-6FA956469D77.thumb.jpeg.c199e4262fb5281104adfd2b378f4018.jpeg

D966328E-15A4-4310-B621-E5C30654A195.thumb.jpeg.1246daa3c41de628b26a1f547c285b9b.jpeg

  • Like 1
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...