Jump to content

John Deere 4020 sales vs All International 706, 806 & 1206 series sales.


czech

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

I’ve said it before I think the 560 rear end became famous because of the timing.  If IH would have put the 560 on the market 2 years earlier to compete with the 720, then the damage would have been minimal since the 3010/4010 would still have been 3-4 years off.  IH could have recovered in that time.

The whole "60 series" never should have existed, at least not as it did. Instead of wasting time and resources on yet another generation of Farmall M level technology, IH should have kept making 350's and 450's so they could have the 706 and 806 ready to introduce in 1960. History would have played out much differently.

IH took appeasing the "I don't like change" crowd one step too far... That's my opinion at least.

3 minutes ago, nepoweshiekfarmalls said:

If the transmission and final drive on the 706/ 806 was so crude,  why is it that most pulling tractors use that driveline behind obscene horsepower?  

Easy answer: They are crude but they are rugged, durable, "bulletproof."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nepoweshiekfarmalls said:

If the transmission and final drive on the 706/ 806 was so crude,  why is it that most pulling tractors use that driveline behind obscene horsepower?  

The accusation that IH was not concerned with operator comfort and convenience...... I have driven both a 706 and a 3020.  If you have long legs, the hydraulic controls are not handy.   I have no issue reaching those levers on my 706!!!!

I could care less about tractor pulling and what it proves.  Doesn’t put food on the table for me.  But I agree the crude statement was probably overboard.  I always thought if you can reach the throttle on a IH that points up and away from you, then you should be able to reach the hydraulics on a pre 69’ JD. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Matt Kirsch said:

The whole "60 series" never should have existed, at least not as it did. Instead of wasting time and resources on yet another generation of Farmall M level technology, IH should have kept making 350's and 450's so they could have the 706 and 806 ready to introduce in 1960. History would have played out much differently.

It’s easy to be complacent when your nearest competitor is selling 2 cylinder tractors.  Did JD give IH the kick in its @$$ to finally start designing a tractor that didn’t go back to 1939’.  When did work on the 06 series start? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have posted pictures of the 806 on here my grandpa bought new. He had also purchased a 2010 jd around that time. I think it replaced a M. The 2010 was sold on their auction in 1972. My dad bought the 806 but neighbors family bought the 2010 and it ended up 150 miles east on a farm of theirs. They state to this day that 2010 has never been in dealership or repair shop for anything major besides a tuneup. I was only 2 when tractor sold so I would like to see it one day. I have seen pictures of it. On his sale he had those 2 tractors and a team of horses yet.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, dale560 said:

I have posted pictures of the 806 on here my grandpa bought new. He had also purchased a 2010 jd around that time. I think it replaced a M. The 2010 was sold on their auction in 1972. My dad bought the 806 but neighbors family bought the 2010 and it ended up 150 miles east on a farm of theirs. They state to this day that 2010 has never been in dealership or repair shop for anything major besides a tuneup. I was only 2 when tractor sold so I would like to see it one day. I have seen pictures of it. On his sale he had those 2 tractors and a team of horses yet.

There's lots of guys who bought inferior equipment and got good service from them. And then there's guys who could break an anvil with a rubber hammer

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big Bud guy said:

It’s easy to be complacent when your nearest competitor is selling 2 cylinder tractors.  Did JD give IH the kick in its @$$ to finally start designing a tractor that didn’t go back to 1939’.  When did work on the 06 series start? 

Just fir friendly debates sake..

..John Deere was building tractors dating back to the 1920s !was it 1922?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big Bud guy said:

I could care less about tractor pulling and what it proves.  Doesn’t put food on the table for me.  But I agree the crude statement was probably overboard.  I always thought if you can reach the throttle on a IH that points up and away from you, then you should be able to reach the hydraulics on a pre 69’ JD. 

I think the main thing people turn their noses up at is the lack of synchronized gears, and to a lesser extent, the lack of a full powershift. 

Everything's relative. The IH 06 series transmission is sophisticated compared to a Case 30-series 6-speed chain drive. That's crude with a capital C, and a capital RUDE.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

It’s easy to be complacent when your nearest competitor is selling 2 cylinder tractors.  Did JD give IH the kick in its @$$ to finally start designing a tractor that didn’t go back to 1939’.  When did work on the 06 series start? 

IH had prototype tractors with a sliding gear transmission setup very similar to the 7/806 design by at least 1950 but likely prior. The problem ensued when John McCaffrey's alleged leadership involved cannibalizing the R&D budget to chase fairy tales and moonbeams around that same time. IH made a big deal about fixing the supposed weakness of the 560 tractor as a marketing ploy while Deere quietly rectified the 4010 transmission failures and their customers returned happily to the more comfortable seat on a more powerful tractor they'd traded their 560 to own. The bottom line on 560 issues is there's scant actual evidence of widespread failure but there is widespread evidence of former IH customers moving to Deere for a better overall operator comfort and more power. This is recrimination central for sure but had McCaffrey not done what he did circa 1950, three decades of playing catch up to ultimately surrender a much improved and competitive product line to Tenneco's Buzzard management disaster area in Racine would most likely been avoided.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took these pics a week and a half ago of some downright pi$$ poor tractors still in use south of Brantford. I was waiting for a spot to post them ,Its not snow on the ground I used to know very good farmers have good service from Allis , Nuffields,Masseys as well

Sights like this are not too common around here seems like everything is green and lately its seems ALL Fendt green. the yellow wheels better watch their market share

image.thumb.jpeg.fd47a224c019d1c3256c0cd8a3ef5ebc.jpeg

image.thumb.jpeg.1637559b04f51e34742e2d2c5995eb24.jpeg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Drysleeves said:

IH had prototype tractors with a sliding gear transmission setup very similar to the 7/806 design by at least 1950 but likely prior.

Yes but when did IH actually start designing the 06 series with the intent of production.  1953 is the year JD put together a team to start work on the NG tractors.  But they had toyed around with the idea of building multi cylinder conventional tractors before that even building a mock-up.

 

35 minutes ago, Drysleeves said:

The bottom line on 560 issues is there's scant actual evidence of widespread failure but there is widespread evidence of former IH customers moving to Deere for a better overall operator comfort and more 

I don’t know how widespread the 560 failures were.  Just reading Ken Updikes book makes it sound like an epidemic.  Hundreds of tractors at all these tents because there was so many to update, sales dropping from over 20,000 to 5,000 in one year and so on.  I talked to an Iowa farmer when I was looking for a Farmall 240.  According to him the only 560s that tore out rear ends was the guys trying to pull 5 bottom plows.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how the 560 gets called antiquated with transmission lineage back to the M. Everyone loves the M through the 450, but were taught to dislike the 560... but the 656 through 686 were adored?  Same bloody tractor. Nobody around here had a bad word to say about a 560 until they started writing books about classic tractors... by certain green with yellow wheeled enthusiasts. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt Kirsch said:

I think the main thing people turn their noses up at is the lack of synchronized gears, and to a lesser extent, the lack of a full powershift. 

Everything's relative. The IH 06 series transmission is sophisticated compared to a Case 30-series 6-speed chain drive. That's crude with a capital C, and a capital RUDE.

I didn’t want to be the one to say it because it might hurt some feelings on here but yes I guess the IH system was crude compared to a JD.  But compared to every one else I think they were alright.

The 6 speed Case 930 overall was sort of a crude tractor.  But then again it was aimed at us wheat farmers.  I think that tractor is one example of its cheap price keeping it in production past its prime.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've spent plenty of time on 706-1066 and JD 2510-4320.

The synchro range JD is only superior to the IH (56-66) on the road. The IH shifts easier to me in the field.

Nobody round here ever talked bad about the transmission and rear end on the 706-1066. As I've said they considered the early JD power shift fragile. Honestly I don't think I ever drove one, just synchros.

The glow plugs on the early 706 could be troublesome. Dad converted his to a crude but reliable system (two wires and a pair of pliers). I upgraded it to a Ford starter solenoid.

I never drove the 06 series with the original style shifter much. Ours was upgraded to the 56 style and very good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

Yes but when did IH actually start designing the 06 series with the intent of production.  1953 is the year JD put together a team to start work on the NG tractors.  But they had toyed around with the idea of building multi cylinder conventional tractors before that even building a mock-up.

 

I don’t know how widespread the 560 failures were.  Just reading Ken Updikes book makes it sound like an epidemic.  Hundreds of tractors at all these tents because there was so many to update, sales dropping from over 20,000 to 5,000 in one year and so on.  I talked to an Iowa farmer when I was looking for a Farmall 240.  According to him the only 560s that tore out rear ends was the guys trying to pull 5 bottom plows.  

  I've been told by a couple of people who worked for IH at HQ that IH was pretty much reactionary to the 4010 as opposed to having a program in the final stages when the New Generation was released.  The only thing they had ready was the D361 from the construction side and the D282 from the 560.  A major retooling of Farmall was not required to produce the 06 so that was not an excuse not to come out with the 06 series in 1960 if that was truly IH's goal.  IH had overextended itself in terms of management during the 1950's.  IH had executives and stockholders that placed pressure on IH to make profits NOW.  The quickest way to do that was extract engines from the largest production line IH had which was the light truck engines which found their way into the 60 series.  The other thing was keep schedules on time and pretty much the same tooling via the 350/450 rear end.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, acem said:

I've spent plenty of time on 706-1066 and JD 2510-4320.

The synchro range JD is only superior to the IH (56-66) on the road. The IH shifts easier to me in the field.

Nobody round here ever talked bad about the transmission and rear end on the 706-1066. As I've said they considered the early JD power shift fragile. Honestly I don't think I ever drove one, just synchros.

The glow plugs on the early 706 could be troublesome. Dad converted his to a crude but reliable system (two wires and a pair of pliers). I upgraded it to a Ford starter solenoid.

I never drove the 06 series with the original style shifter much. Ours was upgraded to the 56 style and very good.

  The early PS was fragile?  Not from what I heard.  There are JD 8 speed power shifts which have tens of thousands of hours on them without rebuild.  You do have to do the required fluid changes, filter changes, and other maintenance to achieve that.  But like I said the more shifts an operator makes the sooner a TA or PS will need repair work.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, acem said:

I've spent plenty of time on 706-1066 and JD 2510-4320.

The synchro range JD is only superior to the IH (56-66) on the road. The IH shifts easier to me in the field.

Nobody round here ever talked bad about the transmission and rear end on the 706-1066. As I've said they considered the early JD power shift fragile. Honestly I don't think I ever drove one, just synchros.

The glow plugs on the early 706 could be troublesome. Dad converted his to a crude but reliable system (two wires and a pair of pliers). I upgraded it to a Ford starter solenoid.

I never drove the 06 series with the original style shifter much. Ours was upgraded to the 56 style and very good.

Obviously you can’t shift on the go doing tillage and that’s were the TA would be superior but that syncro comes in handy in pto work, hay making operations, pulling rock pickers and such.  

We had to get our 4020 PS overhauled but that was only after 6,000 hrs and it did heavy tillage the first half of its life plowing with a IH chisel plow.  The reason for getting the powershift was because we had hills and shifting on the go increased productivity vs stopping and shifting down with all previous tractors.  The 4020 is long gone but I wish I would have written the serial number down because it was one of the first 4020 powershifts.  The manual that came with it was printed before they were tested at Neb. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Farmall Doctor said:

Funny how the 560 gets called antiquated with transmission lineage back to the M. Everyone loves the M through the 450, but were taught to dislike the 560... but the 656 through 686 were adored?  Same bloody tractor. Nobody around here had a bad word to say about a 560 until they started writing books about classic tractors... by certain green with yellow wheeled enthusiasts. 

  The 666 and 686 (1976-1978) had the much preferred D312 in them for the diesel option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

Obviously you can’t shift on the go doing tillage and that’s were the TA would be superior but that syncro comes in handy in pto work, hay making operations, pulling rock pickers and such.  

We had to get our 4020 PS overhauled but that was only after 6,000 hrs and it did heavy tillage the first half of its life plowing with a IH chisel plow.  The reason for getting the powershift was because we had hills and shifting on the go increased productivity vs stopping and shifting down with all previous tractors.  The 4020 is long gone but I wish I would have written the serial number down because it was one of the first 4020 powershifts.  The manual that came with it was printed before they were tested at Neb. 

 

Keeping oil in the transmission was a big thing. Dad had to have the ps fixed on his 4020 a couple years after he bought it in 1980. One of his helpers ran it out of hyd oil a couple times. I had to pull it apart about 20 years later to fix a broken pto clutch assembly. That 8 speed went on to the more later transmissions. In all fairness before he bought the 4020 the 806 needed TA fixed as the sprague broke. They put a m and w tenderfoot on it then also. Dad was a little hard on equipment over the years or so his help was. He was meticulous about cleaning and oil changes back in the day but he wanted to go so it was always full speed wide open. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  By 1961 the 560 had to compete with the Oliver 1800 and Case 930 as well as the JD 4010 as farmers always wanted more power.  Those tractors delivered their rated power effortlessly while to get 85 HP out of a 560 diesel required a turbo and still lacked a fully integrated 3 point hitch.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a kid and not allowed to drive the power shift tractors because I might break them.  My neighbors didn't use them for tillage by the time I was old enough to remember.  They had to rebuild them before I was around and didn't want to pay that price again.  The ones I was around were used for planting and other lighter duty work while the sychro range tractors did the tillage.  Our ground is mostly flat so there was no real need to change gears.

The sychro shifter got really sloppy after years of cultivating.  So did the IH (56-66) but I was able to keep them functioning better. I was cultivating alot back then.  We didn't realize until the 80s that you could rebuild the range cover on the IH tractors.  Man what a difference that made!  Never rebuilt the shifter on a sychro range.

Those sychro range transmissions seemed to be tough like the IH TA delete transmissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  By 1961 the 560 had to compete with the Oliver 1800 and Case 930 as well as the JD 4010 as farmers always wanted more power.  Those tractors delivered their rated power effortlessly while to get 85 HP out of a 560 diesel required a turbo and still lacked a fully integrated 3 point hitch.  

Don’t forget 1900.  What flies under the radar is the 1800/1900 introduced in 1960.  They were a step above the IH offerings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  By 1961 the 560 had to compete with the Oliver 1800 and Case 930 as well as the JD 4010 as farmers always wanted more power.  Those tractors delivered their rated power effortlessly while to get 85 HP out of a 560 diesel required a turbo and still lacked a fully integrated 3 point hitch.  

I’m sure it was a tough call about releasing the 706/806 vs run the x60 series another year.  As mentioned they had just come off the rear end failures and didn’t want a repeat, but they were losing market share.  I wouldn’t want to make that decision.

i think everyone agrees that if the 06 series had followed the x50 series, even if the x50 had to run a year longer, IH probably would have stayed ahead or even with Deere at the time.  A Farmall 706/806 up against a 730, now that isn’t a fair comparison.


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mudfly said:

I’m sure it was a tough call about releasing the 706/806 vs run the x60 series another year.  As mentioned they had just come off the rear end failures and didn’t want a repeat, but they were losing market share.  I wouldn’t want to make that decision.

i think everyone agrees that if the 06 series had followed the x50 series, even if the x50 had to run a year longer, IH probably would have stayed ahead or even with Deere at the time.  A Farmall 706/806 up against a 730, now that isn’t a fair comparison.


 

  Any information I have to go by says the 06 series simply was not ready to go by 1961.  I don't doubt that it did not take long to come up with the 4 X 2 transmission as the base for the 706 and 806 but the line needed a couple years of testing which was not out of the ordinary for a US built farm tractor then.  But there is no changing the chain of events from the mid-1950's to the mid-1960's.  IH was adding divisions but was not adding profit hence the 60's series and the use of IH light truck engines.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mudfly said:

 

 A Farmall 706/806 up against a 730, now that isn’t a fair comparison.


 

That wouldn’t be fair.   What also wouldn’t be fair is if the 4010 came out in 1958 as originally planned.  For as much grief the 560 gets, IH did have the problem mostly fixed by the time the 4010 hit the market.  The 2-cylinder 30 series were just a stop gap intended to fool not only the competition but JD customers as well.  The 20 series were suppose to be the last of the 2 cylinders. 

  • 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...