450vs560

[766 Man]

  One bottom Dearborn plows come up at auction once in a great while.

[Binderoid]

54 minutes ago, iowaboy1965 said:

Probably the whole gas start then switch to diesel? The mechanism could stick and make them hard to start I believe. Mostly after sitting for a few years? Also I think if you didn't cool one down properly before shutting them off, they would tend to crack the head.

My uncle had one back when they were current. He had some problems with the head. Once for sure  when it caught fire in the field so obviously he was not able to let it cool down before he killed it. 

He had several gas 400/450s as well. Grandpa had a 400 I think.

They both had 400s for a while. Uncle Bill's had M&W firdomes  in it and grand pas was all stock. He said he could pull a plow a gear faster than Grandpa, but had to stop for fuel a hour or 2 sooner also. Somewhere I have a picture of uncle Bill on one of his 400s that the guy before him had repainted.

One thing  that had to be correct (but by no means a chronic or troublesome issue) was the butterflies  had  to snap shut cleanly with no air leaks. Sticky or mis-adjusted linkage results in butterflies  not closing  all the way, and that means no gas start. 

As a kid in  the 70's I remember  the operator reaching up behind  the carburetor  on our TD 24 with a grade pin and tapping  something,  and the engine  would  roll over a couple  cylinders and start right up. Years later we had the intake  off and fixed it  to work  by itself. 

[acem]

It seems that gas tractors were the norm round here before 1960.  After 1970 diesels were the norm.  Diesels were around but did not get popular until the 560 and 3010/4010.

Before the 560, LPG was more common here than Diesel round here.

[John Rowehl]

58 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

That would have been my choice if I was going to use it as a heavy duty plow tractor.  For a hay/yard tractor something you might be starting up several times a day a gas is just more convenient.

Those are excellent points.

Thus, I think the voting trend is a bit ironic the since the bulk of the discussion seems to be how many plow bottoms these models can handle.🤔

[Big Bud guy]

15 minutes ago, John Rowehl said:

Those are excellent points.

Thus, I think the voting trend is a bit ironic the since the bulk of the discussion seems to be how many plow bottoms these models can handle.🤔

The gas 450 theoretically out pulled the diesel version.  My preference has always been JD diesels and IH gassers built before 1960. 

[Powered by IH]

1 hour ago, Big Bud guy said:

The gas 450 theoretically out pulled the diesel version.

Keep in mind though that the gas start diesels were designed for fuel economy, not pulling power.

IH's campaign with those tractors was to do the same amount of work, but at half the cost.

[Big Bud guy]

39 minutes ago, Powered by IH said:

Keep in mind though that the gas start diesels were designed for fuel economy, not pulling power.

IH's campaign with those tractors was to do the same amount of work, but at half the cost.

I’m will aware of that hahahah.  That’s something you learn as a 8 year old farm kid.  Our first diesel tractor was an IH TD 14 bought in 1947 by grandpa.  Our first diesel tractor on tires was a WD-9 bought in 1953. It replaced a “all fuel” W-9.  I’ve only seen one Farmall M-450 diesel in my area because they were used for haying and light duty work.  Fuel economy was not important for that 

[dale560]

23 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

I’m will aware of that hahahah.  That’s something you learn as a 8 year old farm kid.  Our first diesel tractor was an IH TD 14 bought in 1947 by grandpa.  Our first diesel tractor on tires was a WD-9 bought in 1953. It replaced a “all fuel” W-9.  I’ve only seen one Farmall M-450 diesel in my area because they were used for haying and light duty work.  Fuel economy was not important for that 

A lot of M and MDs used for field work here but then 160 acres of farmland was a lot. Then wd9 a were king.

[Big Bud guy]

4 minutes ago, dale560 said:

A lot of M and MDs used for field work here but then 160 acres of farmland was a lot. Then wd9 a were king.

With the Homestead Enlargement Act of 1909 we were starting off with 320 acres.  Great grandpa was farming 600 acres of crop land by the 50s with the WD-9

[dale560]

4 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

With the Homestead Enlargement Act of 1909 we were starting off with 320 acres.  Great grandpa was farming 600 acres of crop land by the 50s with the WD-9

That is what my grandpa had in the late 40s or early 50s. He owned 540 then and rented 160 but about 140 pasture. With super wd9 and M I believe.He started with the 540 or 400 tillable with the M. He bought the farm in 1943 or 44 after renting another place for 4 years.

[acem]

Back in the mule and cotton days, 40 acres was the norm for a family  only part of that was cotton. Rest was corn, etc raised in rotation for the mules, erc.

Lots of hand work in cotton back then. Hoeing, picking, etc.

 

 

[lotsaIHCs]

10 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

With the Homestead Enlargement Act of 1909 we were starting off with 320 acres.  Great grandpa was farming 600 acres of crop land by the 50s with the WD-9

That's a lot like my grandpa. He had 480 acres and then added another 80. He started with a Waterloo Boy and at one time had an H and a Ford N. I'm guessing he was just farming the home 160 with the WB. As he acquired land he scrapped the WB and bought the H. Then at some point, I'm assuming in 1952, he traded the H for a new M and later as far as I know he traded in the N Ford for a 300 Utility. I'd have to check the serial number of the M, can't remember if it was 51 or 52. It has disc brakes but is still a straight M, not a Super. A lot of the details are lost since my grandpa passed in 1964, before I was born. Grandma had an auction sale at that time. Sold all of the equipment. I believe he had a Gleaner combine too. Mom doesn't remember everything they had but she has the paperwork from the auction sale listing all of the equipment and who bought each piece. My dad was able to buy the M back at a neighbor's auction sale. The neighbor bought it on my grandma's auction. At some point 80 acres was sold off to pay taxes on the rest of the land.

[Big Bud guy]

10 hours ago, lotsaIHCs said:

That's a lot like my grandpa. He had 480 acres and then added another 80. He started with a Waterloo Boy and at one time had an H and a Ford N. I'm guessing he was just farming the home 160 with the WB. As he acquired land he scrapped the WB and bought the H. Then at some point, I'm assuming in 1952, he traded the H for a new M and later as far as I know he traded in the N Ford for a 300 Utility. I'd have to check the serial number of the M, can't remember if it was 51 or 52. It has disc brakes but is still a straight M, not a Super. A lot of the details are lost since my grandpa passed in 1964, before I was born. Grandma had an auction sale at that time. Sold all of the equipment. I believe he had a Gleaner combine too. Mom doesn't remember everything they had but she has the paperwork from the auction sale listing all of the equipment and who bought each piece. My dad was able to buy the M back at a neighbor's auction sale. The neighbor bought it on my grandma's auction. At some point 80 acres was sold off to pay taxes on the rest of the land.

What years did farm with the WB?   

[lotsaIHCs]

23 hours ago, Big Bud guy said:

What years did farm with the WB?   

I really don't know. He farmed with it and a team of horses. The history is a bit sketchy from the early years. Grandpa was in his 40s before my mom was born. So she doesn't remember it. All I have are stories that were handed down. If I had to guess I'd say he farmed with the Waterloo Boy in the 20s and 30s. He would have been 30 in 1928 so that would be about right. The only tractors Ive ever heard of him owning were the WB, the Ford N, the H and the M. Oh, I forgot about the 300 utility too. I know he bought the M new but not sure about the others. He took over the farm from his parents and I believe the WB was the first tractor on the place.

[Binderoid]

On 12/17/2025 at 6:34 PM, 766 Man said:

Just about everything in the engine

Everything  in WHAT  engine? 

We were halfway through  the V8 era at the debut of the 9N....maybe you can narrow this down  a bit? 

[766 Man]

2 hours ago, Binderoid said:

Everything  in WHAT  engine? 

We were halfway through  the V8 era at the debut of the 9N....maybe you can narrow this down  a bit? 

  The subject was the 9N engine so that is "WHAT" engine.  Some things such as pistons and sleeves came out of a V8.  In some respects the 9N engine was considered "half" of a Ford V8 engine of that era.  Other things either came from or were short distance derivatives from the Model B engine which could be made on the same production lines.  Things such as generators were direct takeoffs.  The point has always been Ford came out with these components without investing in new factory space and only slightly modified tooling saving investment costs and passing the savings onto the buyers of the 9N and subsequent models.  This is what you see when you read a discussion online.  I don't have an itemized list of what component came from a given engine and I don't think one is necessary.  

[Big Bud guy]

9 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  The subject was the 9N engine so that is "WHAT" engine.  Some things such as pistons and sleeves came out of a V8.  In some respects the 9N engine was considered "half" of a Ford V8 engine of that era.  Other things either came from or were short distance derivatives from the Model B engine which could be made on the same production lines.  Things such as generators were direct takeoffs.  The point has always been Ford came out with these components without investing in new factory space and only slightly modified tooling saving investment costs and passing the savings onto the buyers of the 9N and subsequent models.  This is what you see when you read a discussion online.  I don't have an itemized list of what component came from a given engine and I don't think one is necessary.  

From what I’ve read the rest of the tractor used axles and ring/pinion gears from their 1 ton trucks.  No doubt all that kept the price down. 

[766 Man]

16 minutes ago, Big Bud guy said:

From what I’ve read the rest of the tractor used axles and ring/pinion gears from their 1 ton trucks.  No doubt all that kept the price down. 

  I had a book that made mention of that and had a few paragraph description of the genesis of the 9N but don't know where that book is hiding as of late.  

[bitty]

16 hours ago, 766 Man said:

  The subject was the 9N engine so that is "WHAT" engine.  Some things such as pistons and sleeves came out of a V8.  In some respects the 9N engine was considered "half" of a Ford V8 engine of that era.  Other things either came from or were short distance derivatives from the Model B engine which could be made on the same production lines.  Things such as generators were direct takeoffs.  The point has always been Ford came out with these components without investing in new factory space and only slightly modified tooling saving investment costs and passing the savings onto the buyers of the 9N and subsequent models.  This is what you see when you read a discussion online.  I don't have an itemized list of what component came from a given engine and I don't think one is necessary.  

This must have been completely forgotten by Ford.... They had how many different bell housings in the 70's ? Had three different just for 351 blocks 

[iowaboy1965]

2 hours ago, bitty said:

This must have been completely forgotten by Ford.... They had how many different bell housings in the 70's ? Had three different just for 351 blocks 

Not exactly true, but yes they did have several diff bell housings and Henry probably would not have been pleased 

[lotsaIHCs]

2 hours ago, bitty said:

This must have been completely forgotten by Ford.... They had how many different bell housings in the 70's ? Had three different just for 351 blocks 

That was an odd thing about Fords. Different bell housings on different engines. Chevy had the same between big block and small block. Pontiacs, Olds and Buick shared bell housings, except for the early years. Chrysler had different between big and small block. Then there was Ford. Nothing fit from one to another engine for the most part. Even between 260/289/302 vs 351. The bell housings were the same but none of the accessory brackets were the same. Then between Windsor, Cleveland and Modified almost nothing interchanged. Not to mention the FE and Y blocks. I put a 302 in a Ford van once, it originally had a 351. I thoight no big deal, both the same engine family. I wasn't a Ford guy so I didn't know that basically none of the brackets for accessories interchanged. There was a lot of rigging involved since tha van was a 78 and the donor 302 was an 80s Crown Vic. What a pain. I  had to cut and weld some of the brackets to make things fit. My former brother in law had a 74 Dodge pickup that was originally a small block. He put in a 383 and I rebuilt a big block transmission for it since the original one wouldn't bolt up to the big block. Seems to me there was an issue with the tail shaft.  I think I had to change it out with a shorter one for the shaft that went to the divorced transfer case. That was back in the late 80s or around 1990 so my memory may be a little foggy on that!

[hillman]

2 hours ago, lotsaIHCs said:

. Chevy had the same between big block and small block. 

Bellhousing same down to inline 6 cylinders.  Accessory brackets  engine mounts , starters, distributors ,etc for the engine families the same or will work 

Engine swaps even in 6, small block and big block not terribly difficult 

[bitty]

4 minutes ago, hillman said:

Bellhousing same down to inline 6 cylinders.  Accessory brackets  engine mounts , starters, distributors ,etc for the engine families the same or will work 

Engine swaps even in 6, small block and big block not terribly difficult 

Yes all the same during many years straight 6 through the 454 . Had two starters easy to tell apart. Straight or staggered bolt pattern was the difference. I was spoiled with all the interchangeability as that's what we ran almost exclusively 

[hillman]

Those Ford engines were dual purpose - poor excuse for an engine into the 50s or a boat anchor

Funny the guys on here defending them are defending JD and Ford engines which both were producing engines into the 50s with 1920 designs when everyone else moved on to overhead valve engines much sooner 

AS far as the IH vs Ford it's like comparing Harbor Freight tools to Snapon..... why?

[Dirt_Floor_Poor]

10 minutes ago, hillman said:

Bellhousing same down to inline 6 cylinders.  Accessory brackets  engine mounts , starters, distributors ,etc for the engine families the same or will work 

Engine swaps even in 6, small block and big block not terribly difficult 

My dad took took out the 292 six cylinder in his medium duty Chevy truck and replaced it with a 350 target engine in the 80’s. The only thing that was a small problem was the distributor against the firewall. Clearance was made with a hammer. The interchangeability was a very good system that is completely lost on auto manufacturers now.