450vs560

[lotsaIHCs]

Chevy 292 was the one oddball with its staggered mounts. But most pickup frames were drilled for both the 292 and 230/250 mounts so it was just a matter of moving the bracket on the frame.

[Dirt_Floor_Poor]

11 minutes ago, lotsaIHCs said:

Chevy 292 was the one oddball with its staggered mounts. But most pickup frames were drilled for both the 292 and 230/250 mounts so it was just a matter of moving the bracket on the frame.

On this truck the 350 is way too far back from the radiator, but it has never caused any problems. The original 6 cylinder radiator was still in it up until about 15 years ago. We still have the truck. My dad always said the 350 had more power loaded than the 292 had when empty. He hated that engine. 

[766 Man]

39 minutes ago, hillman said:

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?

  You are missing the point as I was discussing the commercial success of the N series Ford versus the mechanical performance or durability.  BTW the way you have constructed your last sentence you have IH alikened to Harbor Freight which I am sure that you did not intend.  Probably a good thing that Ole Henry was a little quaint in regards to the N series being a one size fits all solution for the American farmer.  A shrewder industrialist would have considered a product in other HP classes such 35-40 PTO HP as well as the N series.  Ford had the financial power to build a stout machine which would have put a hurt on the other tractor manufacturers.  Anyways, do not confuse a simple discussion of who did what in tractor development with a personal preference as I don't consider myself a lover of the N series Fords.  I am simply giving credit where credit is due.  

[Big Bud guy]

43 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  You are missing the point as I was discussing the commercial success of the N series Ford versus the mechanical performance or durability.  BTW the way you have constructed your last sentence you have IH alikened to Harbor Freight which I am sure that you did not intend.  Probably a good thing that Ole Henry was a little quaint in regards to the N series being a one size fits all solution for the American farmer.  A shrewder industrialist would have considered a product in other HP classes such 35-40 PTO HP as well as the N series.  Ford had the financial power to build a stout machine which would have put a hurt on the other tractor manufacturers.  Anyways, do not confuse a simple discussion of who did what in tractor development with a personal preference as I don't consider myself a lover of the N series Fords.  I am simply giving credit where credit is due.  

Speaking of engines, flat head Chrysler engines took off a lot grain off the fields in US/Western Canada wheat belt through the 50s into the 60s. Flat heads built after Ford dropped the 8n

[hillman]

3 hours ago, 766 Man said:

  You are missing the point as I was discussing the commercial success of the N series Ford versus the mechanical performance or durability.  BTW the way you have constructed your last sentence you have IH alikened to Harbor Freight which I am sure that you did not intend.  Probably a good thing that Ole Henry was a little quaint in regards to the N series being a one size fits all solution for the American farmer.  A shrewder industrialist would have considered a product in other HP classes such 35-40 PTO HP as well as the N series.  Ford had the financial power to build a stout machine which would have put a hurt on the other tractor manufacturers.  Anyways, do not confuse a simple discussion of who did what in tractor development with a personal preference as I don't consider myself a lover of the N series Fords.  I am simply giving credit where credit is due.  

Lmao, how would you think me of all ppl would liken IH to HF. The Fords were economy tractors

 Didn't miss your point at all. You are so eager to prove someone wrong you leap to assumptions 

I was pointing out the design left a lot to be desired

 By the time the 8n maybe 2n rolled around was the parts still common with the auto sector ?

IMHO Ford started building a decent tractor after the 8N

 

Flathead  don't matter of its a Briggs & Straton , Chrysler  ,Ford or a Cub they were outdated 

[hillman]

1 hour ago, Dirt_Floor_Poor said:

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. 

Ford 300 10 times the engine 

[766 Man]

2 hours ago, hillman said:

Lmao, how would you think me of all ppl would liken IH to HF. The Fords were economy tractors

 Didn't miss your point at all. You are so eager to prove someone wrong you leap to assumptions 

I was pointing out the design left a lot to be desired

 By the time the 8n maybe 2n rolled around was the parts still common with the auto sector ?

IMHO Ford started building a decent tractor after the 8N

 

Flathead  don't matter of its Chrysler  Ford or a Cub that were outdated 

  Certainly by the time the 8N came to a conclusion there were far fewer parts that originated in the auto division.  But Henry's thinking for the time the 9N was developed and introduced that the 9N needed a rock bottom selling price as the US and Canada were feeling the effects of the Great Depression was correct.  And the timing was perfect as the Second World War ended that there would huge demand for such a tractor inside and outside of agriculture.  I agree that the N series had flaws and a major one was the engines did not go long in between rebuilds.  Getting 100-150 hours out of rod and main bearings was doing pretty well for that engine.  I already pointed out that the HP was ineffective for larger PTO driven equipment.  The N's could get stuck on a banana peal.  I am not sure of what your criticisms were?  I am not a lover of the N's and get tired of the romanticism but there is no denying their place in the history of mechanizing agriculture.  

[hillman]

Sure the Ferguson System played a role in the advancement of tractors

My criticism is the OP starts a pure IH thread and it gets into a JD or Ford thread

IH gets bashed  on here at will  but heaven forbid you critique JD or Ford n

.believe it or not I don't care if someone likes them

 

If someone drops by my place and starts these debates I hope he doesn't come back

[marty966]

6 minutes ago, hillman said:

Sure the Ferguson System played a role in the advancement of tractors

My criticism is the OP starts a pure IH thread and it gets into a JD or Ford love fest.

IH gets bashed  on here at will  but heaven forbid you critique JD or Ford

.believe it or not I don't care if someone likes them

 

If someone drops by my place and starts these debates I hope he doesn't come back

Thinking this is more the love of debate rather than the love of any given color of farm machinery.

[hillman]

5 minutes ago, marty966 said:

Thinking this is more the love of debate rather than the love of any given color of farm 

I apologize for my part. 

[marty966]

2 minutes ago, hillman said:

I apologize for my part. 

 

3 minutes ago, hillman said:

I apologize for my part. 

Oh well... the old saying about arguing with a farmer is like rassling a pig in the mud....

[lotsaIHCs]

To the original question, I've driven a 450, which has a lot in common with my Ms. I didn't drive it much, I was just doing some repairs on it for a customer so I moved it around a couple of times. I've never run a 560 but would like to sometime. For my own use I'm sure either would be just fine. I just use my Ms dinking around the yard, moving vehicles around and such. I probably would be happy with either one just for the power steering! I sure like that part of my Hydro 70 and 1066.

[hillman]

1 hour ago, marty966 said:

 

Oh well... the old saying about arguing with a farmer is like rassling a pig in the mud....

now that you mention it...........what's better cows or pigs😁

[marty966]

7 minutes ago, hillman said:

now that you mention it...........what's better cows or pigs😁

Definitely cows they don`t stink as bad

[iowaboy1965]

33 minutes ago, marty966 said:

Definitely cows they don`t stink as bad

I like bacon....

[hillman]

1 hour ago, iowaboy1965 said:

I like bacon....

you, you ....you hijacker😉

[Big Bud guy]

3 hours ago, lotsaIHCs said:

To the original question, I've driven a 450, which has a lot in common with my Ms. I didn't drive it much, I was just doing some repairs on it for a customer so I moved it around a couple of times. I've never run a 560 but would like to sometime. For my own use I'm sure either would be just fine. I just use my Ms dinking around the yard, moving vehicles around and such. I probably would be happy with either one just for the power steering! I sure like that part of my Hydro 70 and 1066.

I had a 450 gas wide front with a Farmhand F-10 loader for a short time.  M on steroids but 10 times better.  

[iowaboy1965]

I guess it's a 400. May have been worked over to 450 specs. Uncle Bill isn't around anymore to ask. He told me the guys name that owned this tractor before him, but I've long forgotten. The light color is actually a gray he told me.

Grandpa is at the wheel. Uncle Bill is standing. There is a date of Jan 58 stamped on the border of the picture from when it was processed, I assume. Gosh, I wish they were both still around to tell their stories.

[acem]

13 hours ago, hillman said:

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?

I think the comparison is common because IH and Ford were the big sellers at that time.  

[Binderoid]

9 hours ago, 766 Man said:

  Certainly by the time the 8N came to a conclusion there were far fewer parts that originated in the auto division.  But Henry's thinking for the time the 9N was developed and introduced that the 9N needed a rock bottom selling price as the US and Canada were feeling the effects of the Great Depression was correct.  And the timing was perfect as the Second World War ended that there would huge demand for such a tractor inside and outside of agriculture.  I agree that the N series had flaws and a major one was the engines did not go long in between rebuilds.  Getting 100-150 hours out of rod and main bearings was doing pretty well for that engine.  I already pointed out that the HP was ineffective for larger PTO driven equipment.  The N's could get stuck on a banana peal.  I am not sure of what your criticisms were?  I am not a lover of the N's and get tired of the romanticism but there is no denying their place in the history of mechanizing agriculture.  

Now I know you're stoned. Rod bearings  last only one oil change? 

[lotsaIHCs]

5 hours ago, marty966 said:

Definitely cows they don`t stink as bad

But pigs can devour evidence!🙄

[MacAR]

57 minutes ago, lotsaIHCs said:

But pigs can devour evidence!🙄

This is the correct answer!

[chadd]

Hard choice between the epitome of the gas 4 cylinder 248/263/281 engines and the 560 diesel.  I'd have to give the nod to the 560 Diesel by just a hair.  I'd like to try either one though.  I've been pretty impressed with the D282 in our 660.  It is a smooth runner, sips fuel, and the power output is pretty close to our 806.  Would be interesting to experience it on a row crop.  Also, I'd give the 60 series a leg up in the hydraulics department vs. the 450.

[766 Man]

10 hours ago, Binderoid said:

Now I know you're stoned. Rod bearings  last only one oil change? 

  The Ford dealers recommended a change interval of 50 hours if doing heavy work.  All that aside metal refining and oil refining/additives were far inferior to what is used today.  Talk to anybody who worked on tractors during the 1940's and 1950's and they will tell you the tractor that did heavy work usually was ready for an overhaul every 5-7 years.  Don't matter the brand.  If grandpa never "touched" the engine of your favorite tractor that means he babied it sacrificing production or the tractor was relegated to sickle bar mower duty or in all likelihood was telling you a tall tale to make you feel good after a tough day at school.  The targeted farm buyer of an N typically had 20 acres or less meaning unless he turned all the soil over on those 20 acres maybe 30 hours per year on average on a N tractor.  That is unless he used it to run down to the mailbox on a 90 degree morning or went to town to get cough medicine when the old flivver would not start.  

[Binderoid]

2 minutes ago, 766 Man said:

  The Ford dealers recommended a change interval of 50 hours if doing heavy work.  All that aside metal refining and oil refining/additives were far inferior to what is used today.  Talk to anybody who worked on tractors during the 1940's and 1950's and they will tell you the tractor that did heavy work usually was ready for an overhaul every 5-7 years.  Don't matter the brand.  If grandpa never "touched" the engine of your favorite tractor that means he babied it sacrificing production or the tractor was relegated to sickle bar mower duty or in all likelihood was telling you a tall tale to make you feel good after a tough day at school.  The targeted farm buyer of an N typically had 20 acres or less meaning unless he turned all the soil over on those 20 acres maybe 30 hours per year on average on a N tractor.  That is unless he used it to run down to the mailbox on a 90 degree morning or went to town to get cough medicine when the old flivver would not start.  

If that were true,  IH wouldn't  have to have been giving away plows with tractors to beat a Ford sale. The oil change interval  in a similar  size  IH engine  in '39 was up to 240 hours  max. 

So the rod bearings  can  go TWO oil changes. Im cool with that.