Vintage Ads

[Loadstar]

The MacDon model is 7000.

We had a couple of 75 pull-type swathers 15' with left-end delivery and self-contained hydraulics. Built by Kilberry or MacDon. When did Kilberry become MacDon?

We double-swathed with that. Could use a 230 or H without hydraulics.

Pretty much the same swather as the Cockshutt 402 pull type and the Massey 35. I used to run my uncle's Cockshutt pull type with the self contained hydraulics with the 730 Case tractor. Used to say if it was mine I would sure change it over to tractor hydraulics. It was hard on the arm and shoulder reaching back to those table and reel control levers even then.

This ad from 1966 gives a pretty limited view of the pull type Cockshutt 402 swather . The self propelled was popular at the time.

[lightninboy]

It seems hard to find ads and literature on Killbery and older MacDon swathers. It's like they sold hardly any in their own name.

And then there's Renn and Prairie Star and Premier and Westward.

New Holland did have a 109 pull-type swather.

[Loadstar]

It seems hard to find ads and literature on Killbery and older MacDon swathers. It's like they sold hardly any in their own name.

And then there's Renn and Prairie Star and Premier and Westward.

New Holland did have a 109 pull-type swather.

I have a photo of a Kilberry swather that a friend bought used in 1970. No ads though.

Yes, I think that NH 109 was the same machine as the IH 75, MF 35, JD 580 , White 501.

And the only Renn ad I have is this one from the 1970s. This swather was the same as the Massey 655, the White 6200. They were in the early days of hydrostatics and a fairly decent swather for the time. Big improvement on the old planetary drives with brakes and clutches.

[Loadstar]

Just in case you were worried I might have run out of vintage ads, here is one of my favourite Case ads from 1967. The 1030, at just over 100 hp was a big tractor in those days. And that giant 1660 combine with it's 52 inch wide cylinder was a machine that only the big farmers could afford to look at.

[Big Bud guy]

Just in case you were worried I might have run out of vintage ads, here is one of my favourite Case ads from 1967. The 1030, at just over 100 hp was a big tractor in those days. And that giant 1660 combine with it's 52 inch wide cylinder was a machine that only the big farmers could afford to look at.

That is a great ad. The 1030 was a big tractor if you were a Case guy. JD and IH had it outclassed with bigger ones. That 1660 is one combine I would love to have. Whats funny is in my part of the world big combines like those were popular but you just don't see any Case combines. I only know of one 1660 in the area but JD 105s, IH 503s, and MF 510s were common as dirt almost. And the 105 wasn't too far behind the 1660 with a 50" cylinder.

[M Diesel]

Neat to see a 580 Case intro ad. Those certainly became common as dirt, but the 680 I don't recall ever seeing personally. Probably just over looked them.

[George 2]

Big Bud guy; The reason why you see so few Case 1660 combines is given in the book about Case published in 1992. In it they lamented the fact that the sales penetration was very low and because of that, Case in the 1970's got out of the combine business altogether.

[Loadstar]

The Case combines were pretty popular here in the sixties and into the seventies. We had a good dealer nearby which helped. The 600 was a favourite of the medium sized farmer. The big 1010 with that 318 Chrysler V8 was a good capacity machine. I don't recall ever seeing a 700 but there were a few 400 pull types around.

[Big Bud guy]

The Case combines were pretty popular here in the sixties and into the seventies. We had a good dealer nearby which helped. The 600 was a favourite of the medium sized farmer. The big 1010 with that 318 Chrysler V8 was a good capacity machine. I don't recall ever seeing a 700 but there were a few 400 pull types around.

There weren't many Case combines around here compared to the competition. Might have something to do with the fact their first generation self propelled combines were poorly engineered and that turned people off from the later ones. I have a 600 and I always thought they were for the very small farmer. It puts out one heck of a sample but my JD 55 will outcut it.

[Steve C.]

The Case combines were pretty popular here in the sixties and into the seventies. We had a good dealer nearby which helped. The 600 was a favourite of the medium sized farmer. The big 1010 with that 318 Chrysler V8 was a good capacity machine. I don't recall ever seeing a 700 but there were a few 400 pull types around.

There weren't many Case combines around here compared to the competition. Might have something to do with the fact their first generation self propelled combines were poorly engineered and that turned people off from the later ones. I have a 600 and I always thought they were for the very small farmer. It puts out one heck of a sample but my JD 55 will outcut it.

Now that's a good picture.

[Loadstar]

There weren't many Case combines around here compared to the competition. Might have something to do with the fact their first generation self propelled combines were poorly engineered and that turned people off from the later ones. I have a 600 and I always thought they were for the very small farmer. It puts out one heck of a sample but my JD 55 will outcut it.

Never having run either combine I can't comment on it first hand but it would seem like the 600 would leave a JD 55 in the dust considering the size. Didn't the 600 have the 40 inch wide cylinder? That is closer in size to the 95. Although I know that smaller diameter Case cylinder did not have the inertia of the bigger ones.

Here is the predecessor to the 1010 . The model 1000. Pre V8 engine. Think this one had a Hercules six. Although according to this, it was a Case engine. I am sure I recall a neighbour's 1000 with the Hercules engine.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=MNaaSJMHPHEC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=Case+1000+combine&source=bl&ots=lH4Do5IQSh&sig=CaW-yyRMG7mcQt3Y3psxhLZm8e0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9rERVILEF4jIiwLujoGICA&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Case%201000%20combine&f=false

[Delta Dirt]

Re: Case combines

I remember my neighbor having a larger scale Case back in the late 60's-------early 70's with the 318 Chrysler engine. Had a 20 ft cutter bar--------but seems like the header was offset from the machine itself. Did Case have one with the cab mounted to the right hand side of the combine-------something looked odd about this combine?????? Can't quite get this all pictured in my head------------this was prior to flex cutter bars, but that old Case did a better job of scrubbing the ground in soybeans than any combine around here.

They were running it when Case got out of the combine business. Replaced it with a 1460.

DD

[Loadstar]

Re: Case combines

I remember my neighbor having a larger scale Case back in the late 60's-------early 70's with the 318 Chrysler engine. Had a 20 ft cutter bar--------but seems like the header was offset from the machine itself. Did Case have one with the cab mounted to the right hand side of the combine-------something looked odd about this combine?????? Can't quite get this all pictured in my head------------this was prior to flex cutter bars, but that old Case did a better job of scrubbing the ground in soybeans than any combine around here.

They were running it when Case got out of the combine business. Replaced it with a 1460.

DD

Anson, probably a 1660 although it could have been a 1010. I believe all the Case combines had the offset operators platform, to the left of centre in the sixties. Header was dead centre . Of course I could be proven wrong as there is always something new to learn it seems. An example is this ad from 1966. I had never heard of a model 1160 combine but here it is. No specifications listed so I don't know if it an early version of the 1660 or what. The 1660 was introduced the next year according to my ads.

[Big Bud guy]

There weren't many Case combines around here compared to the competition. Might have something to do with the fact their first generation self propelled combines were poorly engineered and that turned people off from the later ones. I have a 600 and I always thought they were for the very small farmer. It puts out one heck of a sample but my JD 55 will outcut it.

Never having run either combine I can't comment on it first hand but it would seem like the 600 would leave a JD 55 in the dust considering the size. Didn't the 600 have the 40 inch wide cylinder? That is closer in size to the 95. Although I know that smaller diameter Case cylinder did not have the inertia of the bigger ones.

Here is the predecessor to the 1010 . The model 1000. Pre V8 engine. Think this one had a Hercules six. Although according to this, it was a Case engine. I am sure I recall a neighbour's 1000 with the Hercules engine.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=MNaaSJMHPHEC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=Case+1000+combine&source=bl&ots=lH4Do5IQSh&sig=CaW-yyRMG7mcQt3Y3psxhLZm8e0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9rERVILEF4jIiwLujoGICA&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Case%201000%20combine&f=false

Correct the 600 did have a 40" cylinder. However, you can't look at only the cylinder width to judge capacity. The 600 is built like the IH 203/93 which means they have a wide cylinder but a short separator. In fact the 600 doesn't even use walkers just a straw rack which I am going to assume its not as efficient as walkers. The problem with the 600 is it runs out of hp. 56 hp from a 188 Case engine were as the 55 had 71 hp from a 217 JD engine. The 600 was built to compete with the JD 45 and other small combines. My Case 600 brochure states "New Case 600 combine with big 40" cylinder capacity in the price range of 26 and 28 inch machines." In other words Case was trying to convince farmers you get more bang for your buck because the 600 has a wider cylinder when in actuality they didn't have anymore capacity then the narrow machines. And I agree with you the smaller diameter cylinder didn't help Case. 19" vs 22". All I know is a Case 600 and JD 55 are maxed out in 60+ bu spring wheat. Difference is the 600 is pushing 10ft and the 55 is pushing a 14ft header. Been there done that. And I think a JD 95 will double a 600 which I can try someday if I get my 95 going. BTW, nice Case ads keep them coming.

[Big Bud guy]

Re: Case combines

I remember my neighbor having a larger scale Case back in the late 60's-------early 70's with the 318 Chrysler engine. Had a 20 ft cutter bar--------but seems like the header was offset from the machine itself. Did Case have one with the cab mounted to the right hand side of the combine-------something looked odd about this combine?????? Can't quite get this all pictured in my head------------this was prior to flex cutter bars, but that old Case did a better job of scrubbing the ground in soybeans than any combine around here.

They were running it when Case got out of the combine business. Replaced it with a 1460.

DD

Yes they did make combines with the ops platform on the right side and the header offset. They were the No 9 and No 12 which was Case's first self propelled combines. Those are the combines I was referring that were poorly engineered. Later on came the 120 and 150 before going to the newer design. You can tell Case didn't have much RD money because the No 9/12 is just their pull type K/M models with a Case VAC tractor tranny slid underneath and a Case DE or CE engine mounted inline behind you. I have the one in the picture and it is crude compared to JD, Gleaner, and Massey.

[Big Bud guy]

The Case combines were pretty popular here in the sixties and into the seventies. We had a good dealer nearby which helped. The 600 was a favourite of the medium sized farmer. The big 1010 with that 318 Chrysler V8 was a good capacity machine. I don't recall ever seeing a 700 but there were a few 400 pull types around.

There weren't many Case combines around here compared to the competition. Might have something to do with the fact their first generation self propelled combines were poorly engineered and that turned people off from the later ones. I have a 600 and I always thought they were for the very small farmer. It puts out one heck of a sample but my JD 55 will outcut it.

Now that's a good picture.

Thanks. We run two similar machines but that was my neighbor's combine. He borrowed our pickup header and was bringing it back. I meet him just coming back from the field cutting the last 2 acres on our farm with the 600. So we took a pic. The augers in the bottom of the grain tank on the Deere are as big as the unloading auger on the 600.

[Loadstar]

Yes they did make combines with the ops platform on the right side and the header offset. They were the No 9 and No 12 which was Case's first self propelled combines. Those are the combines I was referring that were poorly engineered. Later on came the 120 and 150 before going to the newer design. You can tell Case didn't have much RD money because the No 9/12 is just their pull type K/M models with a Case VAC tractor tranny slid underneath and a Case DE or CE engine mounted inline behind you. I have the one in the picture and it is crude compared to JD, Gleaner, and Massey.

I still have my uncle's K2 pull type sitting in the bush rusting away. It was out of service before I was old enough to take notice. Couple of 95 JDs as well.

And Case did change from right to left side driver platform somewhere in about the late fifties I think. I have a photo of a neighbour who had come in to help finish the harvest with his right side driver platform Case. A little newer than this 1951 ad I think.

[fastcars63]

_{This was in my home town paper many years ago. The Grayson County Historical Facebook page posted this picture}

[Big Bud guy]

Yes they did make combines with the ops platform on the right side and the header offset. They were the No 9 and No 12 which was Case's first self propelled combines. Those are the combines I was referring that were poorly engineered. Later on came the 120 and 150 before going to the newer design. You can tell Case didn't have much RD money because the No 9/12 is just their pull type K/M models with a Case VAC tractor tranny slid underneath and a Case DE or CE engine mounted inline behind you. I have the one in the picture and it is crude compared to JD, Gleaner, and Massey.

I still have my uncle's K2 pull type sitting in the bush rusting away. It was out of service before I was old enough to take notice. Couple of 95 JDs as well.

And Case did change from right to left side driver platform somewhere in about the late fifties I think. I have a photo of a neighbour who had come in to help finish the harvest with his right side driver platform Case. A little newer than this 1951 ad I think.

Originally there was the SP 9 and SP 12. The number corresponded to the header width. The SP9 used a SE engine and the 12 used a DE engine. Both combines used straw racks but the rack was shorter on the 9 plus the 9 had a smaller grain tank. Case later on did add the 15ft header option for the 12 which is what mine has. One of my neighbors had a K2 out in the junk. I looked at it a few times before he scrapped it. I'm not kidding you. Case turned the engine side ways and added a steering wheel and seat. He also had a Cockshutt combine with something around a 6-7ft header and a auger at the top of the header that used a canvas. The auger was for moving the crop over because the separator was a narrow body not wide like a JD 12A. Header was on the left side. Got ad for one of those?

[Loadstar]

_{This was in my home town paper many years ago. The Grayson County Historical Facebook page posted this picture}

Interesting to see the price of the IH fridges. I wonder if it was for one of these 1951 models?

[664 CDN]

Ralph, Mom & Dad had a fridge just like that, bought new in 1951 when we got hydro on our road.

That handle was the worst part of it, prone to break.

I got it for a beer fridge about 1975, and it ran until the late 1980,s.

had the white handle insert that was nla in the 80,s.

Ray

[Old Binder Guy]

Ray and Ralph,

Mom got a new refrigerator in 1951 as well. It came with a bronze colored insert and Mom picked up a yellow insert for her yellow kitchen. That bronze insert kicked around in a junk drawer in the back porch and I think it was still there when I moved out when married. It was a good refrigerator and only was replaced when the large rectangular double door, with freezer on bottom Frigidaire came out.

I really liked the "IH emblem" in the handle of Aunt Lillian's 1949 IH refrigerator though. I was just starting school and it impressed me immensely! Gary

[Loadstar]

He also had a Cockshutt combine with something around a 6-7ft header and a auger at the top of the header that used a canvas. The auger was for moving the crop over because the separator was a narrow body not wide like a JD 12A. Header was on the left side. Got ad for one of those?

I think I might have seen one of those combne ads but not stored on this computer. Closest I have is this one from 1950 with 38 inch straight through cylinder and 8 foot cut.

The Cockshutt model 7.

[Loadstar]

Ray and Ralph,

Mom got a new refrigerator in 1951 as well. It came with a bronze colored insert and Mom picked up a yellow insert for her yellow kitchen. That bronze insert kicked around in a junk drawer in the back porch and I think it was still there when I moved out when married. It was a good refrigerator and only was replaced when the large rectangular double door, with freezer on bottom Frigidaire came out.

I really liked the "IH emblem" in the handle of Aunt Lillian's 1949 IH refrigerator though. I was just starting school and it impressed me immensely! Gary

That was some clever marketing by IH offering different color combinations on the fridges. I don't know the vintage of the one we have that belonged to my uncle. I just remember hauling it home from the city for him in the back of the IH B110 pickup about 40 years ago. It was a used fridge then and it out lasted my uncle.

[Loadstar]

And here is a better view of the Cockshutt number 7 pull type combine. Right from the combine brochure. About 1950 I believe.