Don: My mistake, if I said 4.25x16, I intended to say 4.5x16. I have the Miller catalogue and yes it"s definitely 4.5, sorry about that. I have a set of 4.5x16 rims with 6.50x16 tires, perfect match. I have these on my Farmall 130 to match 12.4x24 on rear. I have a front mounted snow blade, and while those tires look big on a 130, they keep me out of trouble much better when pushing snow. They roll over frozen obstacles much better than the 5.00x15 did. One area I always got in trouble, I"d push snow well off my driveway then could back out, the larger tires have made this much better. I can understand your wanting to use the 6.50x16, as 7.50x16 will make it sit high on front with 15.5x38 rears. I"m rather sold on these larger front tires, and was even more sold on 16.9x38 rears on 560 and 656. I had a neighbor in Nova Scotia, farmed about 600 acres, flat as a floor and loam over gravel. His 5 tractors from 60 - 150 hp were all 4x4. I once asked him why as on that soil 2 wheel drive would serve well. His answer, "Those 24" front tires make tractor much smoother." Since that time I"ve taken his advice, often wished I"d asked before buying my new 1066 in 1975 with 2 wheel drive. This is why I"m always promoting larger front tires ride smoother, easier on front end and go over obstacles much easier. One day on tillage, making about 6 mph my 1066 front wheel dropped in a hole, went below surface, and by the time operator got stopped, front wheel and bottom half of spindle were under cultivator. IH engineers didn"t always have it right in my opinion.
|