What differences are there between a 1466 and a1566?

Anonymous-0

Well-known Member
I have only ever seen one 1566 and do not see why IH introduced this model so late in the 66 series run. Actually the 1466 had a better transmission because it had 16 forward speeds with the t/a and the 1566 only has 12, why? it would appear as though if any change to the number of speeds were to occur it would have been to make more speeds rather than less.
 
I am intersted in seing an answer to this one too. I had always heard that the first numbers were the horsepower while the last number indicated the number of cylinders. Not sure if this is true because a local bulletin lists a 1066 as having more than 106. Not trying to hijack your post, but I will be following it.

Nothing like hearing those big diesels against a load.

Aaron
 
Aaron I don't know who started that saying about the number to HP but I have heard it before also.

It is a false statement.


766=76hp
966=100hp
1066=125hp
1466=145hp
1566=161hp

I guess you could say it is true on some but not all that's for sure.

Gary
 
Not exact but ball park close except for 1066 and some sources list 1066 as 106 drawbar horsepower.
 

One fewer gear in the speed transmission allowed IH to make the remaining gears heavier to deal with the additional horsepower.

Planetary final drives, and heavier axles were added as well.

The classic 4-speed, 2-range, TA transmission was only designed for the horsepower that an 806 could put out, around 95HP. It just wasn't built to take 140+ HP, and there were a lot of transmission problems on the '66 series because of it. Wasn't as bad as the 560 fiasco, but then again, there were a lot fewer '66 series tractors than '60 series.

I guess part of the justification for having fewer gears was, the tractor has so much horsepower, you just bull your way through instead of matching ground speed to available power.
 
I don't know where you got that information from,but you are so far out in left field that it isn't even funny.
For starters,the 14s were noted for weak rears,nothing with the trans.
pretty sure their was way more 66 series made than 60 series,infact it is not even close.
I believe their was around 60,000 1066s made alone,but I would have to look it up again to be sure.
 
They ar enot as bad as you would thing,2nd is a bunch faster in low range so you can use L2,L3 and H1 for field work plus the TA.
a 14 will eat the rear before it even gets close to a 15 in the field,a opened up 10 will walk circles around the 14 without eating itself for that matter.
 

Well Red, around here about 20 years ago, the local dealers' shops were full of 66 series tractors, including Dad's, all with the transmissions tore out of them. Nothing wrong with the differential or finals. If that doesn't indicate a problem or design limitation, nothing would.
 
Can't know the answer to that one,but a 10 can be turned up and run circle around the 14.
the 14s rear for some reason is a weak point.
had a total of 8 1086s on the farm with 1 that had a rear problem,bearing went at 9800 hours.
had a total of 5 14s on the farm anf 2 of them had rear jobs before they hit 3000 hours.
 
Yes, in 1973 IH bumped up the rated rpms of the 966, 1066, and 1466, from 2400 rpms to 2600. bringing the 966 in the 100 hosepower class at 105, and bringing the 1066 up from 106 hp up to 125, and the 14 from 133 to 145.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top