656 or 560

steve in wi · Sep 15, 2008

Right now i have a 656 gaser i use,needs a clutch and exhaust man gasket.I have a chance to buy a 560 diesel fast hitch,wide front,good ta,duals,and 3pt adapter for fast hitch.Can buy it all for 3000. The tractor just does all the hay work, cutting and baling etc. In your own opioions would you stick the money into the 656 or buy the 560 and sell the 656. As far as hours go the 6 must be around 7000, and 560 around 8 or 9000 but runs very good no smoke yet? Thanks just want some ideas,i may be missing something in m y thinking....

Steven f/AZ · Sep 15, 2008

656 is nothing more than an updated 560, really.

The 560 diesel will be MUCH more efficient as far as fuel usage and should serve well for what you want.

I would buy the 560, personally.

Hugh MacKay · Sep 15, 2008

Steve: I had both back when these tractors were new. Personally I'd pick the 656 for hydraulics (two remotes and 3 point), being more operator friendly and the steering. 656 will run circles around a 560 on jobs like haybine, baler, drilling, corn planting, etc., based solely on that steering and good operator platform.

If you set the pumps so they are both cranking the new tractor rated horsepower they will be the same on fuel efficiency. That will be damn close to 1 gph. I operated my 656 at 65 hp and 560 at 90 hp, did a lot of tillage and forage harvester work with the 560. During the years these two tractors were my main source of power, a period of 7 years, I made more money than at any other time during my farming career. I went on to farm with 100hp+ tractors after that, it was never as good.

Steven f/AZ · Sep 15, 2008

Hugh, he has a 656 [b:3d63b2c857]gas[/b:3d63b2c857] - or gas guzzler if it's anything like the one we had!

I'd still take a 560 diesel over a 656 gas.

Hugh MacKay · Sep 15, 2008

Steven: That is a horse of a different color, mine were both diesel. Very simple, buy both and put the diesel in the 656. If one plans to work them, two most important factors in there; diesel and 3 point hitch.

Put the gasser back in the 560, then sell it to someone that only wants to look at it.

Steven f/AZ · Sep 15, 2008

(quoted from post at 16:05:32 09/15/08)
Put the gasser back in the 560, then sell it to someone that only wants to look at it.

Best idea I've heard of in months!!

Owen Aaland · Sep 15, 2008

(quoted from post at 17:19:02 09/15/08)

(quoted from post at 16:05:32 09/15/08)
Put the gasser back in the 560, then sell it to someone that only wants to look at it.

Click to expand...

Best idea I've heard of in months!!

There will be lot of problems swapping the two engines. The front of the engines mount different between the 560 and the 656 so you would need different covers for both of them. The exhaust pipes are on different sides of the hood, gas on right, diesel on left. The engine controls and air filter tubing will not interchange.

The 560 has a heavier clutch housing and rear frame. It followed the M line. The 656 followed the H line. The 460 was the first of the H line to have a 20 inch width across the front frames like the M has but the clutch housing and rear frame are still narrower.

Steven f/AZ · Sep 15, 2008

(quoted from post at 17:36:04 09/15/08)The 656 followed the H line.

Ummm... no. The 656 is a direct replacement for the 560 is a replacement for the 450, 400, SMTA, Super M, M.

I'm not sure where they went after H, Super H, 300, 350, 460... I'm thinking 504 then 544.

Owen Aaland · Sep 15, 2008

(quoted from post at 17:59:11 09/15/08)

(quoted from post at 17:36:04 09/15/08)The 656 followed the H line.

Click to expand...

Ummm... no. The 656 is a direct replacement for the 560 is a replacement for the 450, 400, SMTA, Super M, M.

I'm not sure where they went after H, Super H, 300, 350, 460... I'm thinking 504 then 544.

Next time you get a chance take a good look at the clutch housings. The 656 is narrower than the 560.

MikeinKy · Sep 15, 2008

I don't know what Owen is measuring, but I have both a 560 and 656 and the clutch housings are the same. The 656 has the same engine as the 560 with better hydraulics.

Lee in Iowa · Sep 15, 2008

Every 656 I've ever seen has a smaller clutch housing than a 560. If you look at the frame rails on the 460 , 656, 666, 686 they all narrow up to the clutch housing in one way or another, because as Owen said they are all based on the H. So yes the 560 has a much stouter clutch housing and rear end than the 656. As far as steering I could never tell much difference between a 560 and a 656. Lee

steveormary · Sep 15, 2008

Have driven both. I would prefer the 656.

Good luck.
steveormart

karl f · Sep 15, 2008

physical size isn't the whole story, though. The infamous 460 and 560 rear end failures come to mind. THe 656 should be better designed than the 460 and 560, even after the updates. from my observations in the parts books, it appears the 656 has an extra needle bearing pair in the differential that the older models do not have, and the pinion shaft bearings look different as well. Progress at work.

For the original poster's uses, the rear end is a non issue, but I wanted to make my point that a 656 is not less of a tractor than a 560.

karl f

Hugh MacKay · Sep 16, 2008

Owen: Yes I agree the 656 is narrower through the clutch housing, but certainly heavier than H-460. I also farmed with a 300.

This whole change over from 560 to 656 and gas to diesel is not quite as difficult as you make it sound. I will agree it is a bit more difficult than Steven or I made it sound.

Lee in Iowa · Sep 16, 2008

My 560 has 6100 hours on the tach. The tach hasn't worked in thirty years. The rear end has never been touched. Many of those hours were put on with a loader on the front. My neighbor gave up on his 656 for a loader tractor after it broke in half behind the clutch housing twice. A 460 which has the same size rear end as the 656 was not supposed to have a corn picker put on it unless it had optional heavier axles and or axle housings. The 656 also has more trouble getting stuck in two gears in my experience. Lee

steve in wi · Sep 16, 2008

Thanks for the input,ta i forgot about mentioning getting stuck in two gears also.Everyone agrees the price of 3000 would be allright. It did get painted ten years ago,not a restored job buy a very good paint . I know the owner and see if i can work the price / thanks

BOBM25 · Sep 16, 2008

Oh, heck, for 3 grand buy the 560 and keep the 656. Then add an H. Think about all the time you'll save! One tractor for the haybine, one for the rake, and one for the baler.

But if thats not in the budget, I'd try the 560 out if its in good shape. I know how those 56 series gassers are on fuel. The hydraulics are better on the 656, but I don't suppose you need hydraulics much for baling. I would consider removing the fast hitch and putting on a standard drawbar, though. PTO operated equipment can get to swinging a fast hitch side to side some. I haven't had much expeirence with this, but have heard some guys talk about it and can see where it could be an issue. I don't know how much 3pt equipment you have, but if you don't need it, thats an option.

Hugh MacKay · Sep 16, 2008

Lee: Every 5 or 5 & 2 speed Farmall that ever had a loader for very long got stuck in two gears. Quite common for a loader tractor to shift 50 times for every shift of a deawbar tractor. If your going to use gear shift lever and those shift rails, they do wear out. Another reason they are a poor loader tractor.

My 300 had a loader most of it's 20,000 hours, gear shift lever rebuilt 6 times. My 560 probably did 2,500 hours loader time and had shift lever rebuilt once in 11,000 hours. My 656 probably saw less than 200 hours of loader work and never locked up in 15,000 hours. I did replace the pin on shift lever shaft but not the shaft.

Some day your working your tractor, count the shifts per hour doing loader work, then count shifts per hour disking or baling, etc. My 1066 never had the shift mechanism rebuilt in 15,000 hours, never had a loader. I've seen it work 24 hours on the clock, probably went to neutral dozen times, 4 speed never shifted and TA maybe 50 times. That doesn't wear out shift linkage very fast. Compare that to a loader tractor that probably gets shifted 100 times per hour.

Hugh MacKay · Sep 16, 2008

karl: Right on, we know from the past rear chassis was the weak part of the 560. I'll put my money on a 656 anyday over a 560. My 560 IPTO required 5 clutch packs in 17 years. When my 560 - 282 engine blew up in 1978, (2 pistons out in the yard) used 282s were not plentiful back then. IH wanted $4,000. for a short block. I would have had to use my head, injectors, pump, water pump, etc. I could not see spending $4,000. plus labour, on a tractor without IH CatII 3 point and having that old clutch pack IPTO. Also IH had a 2,000 hour 766 diesel for $9,000. and my 560.

656 or 560

steve in wi

Member

Steven f/AZ

Well-known Member

Hugh MacKay

Well-known Member

Steven f/AZ

Well-known Member

Hugh MacKay

Well-known Member

Steven f/AZ

Well-known Member

Owen Aaland

Well-known Member

Steven f/AZ

Well-known Member

Owen Aaland

Well-known Member

MikeinKy

Well-known Member

Lee in Iowa

Member

steveormary

Well-known Member

karl f

Well-known Member

Hugh MacKay

Well-known Member

Lee in Iowa

Member

steve in wi

Member

BOBM25

Member

Hugh MacKay

Well-known Member

Hugh MacKay

Well-known Member

Similar threads