Was at a John Deere auction last saturday in Pasco, WA.

They had a pair of Farmall Super MTA's there, all painted up with new rubber.

Winning bid was [b:654c4848f0]$7,000[/b:654c4848f0] so he had choice on which of the two he wanted... HE SAID HE WANTED BOTH! So he bought the pair for [b:654c4848f0]$14,000[/b:654c4848f0] plus a 10% buyers fee. So, that comes to [b:654c4848f0]$15,400[/b:654c4848f0].

If they are good restorations then that is right on the mark for the price.

arod: Correction, "MOST FARMALLS HOLD THEIR VALUE". My Farmall SA was bought new in 1953 for $950., if you want to buy it now all restored, you best come with 4 times that much. Even my old non restored 130 was bought new for $1,650. with plow and cultivators. I bet I can do better today on tractor alone. My 656 diesel was bought new in 67 for $4,200. My Farmall 300 in 55 for $3,000.

I'm thinking those MTAs were probably $3,500. new.

The tractors that aren't holding there value are 100hp+ tractors, not enough folks have any use for them.

plus on the 100+ hp class, when they are used, they are USED, abused, and all worn out. I would venture that manufacturing materials were designed within closer durability & failure margins to the horsepower class compared to A C H M. That is, the design limitations were maxed out. You can see the evidence in the transmission and rear end development saga.

Anyone needing a 100+ horsepower tractor needs to depend on it like they depend on their heart to be a successful farmer. THey cannot afford to be down daily as more and more parts fail on a wore out work horse. Even complete rebuilds front to rear cannot be relied on as castings and non wear (a floating shaft for example) critical parts have been stressed. The warranty of a new one brings extra insurance to the table--at least at catastrophic failure the farmer can know the dealer and manufacturer will be more apt to help him with urgency.

Another reason that is equally in first with the above is the features. New equipment hydraulic demands put 1980s tractors' capacities to shame. Comfort and ease of operation are much improved too.

Fuel economy is a reason too, you can get a bigger tractor today that uses less fuel than some of the favorite classics. When fuel was of little cost, economy wasn't important, just power output. Today if you can save merely a gallon an hour, it adds up fast.

my opionion

karl f

Karl: I quite agree with you on big tractors since the 06 series being maxed out to the engineering limits. Even that 460-560 chassis had reached it's limit when they put those 6 cylinder engines up front. The 1940 through 60 tractors were way over engineered.

That said, serious farmers never could fool around with old equipment, even in the 50s.

Hugh, a LOT of bean farmers here in southern Id use SC's to cut beans. They plant with bigger tractors but cut with the old girls. Ron

I dis-agree with serious farmers never could fool around with older equipment even in the 50's. I bought a new JX95 to replace a Farmall 806D. I've had that tractor back in the shop 4 times in the last year. I have to haul it back to the dealer and they have it 3 to 5 days every time. It has 160 hours on it. I bought the 806 with 9200 hours on it and it never went to the shop in the 5 years I owned it. Never should of got rid of the good tractor. Point is serious farmers fool around with what ever cost's them the least per acre and still gets the job done in a reasonable amount of time. The example of cutting beans is a good one. With the cost of equipment it was cheaper to rebuild a 4630FWA we got rather than buy a new 170hp tractor. Got less than a third of the cost in it and it will run strong for another 30 years. And I'm sure folks on this site have heard me talk about the best tractor in my stable...a 1946 M. I don't think all of the tractors I own combined can catch up to the amount of work that tractor has performed in it's 60 plus years with virtually no repairs. And believe me when I say that tractor earns it's keep on my farm. It has to. I just got an 856D and it will spend lots of time on a baler earning it's keep with I'm sure a low cost per acre doing it. Thats why the older GOOD iron holds it's value. Serious farmers can still get a good days work out of them and not break the bank. I'd rather buy more ground than new equipment.
Best Regards

I was at an auction a month or so back in Duncombe Iowa & there was a SMTA on that sale, it went for $10,000

dan: You obviously bought the wrong new tractor. If you look at all Farmalls 1939 to 1971, basically letter series through to end of 56 series production, yes I agree any of them in good working condition are selling for more than they did when new. Under 75 horsepower are doing better in relation to new price than over 75 hp. That is no surprise, just more folks have a use for used small tractors.

Here is the mistake most buyers make, they try to farm, using too much horsepower. If you are using more than 1/2 horsepower per acre you are not a serious farmer. When I say 1/2 horsepower, I'm talking about total tractor horsepower on the farm. Also when I say 1/2 hp I'm thinking livestock farm. Corn, bean, wheat cash croppers should be closer to 1/4 hp per acre.

In the 1950s, I had an uncle milked 20 cows on 100 acres and did all his work with a then new Farmall Super A. At roughly the same time, my dad milked 40 cows, did some cash cropping on 250 acres with Farmalls 130, 300 and Cockshutt 540, roughly 90hp. I have a neighbor just restored his dad's Farmall 300 that was bought new in 1955 to work with a MH 22 and they cash cropped 500 acres.

Don't come back and tell me the guy cash cropping 100 acres with an 806 is a serious farmer. You give me a 100hp and I'll cash crop 500 acres every year and everything will be done on time. An 806 well maintained will do the job. If it's a new tractor best make that 125 hp as most of what I see today is rated flywheel horsepower.

Hugh .. I agree with you when you put it in terms of horsepower to acreage. You are correct with the 806 on 500 acres vs 100 acres. The original point of my reply was in terms of why the old equipment holds it's value vs your response on fooling around with older equipment. I'll fool with old equipment that gets the job done everyday rather than drive my costs up with newer for just the sake of being newer. LOL, I bought the right new tractor it's just having a hard time living up to the expectations and quality of the old stuff. I think you will agree that most new operators don't think in terms of HP per acre. I know some guys have a tractor for darn near every implement they own.

Dan: I haven't farmed since 1990, thus haven't had a lot of exposure to tractors built since then. Actually my last tractor new or used was bought in 1975, 76 if you count a skid steer loader. So 75-76 was a Deere 540A forestry skidder, an IH 1066 and a Case 1737 Uniloader. very happy with the Deere and Case, wish I had never seen the 1066. How little, things change, I had been farming up to that time with Farmalls 130, SA, 300, 560D, 656D and a Case 1737 Uniloader, couldn't say anything but good about the lot.

Actually I acquired the SA, 656 and a 504 from a neighbor when I purchased his farm. He told me to get rid of 504 PDQ, said it was a lemon from the day it was new. I took 504 and 300, along with 3x16 trailer plow to field one day. Plowed awhile with each and wasn't long agreeing with him. He said, "I made a mistake trading my 300 for that 504. I knew you were going to sell one of 300 or 504." I guess he figured there was no point in two good 300s going down the road in favour of one 504.

To sum up, the biggest difference I saw between farming with old versus new tractors, was with the old tractor, one doesn't have to make the payment next month. Bear in mind the only used tractors I ever farmed with were bought new by my dad or my neighbor, both excellent on maintenence. Not quite the same as buying used tractors on the open market.

Another observation, during my farming days, probably logged 150,000 hours on all tractors, and was never without a tractor during the busy planting or harvest season. Today I don't think I've met a farmer that hasn't been without his main workhorse during the busy season, those being tractors built since 1980.

There you go, I've argued myself to other side of the question. A non usable new tractor is something unheard of in my farming days. Then again so were non usable new cars and pickups, prior to 1980. I haven't bought a new one of those since 1979. in the 70s had two new cars and two new pickups that were never back to dealer on warrenty. Buyers of new cars and pickups today will tell you it takes 3 for every two people, one in shop all the time. I guess we are about the same, my son, his wife and my wife and I have 3 cars and 1 pickup, all 1990 or newer. It's a good thing I never go anywhere but to the car or pickup repair shop. If I wanted to, I'd have to drive one of my offset Farmalls.