Repower Virtualy Any IH/Farmall with a CUMMINS!

charles todd · Jan 12, 2009

Saw these on EBAY. Adapter plate and flywheel to put a 3.9L or 5.9L in almost any IH/Farmall from an M up to a 2+2. Pretty cool.

Listing 190279339537

Listing 190279756320

Pull out the checkbook for this one!

Charles

rrogers · Jan 12, 2009

thats awsome, i wish i had a junk tractor and some money to play with and i get one and put one together, it would be fun to build something like that

ScottyHOMeY · Jan 13, 2009

That could be fun, but don't forget what happened with the 460/560.

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

Charles: I doubt if those two Cummins engines you mention will be a suitable transplant for Farmalls over 100 hp. Just after the Case buy out, my neighbor bought a new CaseIH 95 hp with a 5.9L turbo cummins. He already had a IH 886 with a 360 IH n/a engine. I drove both tractors on a new 16' disk and the 5.9 cummins wouldn't hold a candle to the 886 with 360, even though the CaseIH had 3 power shifts compared to 2 speeds with TA.

When CaseIH adapted the Cummins engine to basically a Farmall chassis over 100 hp, they went with 504 cubic inch Cummins.

mkirsch · Jan 13, 2009

Dunno about that Hugh. Dad's got a 5240 Maxxum with the 5.9L turbo Cummins and it does pretty well stacking up against the 1066. Of course the Maxxum has MFWD and the 1066 does not. Sheer torque and power, the 1066 has hands down. Putting it to the ground, the 1066 only has a slight advantage in good going.

They crank these 5.9L engines up over 300HP in pickup trucks, so I can't imagine running them at less than half that in a tractor is going to put any undue wear on them.

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

MKirsch: Why did CaseIH go with 504 Cummins in 100+ hp tractors?

the tractor vet · Jan 13, 2009

Ya know Hugh that as long as i have been around I H's ya never find two of them that are the same from the factory . And this holds true to all engines . A 5.9 cummins with a turbo will run the bag off a D360 or a DT 360 hands down unless the D360 had the wick turned up and there was a problem with the 5.9 , So with out putting BOTH tractors on the same Dyno and RUNNING The same test on both ya can not be 100% sure as to why the D360 out preformed the 5.9 Did both tractor weigh the same did they both have the same tires . Now will a 5.9 hold a candle to DT466 yes set at the same hp. setting yes as they run the 5.9 in med. duty trucks and set at the same Hp. the 5.9 puts out MORE torque . As to how long they will live hey thats a craps shoot . Why did Case I H use the 504 well my thinking on this is more cubes more torque . Bigger block more built in weight . Also they do not have to turn up the fuel as high to get the desired Hp. Less fuel to the engine better fuel econ. and longer engine life. Plus with them going to and OUT SOURCED engine they no longer have to put up with the EPA and there goofy ideas . No more problems with air pollution from the foundry no getting and engine cert. for the clean air act let someone else worry about it.

the tractor vet · Jan 13, 2009

Been wrenchen for alot of years done y fair share of SWAPPEN engine out of one item to and other making this work and that fit done two cummins swaps into OIL ALL OVERS and as far as i am concerned myself i would just as soon rebuild FIX or REPAIR what was in there from the factory lot less money lot less time involved.

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

Vet: As I asked Kirsch, why did CaseIH go to the 504 Cummins in 100+ hp tractors?

MN Scott · Jan 13, 2009

He answered your question Hugh.
Vet said, "Why did Case I H use the 504 well my thinking on this is more cubes more torque . Bigger block more built in weight . Also they do not have to turn up the fuel as high to get the desired Hp. Less fuel to the engine better fuel econ. and longer engine life. Plus with them going to and OUT SOURCED engine they no longer have to put up with the EPA and there goofy ideas . No more problems with air pollution from the foundry no getting and engine cert. for the clean air act let someone else worry about it"

mkirsch · Jan 13, 2009

Well Hugh, a good bit of it is/was a numbers game. Who has the biggest engine. Deere had a 466 cubic inch engine in their big row crops at the time.

Not saying I necessarily disagree on the use of the 504 Cummins in the Magnum. A bigger engine means more torque and less relative stress on the components for a given HP. It'll last longer and be more reliable.

You're the one that has maintained that farms are/were overpowered. I thought you'd appreciate an account of being able to do the same work with less tractor, not get on my case because your buddy's Case was a gutless piece of crap that caused you to condemn all 5.9L Cummins engines... It was that one tractor, not every tractor with a 5.9L in it.

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

Scott; I know all about bigger block, more cubes, etc, and why CaseIH used the 504, however I question his wisdom on the 5.9, I've driven more than one of them, in my area a lot of 5.9 went into Timberjack forestry shidders, I've talked with a lot of folks and the opinion is always the same, gutless wonders at best.

I have another friend, owned 5 of those 5.9 in grapple forestry skidders running 24x7 ten months of the year. Today they run Cat or Deere.

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

MKirsch: Farms being over powered, and engine matched to chassis and HP are two different issues. Lets not confuse the two.

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

Charles: I guess you didn't expect what happened. Well guys, in my opinion, the only thing that ever made 5.9 Cummins shine was the dodge diesel pickup, no question in a class by itself against Ford and GM diesels.

Try the 5.9 against the DT360 in a single axle freight truck, most of the glamour disappears. When I was shunting trucks for the leasing company, I drove hundreds of each, most of them having the same power train from the clutch back. I remember once they flew two of us to the east coast to pickup two freight trucks. I had a DT360 and he had 5.9 turbo Cummins. Once on the road we discovered the Cummins was governed about two mph faster than the DT360. We had to travel together, they only gave us one fuel card and we had 1,200 miles of driving. Much to our surprise, HILLS soon sorted out our differences.

spiffy1 · Jan 13, 2009

(quoted from post at 15:22:10 01/13/09) Much to our surprise, HILLS soon sorted out our differences.

Was there much difference in fuel consumption between them? Did it change on the hills vs. flat country?

Anonymous-0 · Jan 13, 2009

check out some tractor pulls. already being done.
cat-m
cummins-m
560-dt466

Hugh MacKay · Jan 13, 2009

spiffy: There was quite a mix of hills and flat country, be hard to sort that one out. We filled up twice and I can tell you we were quite close on our fuel volume. The Cummins was able to hit 110 kph, whereas I was limited to about 106 kph with the DT360. I expect any fuel saving I had on the lower speed, was used up maintaining 106 up hill and down. On a couple of ocasions I caught up to him on a hill, where I couldn't pass. I remember him being down to 85-90 kph range.

BOBM25 · Jan 13, 2009

I got no beef against the 5.9 Cummins. But our 1066 will out pull our MX170. I know thats a newer version of the 5240, but it doesn't seem to have the torque that the 1066 does, especially in lower RPM's. I know some people dog the 1066, but ours is a puller, always has been.

scotc · Jan 13, 2009

Case went to Cummins in the 70s looking to source an engine for their construction lines. Among the design perameters was that it had to last so many hours at such a horsepower level , and it also had to be able to run while tipped at a minimum of 45 degrees in any direction. So begins the story of the B series. That's why they can run 350+ horse and 650+ torque in the pickups without leaving the crank on the highway.

The cummins has a different torque peak and redline than an IHC so it will perform differently. The standard redline is 3200 so it will run a bit faster, especially in something like an M, and there is a 4200 RPM governor spring available that is fairly easily swapped in, so you could make something like a 1066 FLY.

I'd like to stick a 3.9 in a little red express with an 8 speed.

charles todd · Jan 13, 2009

Wow! What a discussion topic! I have learned a bit here tonight! I have always been partial to Cummins diesel's in 1-ton's down vs the others. I do feel a dodge is like an ugly girl, "fun until your friends find out". The Cummins makes a Dodge, and that is it. (Sorry Dodge guys). I know the Cummins is a strong engine. I thought it would be fun to have the more seasoned guys hash this one out in Cummins vs. IH.

Personally I think it would be a neat conversion, if I had the funds, the time, and the larger tractor.

Charles

Anonymous-0 · Jan 15, 2009

Have to remember that the cdc engine, consolidated diesel corporation, was established in 1980 with a joint 50-50 venture of case and cummins. They designed engines jointly and they were convential style, meaning injection similar to most ag equipment and not the cummins PT system so they were not really cummins as we think. Case had started to use the smaller 6 cyl , I think it is 5.9, in some of their row crop tractors at the time of the merger with IH and then when CIH introduced the Magnum in 87, they used the 8.3 (504). Lot of changes since then as I see now that cummins purchased the 50% from CNH or Fiat or whatever so they are sole owners I guess. Still to supply CIH for forseable future.

Repower Virtualy Any IH/Farmall with a CUMMINS!

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Similar threads