- Thread starter IA Leo
- Start date
25566 made. A better tractor than the SM, but the SMTA was the first with torque amplifier and independent PTO. About 65000 Super M's, preceded almost 300000 M's. There are simply fewer of them around. Same thing can be said about the 200, 230, 300, 330, 350, etc. Nothing wrong with any of them. There were also about 38000 400's. From a hobbiest standpoint, with only a half ton pickup, I can't safely haul anything bigger than a 300, that is pushing it. The bigger the tractor the more weight. Having the older tractors hauled is a significant part of the expense. And for those people who have only a few acres, or the hobbiest farmer, the M-450 series is overkill. I have about 4 acres and 7 tractors, from a Super A to a 460--can't use them all.
Gee, I consider the 450's great machines. Really, they are just a further evolution of the M, SM, SMTA, etc. Only pain in the neck feature is getting the hood halves on and off. I have a SM because that is what we had when I was a boy on the farm.
I think 1957 was a great year. If I could only have one old tractor, it would be a Farmall 350 (not diesel), circa 1957.
1957 may have been the industrial peak for the U.S. relative to the rest of the world. GM locomotives, the '57 "Chebby", Johnson outboard motors, the quality of american firearms, on and on, ad nauseam.
mike
I think 1957 was a great year. If I could only have one old tractor, it would be a Farmall 350 (not diesel), circa 1957.
1957 may have been the industrial peak for the U.S. relative to the rest of the world. GM locomotives, the '57 "Chebby", Johnson outboard motors, the quality of american firearms, on and on, ad nauseam.
mike
soybeanjoe
Member
We had a 450 gas back in the day, '58 I believe. We bought it used in '62 or '63 or so. Tractor had a lot of issues early on in it's life. When we bought it it had just had it's 3rd engine overhaul & 2nd rearend overhaul. IIRC on the 2nd rearend overhaul the dealer used a lot of the updated 560 parts. Engine had oversized pistons & sleeves, new crank, cam & head.
We ran it till '71 when I traded it & a '54 SM that we had had since new for a '67 806D. All the years that we owned the 450 it never gave us any problems other than the power steering had a "catch" in it at times. Not a problem till you were cultivating small crops at low engine speeds.
In '67 we bought a new 656 gas. That old 450 would pull rings around that 656. The 656 was a turd when it came to hp but was a lot more comfortable to operate than the 450.
The 450 was more of a horse than the SM. How much of that was the oversized pistons (SM had 41/8" Firecraters) or just difference in tractors I'm not sure. We pulled a 3x14" #16 plow with the SM & a 3x16" fast hitch plow with the 450. 13' disc with the 450 & a 9' most of the time with the SM. 14' field cultivator with the 450 & a 11' with the SM. Usually pulled the implements in the same gear with the respective tractor.
I a;ways regretted trading the SM off. Partially because it was the first tractor I ever drove in the field as a kid. In the last few years I have bought a '49 M, '53 Stage 1 SM, '53 Louisville Stage II SM, & a '54 SMTA to play with. Have never had a desire to buy a 450 but that might change someday.
We ran it till '71 when I traded it & a '54 SM that we had had since new for a '67 806D. All the years that we owned the 450 it never gave us any problems other than the power steering had a "catch" in it at times. Not a problem till you were cultivating small crops at low engine speeds.
In '67 we bought a new 656 gas. That old 450 would pull rings around that 656. The 656 was a turd when it came to hp but was a lot more comfortable to operate than the 450.
The 450 was more of a horse than the SM. How much of that was the oversized pistons (SM had 41/8" Firecraters) or just difference in tractors I'm not sure. We pulled a 3x14" #16 plow with the SM & a 3x16" fast hitch plow with the 450. 13' disc with the 450 & a 9' most of the time with the SM. 14' field cultivator with the 450 & a 11' with the SM. Usually pulled the implements in the same gear with the respective tractor.
I a;ways regretted trading the SM off. Partially because it was the first tractor I ever drove in the field as a kid. In the last few years I have bought a '49 M, '53 Stage 1 SM, '53 Louisville Stage II SM, & a '54 SMTA to play with. Have never had a desire to buy a 450 but that might change someday.
Nebraska Cowman
Well-known Member
John Deere NEVER overtook IH
The tractors from the 1940's regardless of color were comparatively cheap for most to acquire in terms of collectors. I would have to check but I believe the widest production volume and hence sales volume were the 1940's and most of the 1950's. They were traded as farmers were trying to more farm work with the same manpower per farm. A market was there for those used tractors to take care of smaller farms or help the wider number of suburban folk that needed something to mow a small lot, prepare a garden, plow the driveway in winter, and other chores. As the decades past, people who had been away from the farm were looking to reconnect with their roots via purchasing a farm tractor and a lot of those folks had connections to those tractors of the 1940's and 1950's. Overall production dropped domestically from the late 50's on but sales volume was more than offset by the 1980's with the advent of the compact diesels.
There is certainly nothing wrong with the 450. IH's finances were getting distressed by the late 1950's therefore the 460 and 560 design were adversely affected by cutting corners. This hurt IH's reputation at a critical time.
My dad knew a fellow years ago that had a brother at IH corporate in Chicago at that time. The indication was that management and some of the stockholders from that point forward wanted the focus to change from farm equipment to trucks and that ultimately happened (Navistar).
There is certainly nothing wrong with the 450. IH's finances were getting distressed by the late 1950's therefore the 460 and 560 design were adversely affected by cutting corners. This hurt IH's reputation at a critical time.
My dad knew a fellow years ago that had a brother at IH corporate in Chicago at that time. The indication was that management and some of the stockholders from that point forward wanted the focus to change from farm equipment to trucks and that ultimately happened (Navistar).
Should have mentioned that John Deere Credit really helped set Deere apart from its competition in the last half of the 20th Century. I read an article years ago (in the old Implement and Tractor magazine) where Ford Motor Credit really tied the hands of their dealers because FMC could never understand the income patterns of farmers and declined a lot of potential customers.
During the Depression IH had a reputation for being very heavy handed with collections which drove some customers into the hands of IH's competitors in subsequent years. Deere had the best reputation in terms of working with delinquents and customers remembered that when future purchases came.
During the Depression IH had a reputation for being very heavy handed with collections which drove some customers into the hands of IH's competitors in subsequent years. Deere had the best reputation in terms of working with delinquents and customers remembered that when future purchases came.
Adrian Billheimer
Well-known Member
Here's a pic of my 450D, mostly does mower duty in the summer currently but will get back into my small (1/2 acre) garden in another year or two. Runs better than it looks.
When just out of high school, Dad traded in a M for a used 400 Farmall. Was farming quite a bit of ground so it was used in the field everyday. Had a lot of bearing problems in the rearend. After years of a trouble free M the 400 did not stay around long. I have a 450 now and love it. It see very little time in front of the plow or disk.
Thought I wrote this last night, but I must have hit the wrong button to post it....
In 1964, I was stationed in E WY in the Air force. As I worked mostly nights, I worked part time that summer on a ranch on the WY/SD border... the west fence of the ranch was the border. We had a gas 450 and a diesel 350. The 450 was the real workhorse of the ranch, did everything, plowed corn ground with a 3x16" F-H plow, wheat stubble with a 5x14" pull type, 50T baler with a Farmhand accumulator, single row IH chopper to fill silo, etc. It never had a glitch all summer... just went to the field and worked. The 350D was another story... no power, hard starting, little nagging things. Only thing it was used for was loading and unloading the 8 accumulated bales on and off a big bale trailer, and stacking them in big stacks. We had about 400 acres of irrigated alfalfa, so we baled almost every day, but handled very few by hand.
From my experience there, I wouldn't have hesitated buying a 450 gas if I needed a tractor that size.
In 1964, I was stationed in E WY in the Air force. As I worked mostly nights, I worked part time that summer on a ranch on the WY/SD border... the west fence of the ranch was the border. We had a gas 450 and a diesel 350. The 450 was the real workhorse of the ranch, did everything, plowed corn ground with a 3x16" F-H plow, wheat stubble with a 5x14" pull type, 50T baler with a Farmhand accumulator, single row IH chopper to fill silo, etc. It never had a glitch all summer... just went to the field and worked. The 350D was another story... no power, hard starting, little nagging things. Only thing it was used for was loading and unloading the 8 accumulated bales on and off a big bale trailer, and stacking them in big stacks. We had about 400 acres of irrigated alfalfa, so we baled almost every day, but handled very few by hand.
From my experience there, I wouldn't have hesitated buying a 450 gas if I needed a tractor that size.
Nebraska Cowman
Well-known Member
In Numbers, no. I won't argue that point. But IH was a progressive company and came up with a lot of innovations that Deere and others are using today. That ingenuity and foresight they can never take away from us.
scot in pa
Member
You also have to look at the timeline. The M was built from 39-51. The SM was 52-54 if you count the TA. The hundred and 50 series were only built for a couple years apeice, too.
Dennis in NC
Member
GOT A NICE 57 230
I was raised on a 400 gas converted to propane, and a 450 diesel. The 400 put out 63 hp where the 450 at 57 hp. The 450 we used on the suare baler as a diesel is usually smoother running for the baler. We pulled 3 16's #8 plows and pulled a 13 and 1/2 ft disk mounted with 3 bar harrow. I did notice that you pull a Brillion mower just like mine. It looks like you have a different transport link for the hydraulic lift than I have. Could you post another picture of a rear view of it? Thanks.
That is true, on the other hand IH was slow in making changes, they simply held on to variations of the letter series for too long. The 706/806 came along too late, the damage had already been done. The tractors they were building when Tenneco merged them with Case were excellent (so I have read, never driven one), but the corporate management, dealing with the union, etc, stunk. That is what I mean about JD surpassing IH.
I can see why IH had problems selling the 450. Look at how many Ms, Super Ms, and MTAs are still up and running now. In 1957 they were practically new by comparison.
The 450 didn't offer anything particularly special to entice farmers to spend money they didn't have and trade in perfectly good tractors.
The 450 didn't offer anything particularly special to entice farmers to spend money they didn't have and trade in perfectly good tractors.
Nebraska Cowman
Well-known Member
Yeah, I can understand your point. But I maintain that IH was a victim of hard luck and hard times. When hard times hit IH did not have enough cash reserves. John Deere was more conservative and won by default by doing nothing. As far as advancements, yeah, IH should have came out with a new state of the art tractor instead of the 400 and 450. We know that now but nobody did then. Look how long JD held on to their antique 2 cylinders. But they got away with it.
I think one reason the 2-bangers worked well for so long was fuel economy... Our SC used almost as much gas as our JD 60s or 2x14"vs. 3x14" plow... and the JD pulled it faster... that was a big difference.
There was a big seed corn farm in the area that had 3 gas 720s and one 400 gas. The manager told Dad the IH used twice the fuel of the JDs and pulled one less plow bottom. He [u:7549544a7a]may[/u:7549544a7a] have been exagerating some, but maybe not.
Too Far Gone
Member
He forgot to mention that the IH was done plowing and back in the shed long before the 720 was done
Believe me, I liked running the 450 on the SD ranch, but I wasn't buying the gas. Main reason was the Torque Amplifier. The 350D was easy on fuel, but had no power for it's size... the 450 was a gas hog but had plenty of power for the way we used it.
On the seed farm, the 400 pulled a 3x16" and the JDs 4x16s".
On the seed farm, the 400 pulled a 3x16" and the JDs 4x16s".
I Believe that the downfall did not start with the 400/450 but insted the 460- Thats was the turning point in my opinon, they held on to the letter series rearends to long and it showed when the pumped 6 cyl hp through it, When they finally recalled everything for the 460 they were losing so much money they couldnt make a comeback
I guess it can be argued that becuase IH stood behind their machine and recalled it when something was not right was their downfall.
If the 706/806 series had been intro'd insted of the 460/560 IH could be still operational in the farm business IMHO
I guess it can be argued that becuase IH stood behind their machine and recalled it when something was not right was their downfall.
If the 706/806 series had been intro'd insted of the 460/560 IH could be still operational in the farm business IMHO
Larry B 1486
Member
Don't know much about 1957 being bad for IH but I think 1963 was the best year. I think that's when the 806 came out. That's when IH started REALLY making tractors. 706-806-1206's. I have owned a M, SMD, no 400 or 450, 504D,560D, and today two 806D, 856 with a 1206 motor in it,1466 and 1486. I have also owned a B450 diesel in the mid 1970's but nothing like the American 450. Love them all.
I had a 1957 450 last winter. Big enough to do everything I wanted it to for the 2.3 acres we had at the time. Loved it. But It wasn't big enough for the new place so traded it on a 706. Really like it as I can move so much more snow and don't even have chains on it.
But I'm kinda partial to that 450. Kin of the zenith for the 4 cyl. Farmall line in my opinion.
Roger
But I'm kinda partial to that 450. Kin of the zenith for the 4 cyl. Farmall line in my opinion.
Roger
Similar threads
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.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy