(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

The WORST IH tractor ever built!!!

A

Anonymous-0

Well-known Member
International made hundreds of different tractor models over the years. Many were very reliable,and long lasting machines,while others were not so hot. What is your LEAST liked tractor,and why?? I would say the F-12 is at the top of my list for being a lousy tractor for IH!! Also,i think the 2+2 tractors are the most HIDIOUS looking thing they ever made,with a hood a mile long!! We have heard many good comments over the years about all the great equipment they built,which is true,but there were flaws !!
 
(quoted from post at 20:07:28 01/11/11) International made hundreds of different tractor models over the years. Many were very reliable,and long lasting machines,while others were not so hot. What is your LEAST liked tractor,and why?? I would say the F-12 is at the top of my list for being a lousy tractor for IH!! Also,i think the 2+2 tractors are the most HIDIOUS looking thing they ever made,with a hood a mile long!! We have heard many good comments over the years about all the great equipment they built,which is true,but there were flaws !!
Click to expand...

When I was young my family worked 80 acres with one of them worthless F-12 machines.

So........ what is so lousy about a tough reliable tractor???

In it's day it was quite a machine.
 
I hate post like this everybody always pokes fingers ar IH. What about JD they had plenty of flops too we just don't talk about it. Any tractor company that has been in buisness for a long time has bad tractors so it would only be fair to talk about thier tractors too. Maybe even start a post asking what the worst tractor ever produced by anyone is.
 
A 966. I have a cousin who runs a repair shop. Back about 1980 he got to put all new gears in a 966. The tractor had about 1000 hrs but the gears looked more like 100,000. They missed the hardening process. 560 might be another one for the list.
 
Just curious - what's your beef with an F12? I've got a F14 which isn't much different and I think they're a neat little tractor.
 
My dad was born in 1919, died in 1982, and spent his entire life on the farm (except the time he spend in Europe during the 2nd War). He owned or operated a number of different tractors including Avery, Farmall A, C, SC, SA, 200, 240, 656, Jubilee Ford, 640 Ford, Ford Dexter, and who knows what else. Understandably he started out following a hard tail (if you don't know what that means, you will not understand anyway). I never once heard him criticize any tractor though I think he liked the 656 the best. My mother said that he would come in from plowing with that Avery (no hydraulics) and back up to the bed and fall in saying nothing and get up the next day and do it again. As hard as the plowing was, the Avery was an improvement over the mule. Bad tractor, never heard of such!
 
I read an article in Red Power by an IH mechanic who said the 560 was the worst tractor and the 806 the best tractor, based on durability.
 
The F-12 was a very important tractor in IH history. The arrange of framing and axles lead to the development of the Farmalls H and M and following the development of the W-12, I-12 and O-12 showed that the one basic design could be used for the row-crop as well as for a more general series of tractors such as the W-4, I4, O-4, W-6, i-6 and O-6. The earlier Farmalls (Regular, F-20) had minimal compatibility with the 10-20 etc apart from magnetos and steering wheels
 
The only red ones I owned were a 1942 M and a 1972 1066. Both were as good as could be expected. But 2 models I heard a lot of static about were the 660 and 1466. Both had "weak" engines.
 
You guys don't know a wolf in sheeps clothing
This is just a John Deere guy trying to get all rouled up. oldiron29
 
I have owned a H BN I-9 T-9 200-The Best,and now a 460 Diesel which is??? When i had the pump and injecters done the fellow a retired jd mechanic,took great pleashure in telling me about 25 to 35 460 560 Diesel's sitting in front of the JD dealer at one time trade in's on Deer's!I like the TA and also the 2+2 because with 4 big tires you step over bumps instead of bounce. Opp's,i for got the F-20 and the TD18 Bud.
 
I grew up on red while we had a few neighbors with the put-put's. Even the worst IH was far better than any dead deere I have ever been around. I also have the only Oliver we ever bought. It is an OK tractor, but I liked the 656 diesel we had at the same time better.
 
My grandma's first cousin passed away last year at 101. He was a farmer from birth to death. His first tractor was a new F12. His son told me he asked his dad why he didn't get a F20 instead of the F12. His reply was... Only so much money... for the price of a F20 he got the F12 plus the tractor implements he needed. The F12 did it's job. His farm is still being farmed... by his son, grandson and greatgrandson. His favorite tractor was his 560. My 560 is a good machine.
 
IMHO if you have walked many miles behind a mule.Know what a mule " Wink" is.
There is no such thing as a bad tractor !!!!!!!
 
If it was not for those flops of experimetation from the RED, GREEN, ORANGE and all other colors of the tractor spectrum we would not have what we have today. We go to the store and get our food because the tractor is so much more efficient today. We can go to the hardware store and get lumber, tractor descendants harvest the lumber. Our cars and trucks are relible, tractors tested many of the comonents before they were ever considered for the road. We no longer destroy the human machine, because a tractor decendant is there to do it for us. Think real hard before you knock a tractor reguardless of make, they helped to make this great land.
 
I've had lots of tractors over the years,most of them IH.The worst was a 1963 706D(282),The best is a 1967 706D(310).So,exactly what does that mean?
 
My dad and uncle loved there F12. That was there first tractor bought around 1936 from what I was told and traded it for a H in 1944. I started out on a Farmall H. I have owned in the IH line a M, SM, SMD, B450D, 504D, 560D, 706D. Today I still own a 806D, 856D, two 1466's and a 1486 that I use in a custom haybaling operation. The worst tractor that was ever built was the very first tractor because they always kept getting better. But thats any color. Now if this is someone trying to start a color war, I work with my brother inlaw which we farm about 3200 acers and run red CIH 7130 and 8950, blue 8770 and 8970, green 7930 and 8225R tractors and seen flawes in them all.
 
i have never owned one, but the downfall of ih i think began with the 560 ... because they lost so much money on the recall of them ... love the look of the 560 and 460 but they seem like that was the downfall
 
The worst one my uncle, who farmed the "family farm" ever had was a 1938 Avery Ro-Trak. The rear end would not take pulling in low, the steering linkages would bend or break far too easily, the wiring was bad and it looked pretty silly too. The worst tractor I've ever run was a neighbor's 1937 F-12 which was on steel. My John Deere H was pretty bad too, the weak little snot badly needed about 5 more horsepower and one more gear between 2nd and 3rd, would have been a dandy little tractor with these improvements.
 
Guys, there was one that sure enough didn't cut the mustard....3388 anteater, If they were used in a row crop situation only for extra traction and such they were great. But in the High Plains in the 80s, The guys who though they were just a small Steiger had problems, they just didn't hold up at all. They were cussed all day long in my area.
Later,
John A.
 
My late father always said that the Farmall M was the best tractor ever built by ANYONE(
I kind of agree).A farmall H ,onthe other hand,was the WORST tractor .I have no idea why.
 
well one of their biggest mistakes was putting the six cyl.model fbb truck engine in the w-40 tractor in the 1930.s. it was nothing but trouble because the engine was too light and did not stand up at all. it cost them a lot for being in a hurry to get a bigger tractor out. i think the other tractor problems were minor compared to this screw up as it was supposedly to the breaking point. the w-40's did not have a good reputation at all back then. now they are highly sought after by the collectors.
 
There are a lot of people who bash the f-12/f-14, but in truth they sold over a 130 thousand of the those "worst" tractors. My thinking is that those people are showing their ignorance. Anyone with experience knows that the "right tool for the job" is important. If you want to plow 20 acres a day, the f-12/14 is not for you. But if you are planting produce, running a poultry farm, or general light work, the f-12/14 is great for that. I have a buzz saw on a F-20 and one on a F-12. The F20 burns about 4-5 gallons an hour in comparison to 1-2 gallons an hour the F12 takes; I cut upwards of three face cords an hour so, I am really hoofin it. I even mow 4 acres of lawn with a 60" belly mower and it take just less than 2 gallons. The f-20 or f-30 would put me into the poor house.

Cultivating produce, such as cabbage, carrots, sweet corn, etc., there is nothing better than putting the front gangs on the f12---it may be slow but I really hate using a hoe. Ever used a 3pt rear gang cultivators? You have to stay away from the plants otherwise you will be spending alot of time replanting them.

I do wish there was a better set of hydraulics; even the f-20 hydros were sucky. A good farmer could set up a pump and system to make better system. And if you put on a 3pt hitch, then your talking a good machine.


The big thing is that if you have a worn out f12/14, there is much frustration; a rebuilt one will give you plenty of years of hard work. Keep in mind a f12 was only a 12HP drawbar class tractor.

Now if you want to talk about a worst tractor, lets talk about a Ford or a Mahindra!
 
What does "best" mean? Each person has his own defintion of "best."

I kind of agree about the Farmall M--but I was raised on one. Does that cloud my judgement? Probably.

Never had much to do with JD 2 cylinders until later in life. Now, after owning and using a JDA, I honestly have to say that the JDA's are a special machine. (And that's not demeaning my Super H and Super M. They are still great tractors.)

Don't know why he considered the H to be the worst unless he happened to get a bad one. Lots of people had them and liked them. But there's a big difference between an H and an M and many people didn't realize this.
 
I have owned several IHs and worked for folks that were all IH and cant think of any that were bad . Seems others are having a hard time putting there finger on one too . Alot of the time the worst tractor is the one that somebody is trying to use it for somthing it was not intended to do . Most any problems were easyly repaired . The only one I had a problem with was the thurst of a 706 gas , as a field tractor it would put you in the poorhouse but as a wintertime chore tractor ya could nt beat it . The same tractor with a 310D I have uses very little fuel no mater what your doing .
 
My opinion is everyone is using 20-20 hindsight. In it"s day the F12 was the tractor to have. As time went by everyone built bigger and better tractors, but the F12 was the start of an era. And yes, I own an F12. Been in our family for almost 60 years now. In the process of restoring it to it"s original beauty.
 
I think the 560 is the clear winner, they sent IH into a tailspin and gave Deere the go ahead lead after that, alot of the future problems like the 2+2 and the merger with Case are most likey carryover problems from the days of the 560 when IH was trying perhaps too hard to keep up with Deere and couldnt. I would say the best series they made was the 66 line. I dont hear bad about them, but the 88, 86, 56, 06 all have their critics but 06 and 56 diesels are pretty great in my opinion.
 
To me it's ironic that the best IH in my opinion was actually the worst in marketshare. My favorite all time IH tractor was the 856 diesel. If it's true that IH only sold approximately 32,000 856's they were loosing market share 3 to 1 to the John Deere 4020. Even the Allis XT190 and Oliver 1850 combined during those years 67-71 would have sold more than 32,000 units.
 
As a correction in my opinion the F 12 wasnt the forrunner of tractors,even though there one of my favorites,but the Farmall {reg} opened a lot of inovation.IH used this enginerring design for many years

jimmy
 
806's and 856's were well regarded here but it seemed like most of the American manufacturers in the late 1960's had a very good product in the 90 to 100 PTO hp range.
 
Keeping in mind that all the manufacturers have put out duds I will say IH had a pretty high rate of success but they had their share of failures. I never saw a 460 (gas or diesel) or a 4100 series (4100, 4156, 4166, 4186) that the owner had something good to say about it. 560's and 706 (282) were livable for most guys but still a lot of 560's were traded off in short order for Deere's or Oliver's here. The 460 though seemed to be the most despised by dyed in the wool IH guys here.
 
In theory the 2 plus 2's were a good idea but should have not been released till some of the problems they had were solved. I think they were reacting to the success of the White 4-150 and 4-180 tractors by releasing them when they did.
I think the separation of the ag division was inevitable as increasing numbers of management had no tie to IH's ag past and honestly thought the future rested with other ventures outside of agriculture. My understanding was that if IH's fortunes had not sagged so bad in the 1970's that the construction division may have been kept (and renamed).
I don't know that IH was "trying too hard" to keep with Deere when the 60 series was released. I can remember dealers who had significant contacts in IH corporate saying a fair number of people were in favor of a new from the ground up tractor (like Deere with the 3010/4010 tractors) after the 50 series but management was content with just upgrading the 50 series and IH's finances were not exactly a help either though they wound up having developed the 06 series on not much better terms on a crash program.
 
If the 460 is/was IH's worst, then that ain't bad...

The 460 morphed into the 656, then the 666, and 686. It was built from 1958 to about 1979 or 1980...

IH's "worst" tractor had an 22-23 year production run, and a lot of people consider the 656 to be one of IH"s best...
 
More like the 560 was the one that morphed into the 656 and subsequent models. 656's were well liked but that is with a lot of guys preferring the 263 gas motors and there were a lot sold around here back in the day. Remember the highlight of that series, the 686, did not feature the 282 for the diesel version and I always considered that the 686 the best for a diesel out of that class.
That aside, the 460's I knew locally were pretty gutless and it seemed like nobody knew how to solve the problem although starting with a 221 CI engine did not help.
The dealer that sold IH years ago said a number of engineers were in favor of starting over after the 50 series (before the failings of the 60 series became apparent). They were taking note of what was going on within the industry as some manufacturers were starting to offer tractors with more engine displacement and more speeds as these competitors were unveiling their own version of the TA.
Again, IH had many top tractors over the course of its history but as time went on they were less and less remarkable against the rest of the industry.
 
(quoted from post at 14:01:09 01/12/11) I never saw a 460 (gas or diesel) or a 4100 series (4100, 4156, 4166, 4186) that the owner had something good to say about it. ..... The 460 though seemed to be the most despised by dyed in the wool IH guys here.
Click to expand...
Dad had a 460 gas and I never heard him cuss it. Granted, he didn't work the guts out of it on his little 100 acres, a 3x16 plow, 11 1/2' tandem disc, 9' swather and a big bale carrier were about it. It still looked almost like new when he died in '84, and one of my nephews has it now.
He had an H that he wasn't too thrilled with and didn't keep long.
 
all makes have short comings of on thing or another some were just ahead of there time others behind times, daddy bought a slightly used m right after WW2 because you couldn"t buy a new one at the time,it was put to had hard work,pulled a silage chopper, combine, 5 disc tiller ,chisel plow, subsoiler,gang discs of which 0ne was a 20 blade offset even done some of the planting ,cultivating and loader work. it was always well serviced and maintained,he was replacing a worn out steering wheel one day and told us that was the 5th one, also had worn out 3 seats, he said that his brother and him would run it 24 hours a day at times fall plowing and fixing land in the spring he told of one time they ran it none stop for 5 day"s, only reason they shut it off then they got scared of pouring high test gas in the tank while it was running he"s passed on but the old tractor is still there bring used some,he also used other brands but stuck with the m, he also was raised behind a mule
 
Not best or worst, but the 656 was a cross between engine used in 560, clutch and TA housing used in 460 , transmission kind of a cross breed between the two, and the final drive was all new, housings different, bull gears and bull pinions different and hyd pto. The axles were mounted on tapered roller bearing as were the bull pinions whereas the 560 was ball originally on axle and bull pinion, and later flat roller inner with ball outer on axle, still ball on bull pinion and also the bull pinion on 656 was bushing or needle bearing supported on inner end where as 560 all the way to H and M the inside end of bull pinion was suppored with the side gear in differential. Quite a lot of differences really.
 
Our family started tractor farming with a F12. Dad said they took turns driving it, never letting it stop even to put gas in. So they wore it our pretty quick. Our worst IHC tractor was a 350 Utility Diesel. It vibrated so bad your hands and feet would go to sleep. You set right on the hdy system and it was hot. The worst thing was the adapter plate would break the bolts inside (you couldn't see) and would bag down in the middle. 460 560 660 finished IHC off Our area was 75% IHC till then AC was second. The only people who didn't change to a 4020 had RED glasses on.
 
(quoted from post at 09:03:12 01/12/11) I think the 560 is the clear winner, they sent IH into a tailspin and gave Deere the go ahead lead after that, alot of the future problems like the 2+2 and the merger with Case are most likey carryover problems from the days of the 560 when IH was trying perhaps too hard to keep up with Deere and couldnt.
Click to expand...

IH was AHEAD of Deere in 1958. Deere was still nursing along the old Johnny Popper design with straight transmissions, and I don't think they even had live PTO.

IH had had 4-cylinder engines since forever, a 2-speed powershift, and live PTO since 1954.

IH came out with a 6-cylinder tractor two years ahead of Deere.

I've read that IH had the 706 and 806 ready in 1958.

If they had skipped the 460/560 and went right to the 706/806 in 1958, they would've beaten Deere for good.

Then again, Deere might've been on to something. They waited until 1960 to make their move with a modern tractor.
 
I meant trying too hard to keep up with Deere when they were putting out 2+2's since they had taken such a hit since the 60 series
 
My understanding is the 06 engines were available in 1958 mainly due to being already used in other IH products. There was some draftboard work done on a transmission and hydraulic system for a concept tractor that in the end did not resemble the 06 layout. The IH engineers were heavy into the concept of a hydrostatic transmission. The 06's were influenced by the 4 X 2 transmission layout of the 4010. I've been told that the 06 program only got going on full scale front burner development after the Deere New Generation tractors were out.
 
Something doesn"t sound right about that 966. Mine has nearly 13,000 hrs. on it. M&W turbo on it for 12,000 hrs. Transmission has never been touched. Original TA. The clutch was replaced. Wayne
 
(quoted from post at 08:23:15 01/13/11)
(quoted from post at 09:03:12 01/12/11) IH was AHEAD of Deere in 1958. Deere was still nursing along the old Johnny Popper design with straight transmissions, and I don't think they even had live PTO.

IH had had 4-cylinder engines since forever, a 2-speed powershift, and live PTO since 1954.

IH came out with a 6-cylinder tractor two years ahead of Deere.

Then again, Deere might've been on to something. They waited until 1960 to make their move with a modern tractor.
Click to expand...

Deere had live PTO starting in '52 with the 50/60 and the 70 in '53. also mothing wrong with the 2 cylinders, but they had been strethed to their limits with the -20 and 30 series. they were always more economical ro run tha IH... we had a 1954 IH SC and a 1953 JD 60 and working hard, they used about the same amount of gas with the 60 doing at least 1/2 again the work.
Click to expand...
 
When the H... are they going to get "Edit" fixed? I know, i should check more carefully before posting :cry:
 
The 9 my grandpa bought new in 72 is being used today by my cousin's future father-in-law. We traded it in 92 or 93 for a 1066 and he bought it, remembered my uncle bragging how tough it was. It was showing just over 11,000 hours when the tach quit, and that was just after he bought it. He's only had the radiator re-cored since then, I think it took a new motor once, and probably a TA or two.

I didn't like the 786. Way too heavy and too tall rubber for the power. Get it stuck, pull it out and finish the job with the 756. Both were running Armstrong radials.

I liked the 2+2. Wasn't much for tillage, but hi TA was out of it. Nice in the summer with that long nose and forward-blowing fan, though.

Styling, I like the 56 series. Performance, 66. I'd like to have that 966 back, and build a 10 that ran like the one we had.
 
I had an IH 756 Gas that i hated from day one. Loud, hard clutching thing. always heard that 460/560 marked the end of IH. i've got a 460 and ive no complaints of it yet.
 
no I would say the 450 i-h of the late 50s and early 60s was the most clumsy underpowered unproductive tractor they ever made. then Deer took a quantive leap of market share that they never relinquished, or I_H just gave it up.!!!
 
(quoted from post at 06:23:15 01/13/11)
(quoted from post at 09:03:12 01/12/11) I think the 560 is the clear winner, they sent IH into a tailspin and gave Deere the go ahead lead after that, alot of the future problems like the 2+2 and the merger with Case are most likey carryover problems from the days of the 560 when IH was trying perhaps too hard to keep up with Deere and couldnt.
Click to expand...

IH was AHEAD of Deere in 1958. Deere was still nursing along the old Johnny Popper design with straight transmissions, and I don't think they even had live PTO.

IH had had 4-cylinder engines since forever, a 2-speed powershift, and live PTO since 1954.

IH came out with a 6-cylinder tractor two years ahead of Deere.

I've read that IH had the 706 and 806 ready in 1958.

If they had skipped the 460/560 and went right to the 706/806 in 1958, they would've beaten Deere for good.

Then again, Deere might've been on to something. They waited until 1960 to make their move with a modern tractor.
Click to expand...

LOL Deer had live PTO and Hydraulics from 49 on with the R.

http://www.external_link/farm-tractors/000/0/3/34-john-deere-r.html

Dad had one. Bear to steer but would work hard all day on very little fuel!

Big reason Deer went away ffrom the 2 cylinder was because IH ran a hard ad series painting the JD as being an old design and the IH as having a much more modren one. Granted JD had gone about as far as they could with HP in thier design and would have had to switch over to the inline engine sooner rather than later. The switch over caused by losing market share because of IH's ads did give the advantage of having to come up with a totally new tractor.

About the only IH tractor I don't like is the M. Got one. Working tractor. Wide front. Thing steers like a pig.

BIL ran 3 560's for years and loved em. Says the worst thing he ever did was trade one on a 970 Case. Sense I've known him he and his dad had 3 560s (all dead), 826 still running, 970 Case (only had a few years), 1066 still using but about used up. 1566, dead, 1586 that's getting a new engine soon and just added a 8070 AC MFW to thier line up.


Rick
 
F-12 as a lousy tractor? Compared to what, a new CIH, or a team of horses? How about a Model T Ford, is that lousy too? Or maybe the antiquated flintlock rifle? Pretty lousy in performance when compared to an M-4 carbine, but nonetheless revolutionary. Have you personally farmed with an F-12, or a 2+2 for that matter? What experience and evidence do you offer to substantiate your statements? If you are to make claims regarding the imperfections of any machine, you should really validate those claims, and offer more than just regurgitated mis-informed opinions and completely irrevelant comparisons you've heard through the grapevine (or on the JD forum). Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the 2+2's hood was indeed a mile long. Oh, and HIDIOUS, is spelled hideous....Shawn
 
(quoted from post at 00:46:11 01/12/11) My late father always said that the Farmall M was the best tractor ever built by ANYONE(
I kind of agree).A farmall H ,onthe other hand,was the WORST tractor .I have no idea why.
Click to expand...

You could have been speaking of my experience as well. We had an M (my grandfather's that I now own) and an H when I was growing up. I hated the H and loved the M. Why? ...

The H had an overall cheap feel about it. It seemed to be built with thinner metal, the hyster gear system was extremely dangerous (I was thrown off the seat not realizing the hyster was engaged), and I hated the way the throttle lever felt (hard to convey the meaning here). The engine sounded loose and rough.

The M, on the other hand, was a heavier duty tractor (I know this was designed to be that way), sheet metal was made heavier, good governor system. The engine sounded smoother and strong. Worked great for over 50 years (I'm in the process of restoring it).

Allen
 
(quoted from post at 14:10:21 01/13/11)
(quoted from post at 08:23:15 01/13/11)
(quoted from post at 09:03:12 01/12/11) IH was AHEAD of Deere in 1958. Deere was still nursing along the old Johnny Popper design with straight transmissions, and I don't think they even had live PTO.

IH had had 4-cylinder engines since forever, a 2-speed powershift, and live PTO since 1954.

IH came out with a 6-cylinder tractor two years ahead of Deere.

Then again, Deere might've been on to something. They waited until 1960 to make their move with a modern tractor.
Click to expand...

Deere had live PTO starting in '52 with the 50/60 and the 70 in '53. also mothing wrong with the 2 cylinders, but they had been strethed to their limits with the -20 and 30 series. they were always more economical ro run tha IH... we had a 1954 IH SC and a 1953 JD 60 and working hard, they used about the same amount of gas with the 60 doing at least 1/2 again the work.
Click to expand...

That SC was not the same size as a 60 why the heck would it do the same amount of work!?! That 60 is a touch smaller than an M and a good touch larger than an H.
Click to expand...
 
(quoted from post at 07:24:08 07/27/11)
(quoted from post at 14:10:21 01/13/11)
(quoted from post at 08:23:15 01/13/11)
(quoted from post at 09:03:12 01/12/11) IH was AHEAD of Deere in 1958. Deere was still nursing along the old Johnny Popper design with straight transmissions, and I don't think they even had live PTO.

IH had had 4-cylinder engines since forever, a 2-speed powershift, and live PTO since 1954.

IH came out with a 6-cylinder tractor two years ahead of Deere.

Then again, Deere might've been on to something. They waited until 1960 to make their move with a modern tractor.
Click to expand...

Deere had live PTO starting in '52 with the 50/60 and the 70 in '53. also mothing wrong with the 2 cylinders, but they had been strethed to their limits with the -20 and 30 series. they were always more economical ro run tha IH... we had a 1954 IH SC and a 1953 JD 60 and working hard, they used about the same amount of gas with the 60 doing at least 1/2 again the work.
Click to expand...

That SC was not the same size as a 60 why the heck would it do the same amount of work!?! That 60 is a touch smaller than an M and a good touch larger than an H.
Click to expand...

You didn't read my post very closely... I was comparing [u:8c663fa3ff]fuel economy[/u:8c663fa3ff] in that post.... the 60 did [u:8c663fa3ff]at least[/u:8c663fa3ff] 50% more work than the Super C [u:8c663fa3ff]on the same amount of gas[/u:8c663fa3ff]. It pulled 3x14s vs. 2x14s and pulled it faster. Same for the disc...pulled a 10' vs a 7' and faster. Both used just under 2 1/2 gph of gas when working to capacity.
As for the 60 being a touch smaller than an M, the 60 would outpull a factory stock M any day. SM was probably a little stronger than a 60. Now, how much gas would that M use per hour pulling a 3x14"? I [u:8c663fa3ff]know for a fact[/u:8c663fa3ff] a 450 would use 5gph pulling 3x16" because I have run one, so I'd bet an M would use 3 1/2 to 4gph on 3x14".
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Majorman
Saturday Tractor Extra 3 9/3
Replies
1
Views
331
Mrfred54
M
F
Be it ever so humble-update
Replies
7
Views
294
caterpillar guy
C
J
Help identifying old lawn tractor
Replies
5
Views
887
504
5
Majorman
Tuesday Tractor
Replies
2
Views
726
Majorman
Majorman
Majorman
Saturday Tractor
Replies
1
Views
338
Duner Wi
D
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

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

Back
Top