Author	[Modern View]
Jason S. 01-07-2013 09:09:15 192.43.65.245 Report to Moderator	I have been considering getting another tractor for a while.Something a little more powerful than my TO20.I have my MF175 for bigger stuff but I had thought something in the size of a 35 would be nice. Plus you have live power on the later models. A friend of mine offered to sell me his nice 1961 MF35 deluxe gas burner for $2500.00. It needs nothing. Its a good looking tractor. I have also came across a pretty nice F40 for $3200.00. Is there really any advantages of one over the other? I am familiar with the 35"s but not the 40"s. As far as I know they are quite similar tractors arent they? [Reply]   [No Email]
Jason S. 01-07-2013 19:02:21 174.254.147.208 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to 2tractors, 01-07-2013 09:09:15   Quoting Removed, click Modern View to see Here you go...my $400.00 tractor and $300.00 rake. The tractor was red when I got it. People drive by when I raking hay and just look at me like I'm out of my mind. I guess because it isn't a V rake or 70hp tractor with a cab. Oh well, it works good and it is paid for.... [Reply]  [No Email]
Tony in Mass. 01-07-2013 18:39:07 76.127.225.182 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   What am I doing up here? you and Miner live in some sort of 'bastion of immortal fergies'.. and disc plows.... AND 3 point rakes!!!! Got to talk to the real estate people in the morning... You got just too many choices. I'd say test drive each of them. Whichever you get will put you in that sweet spot between a 175 and a 20... Imagine if you had a grandpa like that kid on the goldrush tv show? You could do like miner said and just bring home all of them! [Reply]  [No Email]
Jason S. 01-07-2013 18:54:32 174.254.147.208 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Tony in Mass., 01-07-2013 18:39:07   Well what is sad is if I buy the plow I have to give up buying a DEO25 rake I found. I"ve got a DEO20 but I need the 25 because my haybine is a 10ft cut. With a rake that is only 8ft wide it makes it hard to put two windrows together. I can do it but it"s hard. With a 9ft rake it would be a lot easier. It"s kind of like that disk plow. Do I need it? No. Would it make plowing easier for me? Yes. I guess it helps around this area on finding Massey stuff because the dealer in my town has been the same family since the 1950"s and every town around here had a Massey dealer. There is a guy I work with has got a TE20 and a TO30. I"m not interested in the 20 but I"ve asked him several times about the 30. I don"t need it but it"s going to sit there and rot down. [Reply]  [No Email]
phil(va) 01-07-2013 17:15:47 76.1.132.68 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   The 40 is a little heavier, stronger axle, but the 35 sits lower, more compact, feels more stable on hillsides. Same running gear. If 35 has live power, save the $700. My two cents. [Reply]  [No Email]
Gearhead210 01-07-2013 11:06:17 72.241.59.210 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   The engines are the same. The rear ends are (basically) the same. The steering is different, both had their issues but I would say the F40 is better since it doesnt use the power steering under the column. It is however more prone to "wheel shake" at road speed than the 35 counterpart. If the 40 is a row crop with the 38" rears, DEFINITELY go with that. Not only because it is more unique (from a collector's standpoint), but because it gives better traction with the tall rears. Personally I would go with the 40, we own a 35, 135, F40, and a 65. The 40 would get you the $700 difference back in resale down the road later if you don't like it [Reply]  [No Email]
Jason S. 01-07-2013 10:56:52 174.252.144.63 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   Neither have power steering. I did find a MF 50 with a Perkins diesel that is less money than the 35 which I have seriously considered because of the power and fuel efficiency. I do love Perkins diesels. But he sheet metal is a little rough on it but it does run good. Tony, you hate the hood on the 100 series? That is one of the most beautiful tractors ever built...lol...in my opinion. [Reply]  [No Email]
Tony in Mass. 01-07-2013 15:29:46 76.127.225.182 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 10:56:52   Zack just reminded me of a BIG point... the F40 WILL have live pto... the 35? may not? Got to check that out first fer sure. Hummm. A Perkins diesel MF50 w/PS? Tin is no problem, actually still being reproducted... OH! the 100 series tin? Can't get at half the things that break down or need routine looking after, got to swing the hood all the way over just to pour gas, always seem to rattle or scuff, unlatch themselves and rattle even more? Hey 40's and 50's? You are into high performance stuff? The air tubes and hoses are a twisty 5 feet from carb to filter behind the ... like all the missing plow coulters around you... most 40 and 50 grills became frisbies into the woods long ago! Can't help it, I think 35's were the height of human/tractor civilization..... [Reply]  [No Email]
Jason S. 01-07-2013 16:06:15 174.252.144.63 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Tony in Mass., 01-07-2013 15:29:46   This 35 does have live pto. Well now I know why that 50's grills are missing. It is diesel but it does not have power steering either. The reason I'm looking for another one is, I like the versatility of my TO20 but have you ever tried raking hay with one of those with the ferguson 3pt rake on a hill? It isn't real fun sometimes although I've gotten used to it over the years. I was just wanting something that is close to the same size with a little more weight and horsepower. The diesel verses gas decision,I've still not made up my mind. Btw Tony, I'm going to get that Disk Plow Saturday... [Reply]  [No Email]
Zachary Hoyt 01-07-2013 10:24:38 74.47.58.105 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   We have a gas 35 that was here when we moved in 11 years ago. It needed a bit of work at the time but has been incredibly reliable over the years. It got a loader in 08 and has been our main tractor for lifting logs onto wagons ever since. It is tired now, and tends to overheat when working hard in the summer,but still does great and always starts. Sometime I intend to fix it up a bit. I would go for the 35, the live PTO is very handy. Zach [Reply]  [No Email]
miner09 01-07-2013 10:21:07 75.230.194.116 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   The 40 is the same tractor as the MF 50-MH 50, the difference is the tin. If the 40 is HC or RC it will be a little heavier. Buy both, use the 35 and show the 40.Give us pictures. [Reply]  [No Email]
Tony in Mass. 01-07-2013 10:00:07 76.127.225.182 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   As a working tractor, advantage goes to the 35 in my book. Steering issues pester me on my 40. Oh if it got power, go with that. PS on fergies seems to be a $500 option. Used and in pieces! Mechanically, exactly the same... tinwork, STEERING again, both are a bigger pain that on the 35's. Hey I hate the 100 series hoods even worse! A $700 difference? if all else equal, if you are collecting a row of fergies, you want a 40. If you just got to get work done, and neither has PS, show us pics of the 35!!!! [Reply]  [No Email]
McBride 01-07-2013 09:46:31 74.70.171.169 Report to Moderator	Re: 35 vs 40 in reply to Jason S., 01-07-2013 09:09:15   I think the F40 is very much the same as a MH50. Check the specs between all of them them. [Reply]  [No Email]