(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

That Made A Tractor Out Of Her!

A

Allan in NE

Well-known Member
First morning feeding with the new fluid. Sure makes a difference! :>)

Allan

w07ep.jpg
 
Saw that white cab and the orange loader, and for a second, I thought it was a Case!

Heart rate has slowed now, gonna be OK.

Looks like good, clean fun out on the prairie.
 
But, but, but, but............haven't you heard from the hobbyist farmers how CaCl will destroy your rims? 'course, we never had any problems in the 40-plus years we used it. (now-a-days, local farmers have all swapped over to alcohol, because that's what the tire shops did)
 
Yea, our '51 DC CASE has had ccl from day one & still has one original rear rim. It'd have both if we hadn't knowingly neglected a leak.

Glenn F.
 
We loaded our 1936 WC's rear tires with CaCl in about 1947 when we put new tires on it. My dad sold that tractor to a neighbor in 1993 who restored it for shows and parades but it still had those loaded tires on it. No corrosion. When we bought a new WD in 1949 it came from the factory with rear tires 75% full of CaCl. One of those ruptured when I was plowing , bottom inside of landside tire. Shot right up and drenched me with CaCl. About two hours later I was out plowing again. New tire, washed me and the tractor. No ill effects. Now, the castor oil is quite a different matter. How I hate that stuphph.
 
Looking good Allan.

Again I went out the to shop and had a "talk" with my 1946 Allis Chalmers. It has had CaCl since it was new.

I told the tubes and rims how I was quite disappointed that they weren't leaking like everyone said they would. I told them they better start leaking real quick or I am going to install some cheap Chinese tubes.

The tires reminded me that anytime a slight leak was detected, proper maintenance was performed to fix the leak, that's why the rims had lasted 68 years so far.

As I walked by my 1998 Ford/NH, I thought I heard the tires chuckling at me.

Sorry to be so tongue in cheek, but CaCl when properly maintained works just fine. Are there other options? Of course. But CaCl is not the Satan that some people make it out to be.

If your engine oil pan had a hole in it, would you keep running it until you locked up the crank? No. You would properly maintain it.

Rick
 
Got a 7700 Ford with fluid in front and rear, 5000 Ford, 1720 New Holland, and 960 Ford with fluid in them.

Scariest ride I've had on a tractor was when I got the 1720 with loader, pulled an empty wagon down the driveway hill, jackknifed me on the wet grass and had to steer it to the bottom wherever it wanted to go.

Parked that thing until the coop came with CC, made a good little tractor out of it since.

Don't know how its legal to even sell them without the rear tires filled.

Around here the roads are white with the dried salt and fluids they spray on the roads to keep the ice at bay all winter. You get far more rust from that than any CC in the tires, of you venture on the roads. Its so bad, the JD dealer and used jockey in town leave their front row by the road empty, no machinery, over winter, they found the stuff rusted just from the road spray in the air next to the road.

Paul
 
(quoted from post at 15:34:53 01/04/14) How is your strawman argument going to deny the ruined rims from cacl ?
Click to expand...

I guess you have written facts of the percentage of ruined rims from all the ones that had calcium chloride installed??????
 
Wheel weights don't require maintenance and don't leak all over the floor. They never get lost when you puncture a tire and they are not toxic to the environment. Wheel weights don't have to be pumped out of the tire for repairs and they have residual value if you ever decide you don't need them. CaCl has no residual value. You'd have to pay me to take it. Wheel weights also don't reduce the tractive effort or ride quality of your tires. Notice that NONE of the tractor manufacturers ever sent a tractor to Nebraska to be drawbar load tested with fluid in the tires. It was always external ballast.

Also don't forget you can remove wheel weights for light duty work to reduce compaction. You can also remove some from one side and apply to the other for in furrow plowing.

Unless you cant find wheel weights for your application its a real no-brainer.
 
Well at least he didn't bring up bubba, I would sure like to meet that bubba some day. Sounds like a right smart guy.
 
You didn't answer the question.

No denying a neglected ccl leak will destroy a rim. A person has to be smarter than the tool they're using.


Glenn F.
 
I'm either Bubba or Billy Bob and I'm not smart at all; just a semi-literate/uneducated, retired dirt farmer/cattleman.....who did most (or all) of his own engineering, plumbing, roofing, carpentry, mechanicing, welding, wiring, veterinarying, dozer work and many other things that some folks pay to have done for them; ABSOLUTELY no different from most of the other farmers around here. Old John T and others constantly put me down, but I don't take it personal...........
 
(quoted from post at 16:46:13 01/04/14) Wheel weights don't require maintenance and don't leak all over the floor. They never get lost when you puncture a tire and they are not toxic to the environment. Wheel weights don't have to be pumped out of the tire for repairs and they have residual value if you ever decide you don't need them. CaCl has no residual value. You'd have to pay me to take it. Wheel weights also don't reduce the tractive effort or ride quality of your tires. Notice that NONE of the tractor manufacturers ever sent a tractor to Nebraska to be drawbar load tested with fluid in the tires. It was always external ballast.

Also don't forget you can remove wheel weights for light duty work to reduce compaction. You can also remove some from one side and apply to the other for in furrow plowing.

Unless you cant find wheel weights for your application its a real no-brainer.
Click to expand...

X2
 
(quoted from post at 17:07:42 01/04/14) I'm either Bubba or Billy Bob and I'm not smart at all; just a semi-literate/uneducated, retired dirt farmer/cattleman.....who did most (or all) of his own engineering, plumbing, roofing, carpentry, mechanicing, welding, wiring, veterinarying, dozer work and many other things that some folks pay to have done for them; ABSOLUTELY no different from most of the other farmers around here. Old John T and others constantly put me down, but I don't take it personal...........
Click to expand...

Ol' John T never put anybody down. He is a polite and learned gentlemen.
 
I like it and hate it . I bought my WD45 about 5 years ago and both rims were bad so I replaced them. I painted them with aluminum paint on the inside before installing new tubes and calcium . I pull her and she is exactly 4500 llbs and pulls real good . But when I parade she wants to wobble at high speed and that gets a little scary plus she is hard to stop with all that weight .
 
Well you make a good argument but most of the industry just dosen,t buy you argument. More than twice the folks fluid the tire vrs cast weights. We offer either on new units sold and over 70% choose fluid.
 
I'm surprised the conspiracy theorists haven't convinced the authorities to ban anything that can cause a problem if something goes wrong. Calcium Chloride, although used successfully in millions of tires for decades, can ruin rims if a leak is not repaired, ether will destroy engines although millions have came from the factory with an ether starting aid, N series tractors jump out and kill unsuspecting owners yet over half a million were sold and they are still popular, etc., etc. etc. God, we should ban steering wheels because some people don't understand how to use them.
 
The reason for the tests like that they could apply EXACT known to pound weights, Fluid you cannot get exact to pound. If they would have included fluid in the tests it would show it has a lot more traction pound for pound than the cast. Would not have a tractor without it.
 
What kind of bale grapple is that? Can you shoot and post a photo? I need to jury-rig something similar. Thanks Edd
 
I understand because of the cost difference for wheel weights that fit modern utility tractors. That doesn't mean that fluid is cost effective for older machines. I too worked at a dealership and know the potential customers. The only guys interested in wheel weights were the guys with large chassis row crop tractors. Some even go for weights on their articulated machines.
 
That is your opinion, not a fact supported by any manufacturer or university. I can attest to the efficiency of iron ballast over liquid ballast.

Here is what Deere had to say about liquid ballast in tractor tires taken from the 8000 series manual.
"Another type of ballasting is achieved by adding fluid to the tires. Ballasting with fluid should be avoided if possible. Liquid ballast causes a stiffening effect to the tire sidewall that gives the operator a rough ride and makes the tractor more susceptible to power hop. If liquid is used in the rear tires, all tires on the axle must be filled to the same level which should not exceed 40 percent fill (4 o'clock valve stem position). Specific information on the use of liquid ballast is given in: using liquid ballast in tires section."
 
That fluid will give you good traction for sure, and a lower center of gravity for your loader tractor. I had fluid in the 1086 back in it's fieldwork days. Gave real good traction till the right rim split at the bead and shot that crap all over under the cab. I spent a full two days reaching down through the floor of the cab completely cleaning and oiling every linkage that moved under there because it all seized up. Now it has no fluid but it does have five 150 lb weights per wheel, three on the inside and two on the outside. I couldn't tell any traction difference in the field but there might have been, it's hard to tell. Now it's a loader tractor and for the loader I have on it, this is enough traction for the conditions I run in. Jim
 
Exactly it is also nice because it lowers the center of gravity like while mowing road ditches. It all comes down to people having the tools (brain) but not the ability to deal with fluid. I like fluid because it puts the weight on the face of the tire for better traction. You can also get more weight with fluid than with cast weights in the available space unless you get the huge weights but I hate them PITA to mount things
 
I can only speak of the Nebraska test I have read - They all used fluid and cast iron ballast. I have looked at mostly Cockshutts and Olivers from the 50's. I believe the Massey Ferguson 65 had liquid ballast in the front and rear tire at Nebraska. See Test 745 I have some tractors with calcium and some without. The key is keeping about 72 to 75 percent of the total weight on the rear tires and having about 120 to 135 lbs total weight to pto hp to get decent performance. Chains would be helpful this year on my snow blowing (Cockshutt 35L) and blading (Cockshutt 540)tractor though! Both have calcium and one set of rear weights and this year it is not enough on the ice and packed snow.
Regards
Neil
 
Again, I will accept the challenge of a pull off with fluid vs cast weights.

My 830 Case just has cast weights, and I hate them!!
 
Neighbor put new tires on his tractor and it has CC in them. The funny part is they are tubeless and when they pumped the fluid out and took the tire off the rims still had the galvanize on them. My son works for the state of Wi. plowing snow and they mix up CC and spray it on the salt that they put on the roads. In the summer the grass grows just fine along the roads. I know that there have been studies where they say that CC is harmful to the environment, but you have to look at who is paying for the study. The ? that I have what is more important stopping some rust or saving some lives. that goes for driving a car on the road or a tractor in the field.

Bob
 
(quoted from post at 18:31:20 01/04/14) Well you make a good argument but most of the industry just dosen,t buy you argument. More than twice the folks fluid the tire vrs cast weights. We offer either on new units sold and over 70% choose fluid.
Click to expand...

Lowest bidder usually wins. Lowest long run cost isn't always a consideration.
Some folk don't know any better. Great Grand pappy,Grand Pappy and Pappy all loaded with CaCl then why not Junior too? Way back in the day there were no other liquid choices.
 
I say it's a good excuse for you to buy another tractor to have the contest :). Buy yourself another 830 and have a pull-off. Be sure to have the same size tires inflated properly and the same amount of weight on both units. I wish I could perform a real live controlled test for you with measuring drawbar pull between like tractors with the two different types of ballast but I just don't have the instrumentation to get it accomplished. I'll just have to take the experts word for it as well as my own experiences.

I can speak from experience that rigid tires have noticeably less traction than soft properly inflated tires on properly sized rims. Dad kept stobbing the 18.4x34 radials on a late 4020 pulling the rotary cutter across some cruddy ground. He decided that 14 ply forestry tires were the ticket. The forestry tires don't take on punctures but they made the 4020 not a good choice for field work. It just spins like a bantam rooster scratching the ground. It cuts deep ruts pulling the 14 ft disk it used to pull with ease with the soft squishy ag tires. Adding fluid to a tire makes it rigid which means it can't conform to the ground it simply digs a hole to China.

Michelin Ag suggests iron ballast over fluid for the reasons listed in the presentation. Why would they lie? Iron ballast makes their product perform better than liquid ballast.
Here is what Michelin thinks about liquid ballast
 
I dunno, ole John T. has ribbed our "Barak" or "Tom43" a time or two but with good reason :). The old codger has been confused about 24V Deere systems and wont admit it. I will say that John T. has remained calm about it all. I would have already named him a blithering idiot and cut my losses. Ole Tom is the kinda guy that cant be reasoned with because he cannot admit a mistake and refuses to listen to logical, practical reason. John T. handles it like a gentleman.
 
From Mid range Magnum Operators Manual. Page 6-73

6 - WORKING OPERATIONS
Rear wheel cast metal weights
Cast wheel weights are available in: 90 kg (200 lb) and
225 kg (500 lb).
[b:7d004fc02a][i:7d004fc02a][color=red:7d004fc02a]Cast wheel weights are recommended instead of fluid
filled tires. Cast wheel weights allow the tire to flex with
the contour of the ground, increasing tire contact area, reducing
compaction and providing a smoother ride.
Cast wheel weights do not increase rolling resistance due
to internal friction (as fluid does); this increases the efficiency
of your tractor.[/color:7d004fc02a][/i:7d004fc02a][/b:7d004fc02a]
Follow these guidelines when installing rear wheel
weights. See wheel weight installation diagrams.
• A maximum of 455 kg (1000 lb) can be assembled to
the inside wheel.
• A maximum of 225 kg (500 lb) can be assembled to
the dual wheel.
• Weights mount to 34 in or larger diameter solid steel
wheel.

From the Steiger 350 - 600 Operators manual page 6-70

Weights, cast metal and liquid Front Ballast
When fully or semi-mounted rear hitch attachments or implements with heavy vertical drawbar loads are used, it may
be desirable to add ballast to the front to maintain stability and balance. Do not add ballast to the rear axle when
using fully or semi-mounted rear attachments.
The combined static weight of the tractor and the front ballast must not exceed the maximum gross operating weight.
Rear Ballast
When using front mounted attachments it may be necessary to add ballast to the rear only to provide stability and
balance. Add only the weight to the rear required to achieve approximately 50 percent of the total static weight on
each axle.
The combined static weight of the front attachment and the rear ballast must not exceed the maximum gross warranted
weight.
Liquid Ballast
Radial tires do not have tubes installed. [b:7d004fc02a][i:7d004fc02a][color=red:7d004fc02a]DO NOT use fluid in tires as ballast. Fluid in tires causes accelerated rust
and corrosion on wheels. Any damage caused from the use of liquid ballast will not be covered by warranty.
Cast iron weights are the only approved method of ballasting your tractor.[/color:7d004fc02a][/i:7d004fc02a][/b:7d004fc02a]
Front ballast
Two types of front castings are available for your tractor. A front ballast casting or a front suitcase weight casting.
Suitcase weights can be mounted on the front suitcase weight casting. A maximum of 18 cast suitcase weights on
Steiger models 350, 400 and 450 or 22 cast suitcase weights on models 500, 550 or 600 at 45 kg (100 lb) each can
be installed, depending on the application, tractor static weight ratio and soil conditions.

You guys can swear by your fluid filled tires all you want. I'll continue to swear at them. No worse pain in the arse than dealing with someone elses leaking tire in my work area. Well, except moving the heavy sum beaches.
 
Wila-whatever,
I guess you are a compuker geek and have never plunked your arzz on the seat of a tractor. It don't take too many smarts to see what liquid filled tires do for performance compared to wheel weights.
On the other hand with 2wd tractors pulling 3pt hitch tillage tools that have draft sensing 3pt, systems , a pound of weight on the nose of a tractor, will apply 3 punnds of weight to the rear axles, transfeing weight from the front of the tractor and the weight and draft from the implement, as the system sences/cycles and applies hyd lift to the 3pt. All this technology amounts to diddly shi! when you are using a tractor for FEL work, It's all about center of gravity at the rear of the tractor as stated above.
Loren, the Acg.
 
Wherever-Case Guy, no need for me to bore you with my tractor experiences, but I can assure you that I'm no computer guru (wish I was). I'm not sure what you mean by "It don't take too many smarts to see what liquid filled tires do for performance compared to wheel weights."? Does that mean that you think anyone who doesn't agree that liquid ballast is best is not smart?

I will say that lowering the center of gravity by using fluid only works if you don't fill the tire above the 2/3 mark. I'll also give you more food for thought by saying that it is possible to get more stability from weights than liquid if the weights protrude past the outside of the rim which offer the weights a leveraging effect. I will say all of this is null and void so long as you keep the rear tires on the ground. The amount of stability offered by water in the bottom of the tire vs being 10 inches higher wont be enough to save your tail if you are lifting something that your tractor doesn't have enough butt to lift.

I've offered what Deere had to say as well as what Michelin had to say. From your remarks I'll take it that you pride yourself in having more knowledge on the subject than the Deere and Michelin engineers combined. They have each spent hundreds of millions on testing.

Why did you feel it necessary to become Dr. smarty pants? We are having an educational conversation about liquid ballast vs. iron ballast. Did you think you could clear the room by screwing up my handle and accusing me of having never sat on a tractor? I think cabin fever might be setting in for you. A bit cranky it seems.
 
How old are these recommendations from Deere and Michelin? Are they considering a loader tractor? Are they talking about radial tires? I know a dairy farmer that bought a new JD 90HP(about 10 years ago) and hated the radial tires for loader work. His other JD(same size about 2 years older) had bias and he much preferred it for loader work. He bought the tractors new to avoid paying huge ($100,000) income tax. The original post was concerning a tractor 30+ years old with a loader.
 
Your reasoning does not apply to the tires made from 1935 and up in all but the radial tires and it is very easy to see how hard it would be to get exact to pound weight in a tire that only held 200# of fluid, now with your giant tire 200# difference would be no more noticable than a 5# difference in those small tires and that would only be a pint of fluid. It cann not all be pumped out later and for later that remaining fluid would have altered the tests.
 
Buick,
This is where I agree 100% with you.

When I replace my old tires I will use something
other than CaCl. At this time with no leaks and
older tires. I don't see the need to get rid of the
calcium and pay for beet juice or washer fluid.

Rick
 
(quoted from post at 02:05:07 01/05/14) How old are these recommendations from Deere and Michelin? Are they considering a loader tractor? Are they talking about radial tires? I know a dairy farmer that bought a new JD 90HP(about 10 years ago) and hated the radial tires for loader work. His other JD(same size about 2 years older) had bias and he much preferred it for loader work. He bought the tractors new to avoid paying huge ($100,000) income tax. The original post was concerning a tractor 30+ years old with a loader.
Click to expand...

Nobody currently recommends fluid as ballast in radial tires.

Another myth that has been dispelled is that fluid should only be run in the inside tires when running duals. The standard statement now found usually goes something like this... IF fluid must be used as ballast it must be evenly distributed between all tires across an axle.

What happens with fluid in the inside tires and not in the duals is you have in effect two different size tires that end up working against each other causing wasted fuel and increased strain on drivetrain parts. This holds true with bias ply tires and is greatly amplified with radial tires.

Of course the soil conditions encountered are also a big factor in how dramatic the effects would measure out during testing.

When it comes to loader tractors do whatever you must but I've seen them effectively ballasted without using fluid.

When it comes to hillside operation, if you want to lower the center of gravity using fluid the fill level needs to remain below axle level. And the tread width needs to be as wide as practical.

In 38 years as a dealership mechanic I've never come in and found where an iron weight has leaked corrosive fluid on the floor or cause the need of a special gauge to check the tire pressure.
 
Kinda funny reading all this about which is better and who would win in a pull off etc.
I run cast weights and filled tires on the same machine It works for me and bottom line is thats all that is important.
This may offend all of you some of the time or some of you all the time but in reality my cows could care less.
Oh but wait a minute better get out your slide rule as I also have tire chains on and carry a 1200 lb bale 14.2013784 inches out behind the rear wheels.
Did I mention my tires run much cooler in the summer with fluid in them.
There must be a corelation between lower operating temperature and extended tire life that should be factored in as well. :D
 
You make it sound like a tire gauge for fluid costs
hundreds of dollars. If you want to get technical,
fluid has been used successfully in millions of
tires for additional traction and ballast. How can
you argue with facts???
 
8100 series isn't that old. BUT, I think this is where it comes in.
1)When JD's service guys have to take a wheel off an axle, without fluid, it's a lot lighter, and less apt to squash somebody.
2)When Michelin's dealers service a tire, it's a lot faster to pop it on, put the air to it, and drive away, than to pump in fluid.

Back in the day they found that fluid in the tires helped reduce wheel hop and gave a better ride because it acts like a shock absorber as it moves around in the tire. Something like Centramatics wheel balancers or using beads in a tire.

We had a new utility tractor that hopped around and acted funny at speed. That first winter we noticed the tires were only about 1/2 filled. Having them filled the rest of the way up took care of the problem.
 
(quoted from post at 13:19:00 01/05/14) You make it sound like a tire gauge for fluid costs
hundreds of dollars. If you want to get technical,
fluid has been used successfully in millions of
tires for additional traction and ballast. How can
you argue with facts???
Click to expand...

Just because it was done that way "by millions" "for years" doesn't mean it was the best way or most fuel efficient for every application. A lot has been learned about ballasting over the years and it has been learned that fluid in the tires isn't the most efficient ballast for traction in field work.

Best thing I ever did on my own tractors was to get rid of the fluid and reballast with iron.

Two distinct advantages;
1. Could adjust ballast for work at hand as needed.
2. Didn't need to wait on field service from the tire store to get fluid pumped out and back in. Any tire repairs could be handled when needed without delay or additional expense.
 
(quoted from post at 16:59:14 01/05/14)

Back in the day they found that fluid in the tires helped reduce wheel hop and gave a better ride because it acts like a shock absorber as it moves around in the tire. Something like Centramatics wheel balancers or using beads in a tire.

We had a new utility tractor that hopped around and acted funny at speed. That first winter we noticed the tires were only about 1/2 filled. Having them filled the rest of the way up took care of the problem.
Click to expand...

The better ride was only due to the heavier tractor squashing down lamps farther. And having more inertia to reduce the velocity and amplitude of jolts. The dry tire with external cast weights would ride even smoother.
 
(quoted from post at 16:03:07 01/05/14) but in reality my cows could care less.
Oh but wait a minute better get out your slide rule
Did I mention my tires run much cooler in the summer with fluid in them.
There must be a correlation between lower operating temperature and extended tire life that should be factored in as well. :D
Click to expand...

Sorry that you continue to feel threatened by somebody with slide rule that haven't been used of any account since the mid 1970's.
The liquid tire generates more btu's of heat energy from rolling friction. The temperature difference is from thermal inertia of the liquid.
Measure the tire temps the next morning and the liquid tire will be warmer than the dry tire.
 
Hmmm so looks like Deere, Case, Steiger, and Michelin engineers all feel the same way. Guess they must all be wrong cause these guys have been using CaCl for the last 60 years so it must be the best way :)
 
(quoted from post at 09:46:07 01/06/14) Hmmm so looks like Deere, Case, Steiger, and Michelin engineers all feel the same way. Guess they must all be wrong cause these guys have been using CaCl for the last 60 years so it must be the best way :)
Click to expand...

What? The evidence is clear that per lb of ballast . External cast iron is superior to internal fluid.
The one exception is ballasting a 2WD loader tractor. This is a situation where even with eternal cast and liquid it's difficult to obtain enough ballast .
 
(quoted from post at 04:50:41 01/06/14)
(quoted from post at 16:03:07 01/05/14) but in reality my cows could care less.
Oh but wait a minute better get out your slide rule
Did I mention my tires run much cooler in the summer with fluid in them.
There must be a correlation between lower operating temperature and extended tire life that should be factored in as well. :D
Click to expand...

Sorry that you continue to feel threatened by somebody with slide rule that haven't been used of any account since the mid 1970's.
The liquid tire generates more btu's of heat energy from rolling friction. The temperature difference is from thermal inertia of the liquid.
Measure the tire temps the next morning and the liquid tire will be warmer than the dry tire.
Click to expand...

Why you would surmise I would feel threatend by someone with a slide is rule is beyond me. Maybe you were responding to something you read in a post from somebody else.
Regarding my statement of filled tires running cooler, this was an observation not an opinion.
Albeit not monitored under lab conditions.
Last summer I had a sidewall let go on a 38 inch rear tire, I had a spare but it was not fluid filled.
That tractor would spend 10 hours gathering and loading round bales, by days end the filled tire was cool to the touch, the tire without fluid was hot to the touch.
The same temp difference was noted when using that tractor in front of a round baler or cultivator.
In your post you stated "measure the tire temps the next morning and the liquid tire would be warmer than the dry one".
I don't see how this factors in with what is being discussed unless we start considering ambient temperatures.
 

Thermal inertia.
The fluid filled tires actually make more heat from rolling friction than the dry tires.
The fluid filled tires have all that thermal inertia due to the mass of the water mix.
The temperature difference the next morning was a 2nd attempt to illustrate thermal inertia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Steve in VA
Just a green tractor
Replies
9
Views
835
560Dennis
560Dennis
S
EV tractor sales
Replies
7
Views
621
grandpa Love
grandpa Love
C
New clothing line
Replies
14
Views
2K
used red MN
U
K
Jacobson G10 Help
Replies
6
Views
402
mhb@ufe
M
K
1650 Oliver Transmission/Clutch Issue
Replies
2
Views
314
Kenewell
K
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