2950 John Deere tractor

J. T.Daugherty · Mar 11, 2014

Gentleman; I am looking for opinions on this tractor. It is a 1985 2950 cab tractor . It has 2430 hours and a 8/4 transmission. Has a John Deere 260 self leveling loader. Never had this type of tractor before . Doctor told me to get out of the sun as much as possible in the summer time, but cows don't wait. Looking for any and all opinions on this tractor . J D SELLER, hope you respond to this message. I need some guidance. Thanks in advance JOE dAUGHERTY

wvfarmboy54 · Mar 11, 2014

its a good strong tractor cant beat a deere

GRAPE-DRANK · Mar 11, 2014

(quoted from post at 17:26:37 03/11/14) its a good strong tractor cant beat a deere

Naturally aspirated I6, I personally think that to be one of the finest tractors ever made. the 40, 50 series were awesome.

WCS · Mar 11, 2014

Made in Germany

Dean · Mar 11, 2014

My neighbor had a 2940 open station. He used it for everything until he passed 4 or 5 years ago and it was a very good tractor.

Dean

caterpillar guy · Mar 11, 2014

My brother has a 2940 If it is anything like his they don't like cold weather. Needs a block heater below about 50 degrees. Otherwise a good tractor. His has a loader on it. They are a little clumsy in tight spaces for a loader tractor. At least with the MFD front. In the field it is fine. We use it to pull a 15 ft no till drill in the spring.

SKYBOW · Mar 11, 2014

Had one for 10 years. I loved it. Two different neighbors borrowed it all the time. I put a 595 Allied loader on it. You do need a block heater in the winter here in Iowa

JD John · Mar 11, 2014

I have a 2950(no cab) that has a 720 loader on it. I like it, no real problems with it. Has about 7500 hrs on it. Still starts good in cold weather and doesn't use any oil. Biggest downside is dry clutch not a perma-clutch.

JD Seller · Mar 11, 2014

With that low of hours it should be a great tractor. The JD 260 loader is a good one too. The only thing to watch on a JD 2950 is the clutch. It is a dry clutch and is not much more than heavy enough. Watch slipping it.

The up side is the motor is a smooth running one that is pretty easy on fuel. You also have a real good cab.

Tx Jim · Mar 12, 2014

The cab model has a brake fluid operated clutch(master/slave cylinders) that can be a bear to bleed if it gets air in the system. I would suggest to monitor brake fluid level in reservoir in frt of dash.

RodinNS · Mar 12, 2014

There's a bunch of 3140's in this neighbourhood which is essentially the same tractor, just a bit older. They're as decent as anything else from their day. The main failing to the lot of them was high pressure hydraulic leaks. They'll blow an o-ring somewhere and you can spend an eternity looking for it sometimes... assuming you don't delaminate all the brakes and wet clutches from heat in the intervening time. The main dry clutch... most of them here seem to do about 5k hours which is fairly typical. Most of these also had loaders on them.
The 50 series may have been better on fuel... but the 40 series were nothing to write home about in that department. The guys here constantly complain about how much fuel they go through... rightly or not. Some of that may be more habit than the fault of the tractor...
Overall, those are good tractors. There's lots bigger lemons out there.

Rod

4020guy · Mar 12, 2014

Clutch life depends on the operator mostly. Friend split a 2950 last month for a transmission seal. The tractor had close to 9,000 hours and the clutch was still not completely worn out. The clutch plate, pressure plate, and bearings were changed while apart. The tractor has a 265 loader and a front wheel drive. I've also seen guys take a clutch out in 1000 hours. As for starting, check the size and condition of the battery cables and ends. These could have been larger. Lots of these tractors around here with lots of hours and still giving very good service....Ron

Anonymous-0 · Mar 12, 2014

I own a 2950 mfwd, and a 3150 mfwd with cab and 265 loader. I can speak with experiance when I say they are GOOD tractors. I make a far amount of hay in the summer and these units are good on fuel. Each will start without plugging them in to about 25, below that you have to crank to much on them but they will start down to about 20. When in the cab of my 3150 you cannt tell much difference from a 4440. A/C is great, but I swapped out the pump for the later 55 series type. weak spots are the dry clutch, and parking brake. The clutch will not tollerate slipping. Will last a long time if used right. Clutch dust does take a starter out now and then. Dont move tractor with parking brake on. This wears them out fast.

Tx Jim · Mar 12, 2014

(quoted from post at 07:26:49 03/12/14)
The 50 series may have been better on fuel... but the 40 series were nothing to write home about in that department. The guys here constantly complain about how much fuel they go through... rightly or not. Some of that may be more habit than the fault of the tractor...
Overall, those are good tractors. There's lots bigger lemons out there.Rod

1st test is JD 2950,2nd test is Ford 7610

Mike M · Mar 12, 2014

I have a love hate relationship with those parking brakes too.
I do prefer them over the park gear which would get stuck on hills and the hand lever makes them easy to apply.
BUT I do have a bad habit of forgetting they are on and can't hear the beeper over the engine noise (open stations) and drive off wondering why the red light is on the dash ! LOL.

RodinNS · Mar 12, 2014

You can throw that out all you like. All I can tell you is that they guys that own them complain about their fuel use constantly and they've got the fuel bills to prove it. More than twice what I frequently used for the same or more work. Most of that goes back to them using a lot more tractor than they needed to get a job done... which when you think about it... kind of confirms what I've often told you... they have extremely poor efficiency at light load, regardless of what those tests seem to show.

Rod

Tx Jim · Mar 12, 2014

Rod
I know you prefer Ford/New Holland tractors over JD tractors but I think your """he said/she said/neighbor said"" fuel consumption of JD tractors vs Nebraska test statistics won't hold up in COURT!!!!!!!!! :wink:

J. T.Daugherty · Mar 12, 2014

J D Seller ; what is a 8/3 transmission, or the guy doesn't know what he is talking about. Joe Daugherty

JD Seller · Mar 12, 2014

JT: The only transmission I see on the JD 2950 was a 16 speed forward and 8 speed reverse.

IF it is a cab model they have two gear shifters. The left one has Reverse, 1 and 2. The left one has 1,2,3,4. Then the left lever is moved sideways for a hydraulic Hi-Lo shift that you can do under load. Also the 1,2,3,4 is synchronized. So you can clutch shift them while moving like your car/truck.

RodinNS · Mar 12, 2014

It doesn't have to hold up in court... lol
I'm only going by what he tells me, and I know he's consistently spent about twice as much on fuel to do a similar amount of work.

Surely you must realise that the Nebraska tests are in no way based on reality when comparing those two tractors in the field. It's easy to say that the Deere has a higher level of efficiency at 2500 rpm. It's designed to. The Ford runs at 1600. The difference is the Ford can do modest PTO work at 16-1800 that must be done at 23-2500 on that model Deere. It makes a fair amount of difference. If I want to run my 7710 at 2200 all day long I can expect a significant fuel bill too.

Rod

Tx Jim · Mar 13, 2014

It's amazing that 16-1800 rpm isn't mentioned in the Nebraska test for a Ford 7710 for 540 or 1000 rpm pto but rather 2100 & 2048 respectfully. I suppose your Ford tractor was built specifically for YOU. I'm not trying to state/imply the Nebraska tests are the same as real life but I'd believe the test results over someone's NEIGHBORS biased OPINION.

Tx Jim · Mar 13, 2014

(quoted from post at 20:28:24 03/12/14) JT: The only transmission I see on the JD 2950 was a 16 speed forward and 8 speed reverse.
Then the left lever is moved sideways for a hydraulic Hi-Lo shift that you can do under load. .

JD Seller
I was thinking the hyd hi-lo was an option. I know my brother owned a 2750 cab tractor that did not have the hyd hi-lo feature

RodinNS · Mar 13, 2014

You OUGHT to know, since you had one... that 540 on a 4 cylinder Ford chassis is found at 1900. 1000 is found at 2060. Some of the 3 cylinder chassis tractors achieve speed as low as 1650 with most at 1750 or 1800. The Deere in question, IIRC, achieve both 540 and 1000 at somewhere around 2500, hence there is no ability to throttle back and maintain speed. The Ford's also do not make rated power at rated PTO speed. They only make rated power at 2100 or whatever governed speed happens to be on a particular model. My point to you is and has always been that when you throttle the Ford back to PTO speed, in it's economical range, it will not burn near the fuel it would use if it ran at 2100. It was one of those nifty common sense design things they did in realising that an 86 hp tractor didn't need to drive full power through a 540 shaft... so the gear sets for 540 and 1000 reflected two different engine speeds. If you take that Ford and put it on a chopper or something that requires all it's got... it's going to make the chopper howl at about 1150 at high idle... which I don't see as being a particularly big deal. At that speed, no, it's not as economical as the Deere. The difference would seem to be that the Ford's cam profile encourages breathing and torque at mid speed. The Saran engine makes torque at higher speeds and has better efficiency at higher speeds because that's how it's designed. That's just a questionable design criteria for a utility type tractor... not that they're a bad tractor in other respects. Quite a good one actually.

Rod

RodinNS · Mar 13, 2014

It seems to me that I've seen a couple of them without hi-lo.. but that vast majority do have it.

Rod

Tx Jim · Mar 13, 2014

(quoted from post at 12:23:41 03/13/14) You OUGHT to know, since you had one... that 540 on a 4 cylinder Ford chassis is found at 1900. 1000 is found at 2060. Rod

I bought a 6700 after my 5610 burnt so yes I own a Ford tractor. I suppose from your statement you're implying that the engine speeds outlined in red for pto speeds in the Nebraska tests are inaccurate along with their GPH at rated pto speeds?????????

RodinNS · Mar 13, 2014

You indeed circled the correct engine speed... and when you look to the right you'll notice that at 2100 engine rpm it's turning 1025 rpm on the shaft... so when I told you it makes 1000 at 2060... you should realise it's correct. If you also take the time to read your operators manual it will quite clearly show you that 540 is attained at 1900 engine rpm, NOT 2100 engine rpm.

Rod

2950 John Deere tractor

New User

Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

New User

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Similar threads