ot/ please help

JD lovers will argue these issues till death but they are what I call facts.

Both took wrong turns in the late fifties early sixties. JD began making some of the best mid HP tractors ever made, but charges too much for them, and the parts. In addition, some equipment and components were fragile and never made better.

IHC had several good tractors but failed to test and fix before selling them and recalls were deadly. When bean counters and investors got into the mix, the old engineers were gone, and the new ones made quality and complexity mistakes.
When combined (not in order) with case, Steiger, New Holland, and Mahindra, and shipped tractors of marginal quality with marginal support across oceans, it became second rate. There are CaseIH units that are still very very good, but there is poor support and poor control of small tractor series, and JD can claim the final identity prize. It also has still suffering from Price and quality issues that make Kubota smile all the way to the boardroom. JimN

By all means use the comments from this discussion for your essay, just be sure to footnote each of them. How? In parentheses right after the quotation write the name of the contributor and the URL which will enable your reader to find the comment.

For example: (K.W. in Texas,>Link

What>Link you'll end up with is a digest of opinion on the subject, a valid approach to the writing of an essay of this sort.

Don't forget to proofread carefully.

Mr. C.

;8^)

I am kinda taking a liking to this pretty lady that showed up at my buddy's house. She is a 48 year young JI Case 711-B that has looked better, but still has the moves of a cheerleader.

Still bleed red,

Aaron

As far as writing a paper with a bias, I'd say don't. That's the academic in me talking. Research is research and facts are facts. You can't close your argument by saying that in spite of the facts you are right -- you'd only be defying logic. Be honest about it, is I guess the biggest point I want to make to you. And an honest argument will address evidence that is in the other direction. I'll say again, that you could begin by pointing out that Deere is the biggest one left standing, but that it wasn't always so; that, to me, would make a good paper.

A paper with that argument (and this should appeal to your aim) would focus on the 30 years fom the introduction of the Farmall Regular up through the end of the letter series (1924-1954), where it could be reasonably argued that IH was leading the pack. The others made very good tractors during that time, but IH in its heyday had a formidable marketing department and was often first to find out what the farmers needed and wanted and see that it got built, or persuaded the farmers that they needed and wanted what IH was making. The others during those years were often just trying to keep up with them.

Look back over the other responses again, and think, too, about what makes a better tractor. There are differing ideas about that. To my mind, reliability would be the number one consideration, as I expect it would be for any of the folks that relied, unlike myself, on their machines for their living. But IH, Deere, A/C, Oliver, Case, Ford, MM and others all made solid machines that you could count on to run. At that point, as some have pointed out, the comfort of the seat or the availability of air conditioning in the cab, became the selling points. Were they "better" tractors because of the air conditioning? Some folks think so. And don't forget that the beginning of the undoing of IH was their failure in the reliability area, when they tried to put 6-cylinder power onto rear-ends designed for 4-cylinders in the 460 and 560. Disastrous!

Like I said earlier about the pickup wars, the balance shifted regularly, and in the case of the tractors, if you want to make the IH-over-Deere argument, focus on a period when it was true.

Good luck! And let us know how you make out!

Because my Dad always had International equipment.Tractors, combines, plows, etc. and another resaon, I find that IH people are just plain out nicer than JD people, not that all are bad, and there are some IH sobs, but in my experiences, IH people are just plain nicer.

I said that to make the point that a lot of what makes a better tractor has to do with where you were, as in proximity to the dealer for a certain make, and the reputation of the tractors they sold, the reputation of the dealer for sales and, especially, service.

I grew up around Farmalls, but early in my experience we had an Oliver on the place. THe Ih dealer was nine miles one way, over in Lancaster. The Oliver dealer was four miles the other way, in Lithopolis. Those two, and A/Cs were common in our neighborhood. Not sure where the A/C dealer was, but I can say that Deere didn't have any real presence in our area. At least I didn't have the sense that there were many of them around.

If you have a library that can get hold of a book by Ken Updike, "International Harvester Tractors 1955-1985" and read up a little, you'll get a sense of what IH did over the years to compete with Deere and others. You'll get a sense of how a lot of the time, especially in the ten years after WWII, the others were chasing IH, but then IH got away with murder stealing the idea for the narrow torque tube on the A and B from A/C and calling it Cultivision as if they'd thought it up for themselves. Ken's book is fair, too, in pointing out the disaster of the 460 and 560, and the boardroom decision to not license out the Fast-Hitch system, both of which were significant factors in the demise of IH.

Maybe some others can chime in for books about Deere (I simply don't know about them) that would be similar, and I'd encourage you to read them, too.

im kinda partial to John Deere, so i will give you a couple of facts, and they may be favoring JD, but i believe that they can be proven.

up until the introduction of the new generation tractors by JD, International was the leading mfg. After the JD introduced the New Generation tractors, I think that JD and IH ran "neck and neck" for a while, and then Jd became the leading mfg.

John deere has been producing farm equiptment for over 150 years, and has never had to merge with any other manufacturer. IH was bought out by Case in the mid '80s and then case and several other companies have merged many times, and is now with New Holland. I believe that Case New Holland is owned by a different company all to gether. while JD is owned by JD.

one thing that i noticed between Jd and IH tractors, is that the JD has more torque (the crank had a longer stroke), which means that the JD did not need the TA. IH tractors did not have as long of a stroke which in turn led them IH to having less torque. which led them to add the TA, Which i believe was created by JD.

I hope this helps. there are many books out there that tell alot about JD and IH. I believe a lot of them were produced by MBI.

Most of the logo stuff I have found that advertises for 'no longer in business' companies is pretty cheap stuff, for a premium price. I keep a couple of IH caps since I like IH better but when it comes right down to it the Deere branded stuff wears better. Just my two cents.

Good luck
Randy

Even today the ergonomics on the IH's is far surperior to some of the NH's (really Fiats).

It's also sad that when Case merger with IH theri was a JD Killer design on the table that lacked the funding to make it to the assembly line.

I had high hopes for CashIH and liked the IH design that was eventually buit and very disappointed with the Fiats painted red.

Guitar-can result in smashed guitar, but the chicks dig it. May not get best grade.

Tractor-fun for me, results in good grade, but puts people to sleep and may result in tractor being stolen.....