63' Ford 200 vs. 58 M.F. 50

I would like to hear your openions. I am looking to purchase an older tractor and currently have two to chose from. A 1963 ford 2000 with 5' bush hog,5 spd. w/ hi/lo,p.s.,and fresh paint $2800, and a 1958 M.F. 50 all original $2500. both seem mechanically sound. What are your thoughts?

2000 vs. 50

I had a 50 M.F. gas w/ power steering that was a pretty good old tractor. Started and ran good with good power. The transmission would get stuck between gears sometime and you would have to get it unstuck with a screwdriver but it needed a new piece and I didn"t put the piece on. That might have fixed it. Overall I think the old Ferguson 50"s are pretty tough tractors. I wouldn"t have a problem with a 50 Ferguson. As far as a 2000 Ford of that model I don"t really know much about. They seem to have pretty good engines and power. I don"t know about the hydraulics or transmission. I know the 50 Ferguson has live power,not sure about the Ford. The Ford you are describing sounds pretty nice.I guess it would just come down to choice. Probably both decent tractors.

I might add that I will be using it to bush hog 10 acres a couple times a year, plowing and tilling a less than 1 acre garden,grading the driveway, and some post-hole digging.

Yes, they both have live PTO.

MF has more power. Never used either though.

KEH

have had both MF-50 hands down. better engine it has sleeves, 2000 ford not, more power, more weight,

Isn't the MF 50 the same power train as a 35? 35's are highly sought after, so I think the 50 would be as well. Dave

Of the two I'd suggest that you pick out the one that's in better mechanical condition. Forget about the paint... The Ford may have nice paint and not be worth a damn while the Massey well maintained but rough looking. That 300 bucks won't get you far if that's the case.
The 50 will be a heavier more usefull tractor than that vintage 2000.
Be careful that the Ford has a live PTO as well. It may not...

Rod

I question the Ford 2000 with 5 speed and a Hi / Lo. I don't think the sherman Hi / Lo would fit with a 5 speed.
You ma;y need to check this more carefully.

Re-check your specs.. no hi/low on the 5spd fords. A 63 2000 is not much more than a newer 601.. i'd take the MF.. it's more tractor hp wise.. if both in good ondition.. though 2500 for a good 601/2000 ain't a bad deal either.

soundguy

Assuming the MF50 is a gas (Available with early version of Perkins diesel, with indirect injection at that time, or Continental Z134 gasser) They're essentially the same drive train as a TO35/MF35. VERY popular tractors. In their day, a fairly advanced tractor for the size. I'd avoid the diesel UNLESS you KNOW it's condition is good. The 50 is slightly heavier, much better steering, slightly longer weel base, bigger fuel tank, and standard with most all the options available on the 35. I grew up on a Ferguson F40 and a Massey Ferguson 50 (More or less the same tractors) They are an EXTREMELY well balanced, very productive piece of equipment.

The 2000 COULD be a stripped down economy version. They were available with qute a list of options, but standard equipment was a bare bones tractor. By "5sp/hi/lo", are you counting reverse as one speed? If so, a FOUR speed w/hi/lo could indicate live power available. 5-speeds wouldn't have offered live power on a 2000.

The Massey has (had?) roughly 6 hp more than the 2000 of that day. Not a huge amount, but enough to make a difference.

Both are "above average" tractors compared to the competition of the time, but all things equal, individual condition of each tractor aside, I'd take the MF50 in a heartbeat.

BUT....INDIVIDUAL CONDITION of ANY tractor that age HAS to be considered. Is one in significantly better condition than the other.

I hadn't paid any particular attention to the 5 speed hi/lo part in the original post, but.... there was no such thing on a 5 speed.
They had 5 speeds with live power and 5 speeds with non-live PTO, but they were both straight 5x1 transmissions.
Of that vintage they also had a 4 speed with non-live PTO and the jerk-a-matic (S-O-S). There was no 8 speed in '63.
The only way there'd be a high/low on a 5 speed is with the possibility that there's a Howard reduction box or something similar.
Actually, when you get right down to it, I think the 5 speeds at 'that time' were all supposed to have been live PTO versions and the 4 speed was the basic option... but I won't swear to that, and it doesn't cover the possibility that the transmission has been changed at some point.
One would have to carefully evaluate each tractor to see what it has.

Rod

I'm always a little skeptical when people start counting gear #'s. Some count reverse, most don't. (ie A 4-speed w/reverse is a 5-speed to some....)

Back when all these tractors were a dime a dozen, it wasn't UNcommon to find shops/equipment jockeys that would take 10 junkers and whip up 6 or 7 running tractors from parts. All sorts of odd combinations would result. Som of those have been around long enough that the eventual owners would just assume they were "original".


A Ford dealer near here used to buy old highway mowing tractors al over the US. He'd haul 'em in and let his shop crew build "sellable" tractors out of the pile-o-parts. There's still a few floating around the area. Sorta like the old song....Got a '57 engine bolted to a 68 transmission with 63 sheetmetal on '71 wheels with a '53 seat......

A friend has a Massey sorta like that too. Late model (250) rear end with a 135 diesel engine all covered up with a '61 MF35 hood, fenders from a 255, and wheels from a 245. Odd looking sucker, but a really nice tractor. All assembled from boneyard junkers. Pity the NEXT owner when he tries to buy parts.

I hear ya there... I have a neighbour that has a UK 135 I believe. He was plowing snow one day with a blade on the loader. Something fetched up, and whatever took place, it tore the rear end out. His solution, the most expedient at the time was to swap a 35 rear end into the tractor. It made no difference to him, and i suppose there's little if any difference between them anyway... but like you say, when the next owner goes to get parts, there's going to be some head scratching. This guy would certainly tell the new owner of such changes... that's the way he is, but there's probably going to be someone in a parts department somewhere that'll say that can't be done.

Rod

What will be your intended purpose for their use? That may make some difference. Would you ever consider adding a loader to either?

The biggest difference in the pair is the draft control. The 35 will have the original "Ferguson System", while the 135 has the "Improved Ferguson System". In all actuality, the original works just about as good. 2nd generation allows better use of remote hydraulics without effecting draft control curcuit. Throughout production of the TO/MF 35/50 series, and again throughout production of the "DX series" (100 series) there were several updates and improvements. They were distinguished by the tractors serial #. Very little difference UNTIL you go trying to bolt up parts from one run to another. I've seen more'n one GOOD mechanic scratching his head, wondering why a part won't work, only to find out the tractor was a "mixed breed" made from components salvaged from various tractors. I suspect that's true with most popular models/brands where they tayed in production for a long time.

There's why I like all my old tractors that I bought new. I know what I have.

I don't think the 50 diesel was available until 1960.