inline baler vs 'conventional' baler....

[mattv1]

Background:

I cut and bale somewhere between 70 and 85 acres of grass hay for my wife's horse boarding operation yearly.
Currently running a NH273 and a very 'touchy' farmhand accumulator that i did eventually get running last year.
Last year I put up somewhere around 2200 square bales. Probably fewer this year, but not by much...and it may end up being more....depends on how a new field does.

Situation and circumstances:

Started haying because we wanted control over the quality and availability of bales -- it was a dry year and nobody was selling. I have a pretty good job, the deductions of equipment and land leases/purchases works out very much in our favor at tax time.
My tax accountant has advised us that it would be in our best interests to find some more equipment to buy and depreciate.

Questions for the group:

I really like the look of the inline massey balers -- 1838, 1840, etc... Being able to lazily roll down the windrow and have a super-wide pickup directly behind me seems incredibly effort-free. Pretty sure my farmhand accumulator could be setup to work with it, or if not...a new accumulator isn't out of the question.

But -- the newer JD/NH/etc conventional balers look pretty good too -- and there must be a darn good reason why there are so few manufacturers that make inline balers and so many that still make conventional 'off the side' models...

I'm looking to end up with 65 to 75 pound bales from my brome/orchard/timothy/sweet clover various fields....that are straight and very square. I'm looking for something that will tie and function as reliably as my NH273 has, and something that generally doesn't require a rocket scientist to repair. I do all my own work and demand to keep it that way so i can fix my own broken crap when the rains are coming.

I wouldn't say that money is no object, because it always is of course... and i'm sure there are other discussions that i should probably search for....but i'm wondering what the general consensus is on what you all would buy if you were buying a new or nearly-new machine to take over your square-baling duties...

There is a a JD, NH, and MF dealer all within 35 or so miles of me for reference as well.

 

[Farmer495]

Hesston was really the only inline smaller square baler manufacturer. Those balers were made in CaseIH colors for years, and since AGCO bought Hesston, both Challenger and MF colors.

Deere and NH(and CaseIH) are basically the only major conventional square baler builders left.

I am guessing the small square baler market is mature enough that no R & D has gone into it in the last 20 years, so companies are still building variants of stuff that came out 30 years ago.

I've never handled an "inline" bale but I understand the cut side is against the twine which makes handling more "prickly" on the hands.

 

[Trillium Farm]

What Farmer495 said plus: If you get the 1840 (Which I recommend) you'll notice that no banana bales will ever come out of the chute, the bales will all be square and perfectly formed, your accumulator will love this baler, you can bale around 400 units 1hr at a good speed. This baler has 20% less parts compared to the other style, so less to go wrong. I'd never go back to the old style

 

[oldnslo]

The biggest problem I had with in-line balers was stradling a large high windrow. typically something on the underside of the tractor would snag and then you were pushing a bunch of hay under the tractor. Either style should make bales that size with no problems.

 

[mattv1]

....If you get the 1840 (Which I recommend) ....

^^ Why the 1840, this is exactly the type of information i was hoping for. Please share your thoughts on this. Huge thanks!

 

[Trillium Farm]

The reason for recommending the 1840 is that it's built much more strongly than the 1839 the differences are minor, but the structure and chamber are heavy duty in the 1840

 

[MattLynch]

I had an inline Case square baler with a thrower pulling a bale wagon. No complaints other than it made square bales which we quickly grew out of. Nice balers to operate, was pretty simple to work on too.

If you board a lot of horses have you considered round bales? Most of the bigger horse boarders here make round bale haylage for first cut and second cut hay.

 

[powerscol]

Everyone keeps mentioning the cut side and twine. This is a non issue with me and my customers. I usually wear gloves and customers are more concerned with the quality of the hay and uniformity of bale. I have only had an issue of the windrow with my compact tractor once, and that was my fault for making them so big. I also learned to put the draw bar bolt in so as not to drag hay there either. Another pro is they are compact and can go through narrow gates and take up lass space in the barn. Once you have an inline, you will never go back.

Another thing you could do is run over to the Hesston plant and look how they are put together. I Believe its in your neck of the woods.

 

[mattv1]

If you board a lot of horses have you considered round bales? Most of the bigger horse boarders here make round bale haylage for first cut and second cut hay.

My wife wants nothing to do with round bales or large square bales. I've asked more than once She says she needs to be able to feed appropriate amounts to different horses and flakes are easy to weigh and make adjustments to.

 

[leeave96]

I'm not sure you can go wrong with NH, JD or MF balers bought new these days. IMHO - properly setup, all will pound out tight square bales.

A few things that caught my eye - 75/80 acres and only 2200 bales seems low to me. If that is the count, then a lower end baler for less $$$'s might be in order. With a good fertilizer/soil improvement, that 2200 bales could significantly grow and with it the need for a higher capacity baler.

IMHO - again all the new balers will, when properly adjusted and operated, pound out bricks. However the learning curve/fuss factor can be different. In addition, design longevity, parts availability and internet support via forums such as this one - long after the dealer looses interest is an important consideration too.

As an example, JD balers from the 14T to today's 3x8 series are VERY similar in design. I bought a JD348 this past winter to go with my old New Holland 68. I have no doubt 30 years from today, parts/support/tribal knowledge will be available - just like it is with the old 68.

Good luck,
Bill

 

[MattLynch]

I'm not sure you can go wrong with NH, JD or MF balers bought new these days. IMHO - properly setup, all will pound out tight square bales.

A few things that caught my eye - 75/80 acres and only 2200 bales seems low to me. If that is the count, then a lower end baler for less $$$'s might be in order. With a good fertilizer/soil improvement, that 2200 bales could significantly grow and with it the need for a higher capacity baler.

IMHO - again all the new balers will, when properly adjusted and operated, pound out bricks. However the learning curve/fuss factor can be different. In addition, design longevity, parts availability and internet support via forums such as this one - long after the dealer looses interest is an important consideration too.

As an example, JD balers from the 14T to today's 3x8 series are VERY similar in design. I bought a JD348 this past winter to go with my old New Holland 68. I have no doubt 30 years from today, parts/support/tribal knowledge will be available - just like it is with the old 68.

Good luck,
Bill

I was thinking the same thing. I was getting 2000 bales off of not much more than 30 acres.

 

[powerscol]

I would not be so quick to question. A lot of variables go into the bale equation. Ground, grass, water - all add up. When I first started I was lucky to get 25 bales off my 3 acres per cutting. Now I am closer to 300, but I now know how to irrigate and fertilize. I also over seeded with a better grass mix.

If the OP has not done it already I would recommend calling the local state or federal Agg service like NCRS or SCS and have them do a review on his possible needs. Its usually a free service with the possibly of fees for soil tests.

 

[mattv1]

I was thinking the same thing. I was getting 2000 bales off of not much more than 30 acres.

Things are on the upswing, so to speak. My first year I had one 10-acre field that hadn't been fertilized or maintained in 10+ years, other than shredding.
Since then I've acquired a few more acres here and there each year, with each field being the same. Some fields are a lost cause or too much of a pain to deal with so I have let them go and moved to new prospects.

Last year I cut and baled an 18 acre patch and got only 240 bales off of it. Very thin grass, no fertilizer in years....but cleaning the field up last year meant the owner would sign a $1 lease with me for as many years as I wanted it, so i did. I always do extensive soil tests and remediations --- I anticipate many, many more bales this year from that field in particular, but also from the other fields that are still in process of improving.....hence my first post saying i might have way more product to bale up this year.

 

[powerscol]

One other comment on the inline.

There appears to be something about the in-line and the baling geometry with the flywheel running 90 degrees to the tractor taking out some of the plunger dynamics. On some of the standard offset balers the flywheel and plunger work in the same plane so the forces seem greater. Many of the new standard offset models now have the flywheel set 90 to the tractor.

For me when running at full PTO she just rocks back and forth slightly with no side force. I had more jerking in other directions trying out other balers (older JD 24T and similar) that sit offset to the line of pull. Just my opinion, but other may know more. My tractor weighs about 3800 lbs when baling.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

It's the plunger that rocks a baler, not the fly wheel. The lighter the tractor, the more pronounced it is...

SR

 

[5030]

It's the plunger that rocks a baler, not the fly wheel. The lighter the tractor, the more pronounced it is...

SR

Absolutely. I run a NH 575 high capacity (3 rotor) and even my 105 Kubby rocks and rolls in a turn. My 575 will run upwards of 3000 squares in a normal running day 8 hours. I've pushed 3500 in wheat straw on occasion.

The big problem with hay tools is if you buy used, most likely they are basically shot and need rebuilt which is why I buy new, but then it's a business with me, not a hobby.

 

[joeu235]

we have one of the 3 series JD balers, I can't remember which one. It misses one bale a year, the first bale made, and then works the rest of the year with no issues. The New Holland dealer here is terrible so can't imagine ever switching brands.

 

[5030]

Every make of small square baler shares the same components in the knotter sections anyway. Might be painted a different color but the principle of operation is the same.

 

[mattv1]

An update here, months later...

After fighting the right side knotter for several days on my NH273 (new billhook, new wiper, new pinion gears, adjusted twine fingers, new twine holders etc...) I finally got it to tie properly but I wasted the better part of 2 days working on it. I decided it was time to look for something new.

As fate would have it, a 2015 massey 1839 baler with 2500 bales through it was posted for sale the day before, for a very good price. I went to look at it and brought it home. Very impressed with how fast it bales, and impressed with the bales themselves.

Not exactly sure if I will try to get my farmhand accumulator running with it or not. It's setup to run from a baler-mounted flywheel pump now which i obviously won't be able to use on the new baler. I might try just connecting the accumulator up to a remote on the tractor and seeing if i have enough flow to run it.

 

[Trillium Farm]

Matt, you'll love that 1839 i know. Bricks at speed that's what it'll spew