4WD: Advantages/disadvantages

[_RaT_]

HEY THANKS GUYS!!
I've now made up my mind after all this bantering back and forth with redundantly repetitive arguments!
It's now as clear as Eddie's lake!!
I'm going to get two tractors for different specific applications!
I'll get a big ol' 2WD Ford to park and run a PTO generator and occassionally pull a trailer across the street and I'll also get a 4WD Kubota for absolutely everything else!

(I wanna see Soundguy stay away from replying to that one!)

Seriously though, this thread has gotten way too entertaining. I'm loving reading it. I have compiled all the posts into a single Word document and I'm sure my father-in-law will enjoy reading them too! Keep it up!

YeeHaw- I think your making the right choice Chuck. Thats my .02 cents worth and even at that I know I am overcharging. All the best with your new tracteur (Thats French for those of you in Rio Linda) RaT...

 

[D7E]

4x4 is very convenient ,The turning radius on modern 4x4 tractors can be as good as 2x4 and if the job requires it then price is not an issue but it CAN cause mechanical problems in some cases .
We run farming, logging and construction machinery some of which is doing 2000 hours per year and front axle problems are common strangeley more in brand new machines than 15 year old ones, Some brands seen to suffer more than others , MF and VALTRA seemed to have repeated problems for us and we never had a JCB, FORD or IH axle apart but any thing mechanical is a potential breakdown although like in european countries 4x4 is pretty much standard these days.
And if you're looking at ag size tractors go with big names ( JD,NH,IH) little kubotas might be nice but they are still utility tractors and are not as strong , real tractors will last longer how many kubatas make 12000 hours.

 

[_RaT_]

4x4 is very convenient ,The turning radius on modern 4x4 tractors can be as good as 2x4 and if the job requires it then price is not an issue but it CAN cause mechanical problems in some cases .
We run farming, logging and construction machinery some of which is doing 2000 hours per year and front axle problems are common strangeley more in brand new machines than 15 year old ones, Some brands seen to suffer more than others , MF and VALTRA seemed to have repeated problems for us and we never had a JCB, FORD or IH axle apart but any thing mechanical is a potential breakdown although like in european countries 4x4 is pretty much standard these days.
And if you're looking at ag size tractors go with big names ( JD,NH,IH) little kubotas might be nice but they are still utility tractors and are not as strong , real tractors will last longer how many kubatas make 12000 hours.

I thought IH was dead?

 

[D7E]

I thought IH was dead?

You know what i mean i still call NH Ford , Case ih / IH whatever

 

[SkyPup]

All throughout Asia, they have milions of application specific "Uni-Wheel" tractors, where the operator slogs though the muck behind the single wheeled unit balanced on one tire, for them a 2WD would be an advantagous "upgrade".

They spend most of their days toiling behind their one legged mule dreamin' about how great an application specific 4WD model would be.......

 

[_RaT_]

All throughout Asia, they have milions of application specific "Uni-Wheel" tractors, where the operator slogs though the muck behind the single wheeled unit balanced on one tire, for them a 2WD would be an advantagous "upgrade".

They spend most of their days toiling behind their one legged mule dreamin' about how great an application specific 4WD model would be.......

Rumor has it they are skipping right past wheels and dreaming about a tracked machine. With all the rain, I could understand that kind of dreaming.

 

[machmeter62]

In 82' I needed a small tractor to pull a 5' box blade. I ended up purchasing a new Ford 1500 4WD tractor with 20 hp/61cu.in.---17@PTO to move dirt. I could not pass on the deal, since the country was still coming out of the recession then. No down payment, and no payments for the first year, and the cost of the new tractor was $6000!! I bought the tractor sight unseen, because I purchased from the dealer before. The tractor is a crown jewel with it's 2100# and 4WD pulling power, which will out pull my old 47' 9N, and the diesel is a miser on fuel! I loaded all four wheels with water however. I think my 9N weighs 3300#??

Case in point: 4WD tractors (CUT) offers a smaller package, easier to transport, easier to store, more maneuver ability, and less investment than a larger 2WD. I also use a 60" Howard J tiller behind it with no problems.

 

[Soundguy]

Minor point....More like 2800# on that 9n depending on how equipped and wet or dry..... And if it is a 47.. then it's a late 2n ( 3spd ) or an 8n ( 4 spd ).

Soundguy

In 82' I needed a small tractor to pull a 5' box blade. I ended up purchasing a new Ford 1500 4WD tractor with 20 hp/61cu.in.---17@PTO to move dirt. I could not pass on the deal, since the country was still coming out of the recession then. No down payment, and no payments for the first year, and the cost of the new tractor was $6000!! I bought the tractor sight unseen, because I purchased from the dealer before. The tractor is a crown jewel with it's 2100# and 4WD pulling power, which will out pull my old 47' 9N, and the diesel is a miser on fuel! I loaded all four wheels with water however. I think my 9N weighs 3300#??

Case in point: 4WD tractors (CUT) offers a smaller package, easier to transport, easier to store, more maneuver ability, and less investment than a larger 2WD. I also use a 60" Howard J tiller behind it with no problems.

 

[machmeter62]

Minor point....More like 2800# on that 9n depending on how equipped and wet or dry..... And if it is a 47.. then it's a late 2n ( 3spd ) or an 8n ( 4 spd ).

Soundguy

I'll post the serial # tomorrow and it's a 3 speed with wheel weights on the front. I'll look again, but it has some aluminum on it. It has not been operated since 82', and been outside under tarps and trees since then. Plan to restore it someday, time permitting. The sheet metal is good but the tractor lacked any TLC in it's prior life! The fluids looked like they had never been changed, and were not drainable because of the semi-solid sludge that had to be diluted and stirred first! It's hard to believe it was owned by a doctor on acreage next to ours, with no mechanical skills or sense? If I remember correctly, the shifting housing is aluminum, and where the battery mounts is also aluminum? I don't know if this affect the vintage year? I tried to research the tractor in the early 70's, and the only info was classic. The dated info that was sent, stated that it could out work a "team of horses" plowing, and showed three suited guy's being lifted by the three point! It other sales pitch was on the economics of not requiring an acre of hay to feed the horses! The rest of the info was the 120 cu. in., hp., and etc. I used the tractor with an offset disc for my fruit orchard.

 

[Soundguy]

119.x ci.. ( I've seen both 119.2 and 119.7 listed over the yearsdepending on where you look.. I figure the .x is just minutia anyway.... ).. and if it has some aluminum castings.. then it is much older. The first units even had aluminum hoods.. etc.. they were the first 39's befroe the sheet metal was tooled up. The cast aluminum steering pedistal, battery box/dash, and inspection covers did continue on a bit later.. but I doubt she is a 47.. unless parts have been swapped around ( entirely possible... the steering pedistal from a 39 will fit a 46.. etc. .. also.. the engine from a 39 9n will bolt right up to a 1952 8n... so engines got swapped alot.. and the sn is on the engine.. so it makes it hard-er to date them ). There are axle date codes and sometimes a date stamped into the hydro pump bottom plate...

If/when you get into it I'd be glad to provide any help that i can.

I've got an 8n and a 2n.. neat machines..

Soundguy

 

[redlevel]

After reading this thread it makes me wonder why the manufacturers even bother to build 2wd machines any more?

Mark

 

[N80]

After reading this thread it makes me wonder why the manufacturers even bother to build 2wd machines any more? Mark

Okay, everyone say it with me: "Because in many applications 2wd is all that is ever needed."

Seriously, that's really all there is to it.

 

[john_bud]

Okay, everyone say it with me: "Because in many applications 2wd is all that is ever needed."

Seriously, that's really all there is to it.

And they cost less to buy, own and maintain.

jb

 

[kwolfe]

I am sure this has been said before, however I don't have the time to read through 15 pages.

Advantages:

• traction
• resale

Disadvantages:

• price
• more parts to maintain/break

I would also agree with N80. I have a small tractor with turfs. Unless I am doing dirt (for which turfs are not the best), I spend the vast majority of my time in 2wd.

 

[machmeter62]

119.x ci.. ( I've seen both 119.2 and 119.7 listed over the yearsdepending on where you look.. I figure the .x is just minutia anyway.... ).. and if it has some aluminum castings.. then it is much older. The first units even had aluminum hoods.. etc.. they were the first 39's befroe the sheet metal was tooled up. The cast aluminum steering pedistal, battery box/dash, and inspection covers did continue on a bit later.. but I doubt she is a 47.. unless parts have been swapped around ( entirely possible... the steering pedistal from a 39 will fit a 46.. etc. .. also.. the engine from a 39 9n will bolt right up to a 1952 8n... so engines got swapped alot.. and the sn is on the engine.. so it makes it hard-er to date them ). There are axle date codes and sometimes a date stamped into the hydro pump bottom plate...

If/when you get into it I'd be glad to provide any help that i can.

I've got an 8n and a 2n.. neat machines..

Soundguy

Thanx for the additonal info. The serial #12328 I think on the engine? I needed a wire brush to be sure? The rear wheels definitely have 9N vintage if that helps?

 

[redlevel]

If I could be allowed, I would like to continue flogging the deceased equine.

Somebody said that a smaller/lower hp 4wd could do the same job as well as a larger 2wd. Not always. I started plowing a 20 acre field with a M6800 Kubota w/FEL, 4wd, loaded tires, etc. Rated at 62pto hp. Pulling 3 16" ford bottom plow. After the first couple of hours, I parked the Kubota and hooked the plow to my 2wd 6610 Ford. Rated at 72pto hp, just 15% more than the Kubota. The Ford, hands down, was smoother, faster, had less wheel slip, was much more comfortable to operate. The Ford would have pulled the 4 bottom plow.

Moving 1200 lb bales. One on the loader and one on the 3pt hitch=a real adventure on the Kubota. When you tried to pick up one of the bales on the loader without one on the rear, the rear wheels cleared the ground. Not so on the NH 6640, rated at 14 more hp. It handled the bales easily. Needless to say, I wasn't really impressed with the Kubota.

Sure, 4wd has some advantages some of the time, but it isn't the cut-and-dried proposition several posters seem to think it is.

Another thing: I am 58 years old. I just bought what will probably be my last tractor. A Farmtrac 535. Why did I choose 40 year old technology over the new shuttle/HST/4WD/cupholder/plastic fender models available? One reason: simplicity. I have my FIL's 1956 Ford 640, in good running condition. He made 40 crops with that tractor. It has had one engine overhaul in 50 years. It needs a clutch, because it is still on the original. I want my Farmtrac to last 50 years like the old Ford has. With minimal maintainance and breakdown potential. Four wheel drive would be one more something to go bad, to cause problems, to require maintainance. I wanted to get the 435 model, without power steering, but after test driving, I decided I just would not be able to handle it with my bad shoulders. I know, I know, I'm just a sissy.

As for the original poster: the key phrase is "I want 4wd". He should get it. But he would be limiting himself very little, if at all, with a 2wd drive machine of about 10 more hp.

 

[Dargo]

To my understanding, a Farmtrac is painted to look like an old Ford and to look like a New Holland, but I think the similarities pretty well end there. I don't really think that the Indian importer actually bought the old worn out machinery that was used to make Ford tractors 50 years ago and picked up the line. I assume that you are perhaps referring to Farmtrac's lack of modern design and updates in their tractors?

 

[Soundguy]

Thanx for the additonal info. The serial #12328 I think on the engine? I needed a wire brush to be sure? The rear wheels definitely have 9N vintage if that helps?

a SN of 9N12328 would put it as a very early 40.

rears may be a 28" ( or possibly a 32" ) hat rim and if original, will be a smooth hub.. though many have been replaced with rivited hubs due to air entrainment in the castings causing flaws..

got any pics?

Soundguy

 

[redlevel]

There are pages and pages of speculation/facts? on the origins of Farmtrac on the "All Other Brands" forum. I know that Farmtrac advertises bolt-in replacement engines for Ford 3000 and 4000 tractors. It is my best understanding that the Farmtrac plant in India used to produce Ford and later NH units for the Asian and European markets. If you replaced the sheet metal on my tractor with beat up sheet metal from an early-70's 3000 (I don't have a doubt that it would fit), put worn out tires on it, and poured a 5 gallon bucket of burnt motor oil over the engine and rear end castings, then filled the same bucket with dirt and threw it over the whole mess, my neighbor would swear it was his old 3000. If it is not built on the same jigs and molds as the 70's model Fords (not 50 year old, but 30 year old) it is a dang good reproduction.

Yes, I am referring to Farmtrac's lack of modern design and updates. I prefer to call it their simplicity of operation and maintainance. Just like my Daddy's old 600 Ford.

 

[Soundguy]

You'd also have to make the injector pump leak just for effect..... same with power steering at the compression lines...

Soundguy