Do computes and high-end electronics belong in tractors?

[looknlearn]

I have a tractor that is almost 60 years old. In 60 years I don't think anyone will be driving any of these new compact tractors. I may be wrong but electrics are so touchy and are shot if you get water in it, if mice though it was tasty,or if it burns a little. Same reason I like old cars. I might be strange but I think reliability and fix-ability for me is better than comfort. I'll take anything that is mechanical cause it is much more reliable in my experience.

So in response to the title question, no I don't think computers belong in tractors, but I can see where it has made it easier for large farmers.

 

[riptides]

complex is getting simplier all the time.

That being said, the level of in field diagnosis being performed by me is also dropping....

A few machines I've run, no way could I fix 'em if they broke, I imagine in a few years the MTBF will be so good as to out live my poor soul.

 

[dex3361]

I am able to diagnose the electrical and electronic issues but if I keep a complex electronic tractor I doubt there will be parts a few miles down the road. I vote simplicity. If I were to keep my tractor and swap every 5 years then i would not care. But for me that is not the case. I buy and I keep. Unless I catch JTs disease.:laughing::laughing:

 

[kjung17]

Anyone with a JD e-Hydro machine has already switched to computer control. The new Premium tractors from Deere are, with few exceptions, fly-by-wire. Not a cable or linkage on the machine.

 

[First one]

Just how fancy an ignition and emission controls should a tractor really have?
How many sensors do you really need on the engine and transmission?

And what about the comfort factor? A decent seat is great, but do you really need a craft-matic adjustable chair in it's place? I can see sticking a decent stereo in a harvester you're going to be living in for weeks at a time; but do you really need more than an iPod and headphones driving a CUT?

I would rather have sensors to let you know when something's not right and will shut down your tractor instead of finding out the hard way- $$.
I know that I'm not getting any (older) I mean younger.
If I'm going to be working, I want the most comfortable seat I can get, why not?
As far as the tunes go , I like being able to hear what the tractor is doing as much as the music . No head phones for me. I guess if you don't have a cab then you really don't need the best you can get , where it would be exposed to the weather. Still if I didn't have the cab ,I'd still want a kick *** stereo system, makes the day go by faster.

 

[nspec]

There is a very simple explanation for why the old equipment lasted 50+ years and the new compact tractors won't.

Displacement.

Those old machines had huge displacement for the horsepower they produced, and ran at very low rpms. My Farmalls max out at 1400 RPMs. The Kubota will run 2800. Twice the speed.

The old tractors were made out of very heavy robust castings with huge internal parts. I've attached a picture of the bull gear (final drive) from my 1947 Farmall. It's huge - looks like brand new, right? There is a reason for that. It was built to last.

Electronics simply have nothing to do with this. I've run machines with 20 year old electronics in them that have a minimal amount of problems. The large farm tractors and construction equipment have been immersed in electronics for many years now. They are still built very heavily. The only reason people are freaking out is because the little hobby tractors that are so mainstream for the masses now are just starting to see the technology that has been available on bigger machines for longer than anyone realizes.

 

[wvpolekat]

I've attached a picture of the bull gear (final drive) from my 1947 Farmall. It's huge - looks like brand new, right? There is a reason for that. It was built to last.

You are aware they were known for breaking those, right?

 

[nspec]

Not on the A's they weren't. The 60 series had some issues though.

That particular gear in my picture saw many years of hard service and the cuts on the gears are like brand new.

 

[lostcause]

There is a very simple explanation for why the old equipment lasted 50+ years and the new compact tractors won't.

Displacement.

Those old machines had huge displacement for the horsepower they produced, and ran at very low rpms. My Farmalls max out at 1400 RPMs. The Kubota will run 2800. Twice the speed.

The old tractors were made out of very heavy robust castings with huge internal parts. I've attached a picture of the bull gear (final drive) from my 1947 Farmall. It's huge - looks like brand new, right? There is a reason for that. It was built to last.

Electronics simply have nothing to do with this. I've run machines with 20 year old electronics in them that have a minimal amount of problems. The large farm tractors and construction equipment have been immersed in electronics for many years now. They are still built very heavily. The only reason people are freaking out is because the little hobby tractors that are so mainstream for the masses now are just starting to see the technology that has been available on bigger machines for longer than anyone realizes.

i do agree that the smaller displacement may be likely to lead to a shorter lifespan, but regardless, if you had that older tractor with full blown electronics, i don't think you would be able to get the same lifespan with the same (lack of) maintenance and storage care.

 

[eepete]

computers, yes. High-end electronics, beats me. Not on the list but state of the art electronics most definitely.

The new electronics that does stuff like run lights and relays have the ability to see if the wiring is OK. If the bulb is blown or the wiring is cut, it can detect that. When the device is off, it puts out a very small current to see that the wiring is OK. If you short the line to ground or plus, it can tell there is a short and does not pop a fuse because the electronics that drives the line is current limited. So it's pretty nice- you know you have a problem before it bites you, having the problem does not take out other systems, and the exact nature of the problem is known.

Now to take advantage of this, the various computers have to talk to each other so that the operator display can let you know what the problem is. So we have good and bad sides to it all. More complexity, but better diagnostics. I do object to the information that the computer system know not being made directly available to the owner of the tractor. It's as cheezy as when there were "special manufacturers tools" you had to have to work on stuff. And of course the computers certainly help in meeting the emission standards.

Now as for reliability, I remember being interviewed when I got out of school in the late 70's by an automobile manufacturer that was getting more and more into computer control. So in 30 some years a lot of the bugs have been worked out. Put another way, we are at a point where failures are more likely to be the result of stupid cost reductions than core technology unknowns.

As for spare parts, my Deere has a box that houses the transmission controller, and another for the display. That box has the circuit board with the computer and other electronics on it, and several connectors that have water tight boots on them, and the connectors themselves have the pins water tight. When you look at the tech manual, there are extra pins on the connectors. So if the chips used on the circuit board go obsolete, the manufacture can cut a new circuit board and port over the software. There is nothing to keep them from using a handful of different board designs over a large number of tractor models. In fact, there are as many different good reasons for doing that as there are for using the same engine block in a variety of tractors.

So the matter of "will you have spares in 20 years" is not a technical issues, but a management issue. Did the company keep using it's core form factor (box size and connector type/pinout) so they could keep the design up to date? Did the hardware and software guys make the software so it can port over to faster processors without any major re-work? Time will tell.

Yes, I'm biased on this too... We all like to see thing implemented in technologies we can work with or understand .

Pete