JD 1010

[andrball1]

Just got this gas 1010R. First one I have seen with a single front. Having trouble finding much information about the single front wheel. Does anyone know how many were built, Or share any info they may have. I believe it is a 1964. thanks

 

[Wagtail]

G'day Mate and welcome to TBN from Downunder.

Here's some general information, including serial numbers, on your R (row crop) 1010: TractorData.com John Deere 1010 tractor information

Enjoy the site... from wherever in the world you are.

 

[beenthere]

As well, share the s/n and the year can be confirmed.
Looks to be in good shape. How does it run? Any problems that are obvious?

Welcome to TBN

 

[andrball1]

Thanks, sn- 1010R 45627. Runs great, pto, three point hitch both work as it should. The single front wheel is what I liked about it. Just can’t find much info about that option.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

1010's were known to be, shall we say fragile... I hope you are going to use it for parades ect...

SR

 

[rScotty]

Thanks, sn- 1010R 45627. Runs great, pto, three point hitch both work as it should. The single front wheel is what I liked about it. Just can’t find much info about that option.

I had...still have.... a very similar JD530 with a single front wheel. Be very careful because single front wheel models rear up easily. BTW, they were especially popular in corn country. But I'd set the rear wheels out and be careful.

After a few scary moments pulling a blade, I found a wide front for mine and to my amazement it bolted up exactly. A straight across swap. That tractor is still working today and the wide front cured the rearing.

I've also heard that the 1010 was fragile. I'm not entirely buying that. The 530 is not fragile, and I see no reason why the 1010 should be. JD didn't build fragile tractors as a rule. Yes, it is a lightweight machine, and one of the first when JD went from the old horizontal two cylinders to a more modern enginer...but that's understood. From the looks of yours, the PO understood how to use it right too.
Nice tractor,
rScotty

 

[Sawyer Rob]

I've also heard that the 1010 was fragile. I'm not entirely buying that. The 530 is not fragile, and I see no reason why the 1010 should be. JD didn't build fragile tractors as a rule. Yes, it is a lightweight machine, and one of the first when JD went from the old horizontal two cylinders to a more modern enginer...but that's understood. From the looks of yours, the PO understood how to use it right too.
Nice tractor,
rScotty

SO, you feel because a different model JD tractor (530) isn't fragile, then the 1010 can't be either... got it!

BTW, they took the "fragile" out, when they went to the 1020.

SR

 

[rScotty]

N

SO, you feel because a different model JD tractor (530) isn't fragile, then the 1010 can't be either... got it!

BTW, they took the "fragile" out, when they went to the 1020.

SR

No, that's not what I said. Whatever you decided when you "got it" is your own interpretation.
rScotty

 

[Thomas]

Welcome to TBN...enjoy.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

No, that's not what I said. Whatever you decided when you "got it" is your own interpretation.
rScotty

Well, that's not exactly what you said, but that is how it sounds.

Bottom line is, at one time there were a few 1010's around here, they all had problems and now everyone here will only use them for shows and parades.

That's what I'm going by, they are on the fragile side even if you don't believe it.

SR

 

[beenthere]

Think the "fragile" part of the 1010 was the power plant.

The basic tractor cast steel frame is essentially the models M, 420, 430 well-made tractor. Played with some tranny changes in the early models, but then switched back to the sliding gear tranny that was much more solid, tried and true.

Not sure why they would "rear up" more with one wheel in front, unless it had to do with a weight factor.
Not much to compare between the 530 model (horizontal pistons) and the 1010 4cyl gas engine. Better comparison would be the 430 model (2-cyl upright) and the 1010 as pretty much the same tractors other than the newer engine.

 

[rScotty]

Think the "fragile" part of the 1010 was the power plant.

The basic tractor cast steel frame is essentially the models M, 420, 430 well-made tractor. Played with some tranny changes in the early models, but then switched back to the sliding gear tranny that was much more solid, tried and true.

Not sure why they would "rear up" more with one wheel in front, unless it had to do with a weight factor.
Not much to compare between the 530 model (horizontal pistons) and the 1010 4cyl gas engine. Better comparison would be the 430 model (2-cyl upright) and the 1010 as pretty much the same tractors other than the newer engine.

Yes, I have heard that the 1010 & 2010 power plants were so bulletproof as the horizontal 2 cylinders....but being less tolerant of abuse than the horizontal 2s with their decades of development still leaves room for a decent tractor. That's all I'm saying.

Yep, I agree that the 420/430 series would be a better comparison. I just don't happen to have one handy. Wish I did...

On the rearing thing with a single front, it's not just a matter of weight, it's a matter of sideways resistance too. Maybe some other guys who used a single front tire configuration will chime in. The row crops weren't nearly so sensitive to the problem as the single front wheel tractors.

It's more than just rearing from lack of weight. Even if the front doesn't noticibly rise up, it gets light and then you lose all the side resistance. That doesn't happen with the row crop configuration so much because of how they are built.

On the single tire fronts, when the front end rises just a little bit you may not notice it until you have more traction with one rear wheel or maybe you notice that the steering is being unresponsive so you tap a wheel brake.

Then all of a sudden there is no side resistance from the front tire and the unequal push from the rear tires can make the whole front end swing sideways fast enough to make your vision blur. That's why I said be careful. Be especially careful with the wheel brakes. I scared myself several times until switching to the wide front.
rScotty

 

[beenthere]

When my 420 with the standard (wide front) would get light, would just use the wheel brakes to steer.
Don't consider it an issue, but your experience apparently varies.
Depends on the pulling load and lift connections.

 

[rScotty]

When my 420 with the standard (wide front) would get light, would just use the wheel brakes to steer.
Don't consider it an issue, but your experience apparently varies.
Depends on the pulling load and lift connections.

Exactly. A wide front is not only lots heavier, it is pivoted in the center of the axle. So when one side of the axle goes up it forces the other tire down. Sideways resistance stays constant and the wheel brakes work well for steering.
rScotty

 

[JimB77]

On the rearing thing with a single front, it's not just a matter of weight, it's a matter of sideways resistance too. Maybe some other guys who used a single front tire configuration will chime in. The row crops weren't nearly so sensitive to the problem as the single front wheel tractors.



rScotty

rScotty
Single frt wheel was included with Rowcrop models. Single frt wheel was designed to fit between rowcrops better than dual frt tires. Easier raising of frt end when pulling a load is due to less weight on frt end of tractor nothing more/nothing less IF LOAD IS ATTACHED PROPERLY TO FACTORY DRAWBAR

 

[SPYDERLK]

Yes, I have heard that the 1010 & 2010 power plants were so bulletproof as the horizontal 2 cylinders....but being less tolerant of abuse than the horizontal 2s with their decades of development still leaves room for a decent tractor. That's all I'm saying.

Yep, I agree that the 420/430 series would be a better comparison. I just don't happen to have one handy. Wish I did...

On the rearing thing with a single front, it's not just a matter of weight, it's a matter of sideways resistance too. Maybe some other guys who used a single front tire configuration will chime in. The row crops weren't nearly so sensitive to the problem as the single front wheel tractors.

It's more than just rearing from lack of weight. Even if the front doesn't noticibly rise up, it gets light and then you lose all the side resistance. That doesn't happen with the row crop configuration so much because of how they are built.

On the single tire fronts, when the front end rises just a little bit you may not notice it until you have more traction with one rear wheel or maybe you notice that the steering is being unresponsive so you tap a wheel brake.

Then all of a sudden there is no side resistance from the front tire and the unequal push from the rear tires can make the whole front end swing sideways fast enough to make your vision blur. That's why I said be careful. Be especially careful with the wheel brakes. I scared myself several times until switching to the wide front.
rScotty

I had, and have, the 2010 tricycle with a twin wheel front. My dad bought it when I was a boy. It has a front weight set on it - only a couple hundred pounds. I never noticed how much difference it makes til I left it off once after working on the tractor. - - Different machine with some weight out front! - - It is the absolute best tractor for bushogging with a 5' bushog. It mows between the tracks of the rear AGs, so the only affected grass is from the narrow fronts. A mowed field will look almost like a lawn.

 

[DaninOhio]

There is a saying that is used to describe the model 1010 and 2010 by those of us that grew up using them on the farm, goes like this, "if you get a good one you cannot break it, if you get a bad one you cannot fix it". That being said I think I have a good one, hope you do too.

 

[markbuilt]

View attachment 716494
Just got this gas 1010R. First one I have seen with a single front. Having trouble finding much information about the single front wheel. Does anyone know how many were built, Or share any info they may have. I believe it is a 1964. thanks