New 1643 on the farm. Couple questions/observations

[radrock]

Well I just had to give a little input to the loader discussion. I have a 1526. Yeah go ahead and laugh. But it is all of the tractor I need. I didn't think mine was digging in the dirt very good compared to my last smaller little tractor. I have a five foot bush hog finish mower so I had plenty of ballast. I decided to check it out. I had several 80lb bags of concrete mix in the garage. I loaded 10 bags on it and it lifted just fine. My capacity is 823 according to the manual. I added two more bags and lifted it just fine. So I added two more and I was 300 lbs over capacity. 14 bags = 1120 lbs. It lifted it just fine but when I got about 6 inches off the ground the rear end lifted off of the ground. I didn't question ever again that it didn't lift as much as I though it would.

I think Massey tractors are great! Even if mine is little

 

[hammerone40]

We love our 1648 so far. The only rattle we noticed was on the brush guard. The single rod about 3/8" in diameter held in by a hair pin clip.

We have all larger case IH at the farm but I fell in love with the looks and the build quality of the MF. I found the 1600 to be much more comfy than the 1500 I test drove.

Congrats

Andy

 

[radrock]

We love our 1648 so far. The only rattle we noticed was on the brush guard. The single rod about 3/8" in diameter held in by a hair pin clip. We have all larger case IH at the farm but I fell in love with the looks and the build quality of the MF. I found the 1600 to be much more comfy than the 1500 I test drove. Congrats Andy

Aw. I know what you are talking about. I think that rod is used to run through any front weights to keep them from bouncing off??

 

[Masseywrench]

UPDATE:

It's been a few months now, so here are some recent thoughts.

This 1643 doesn't start as easily as my 1540 did. It's not a hard starter, but the 1540 shrugged off very cold temperatures more easily.

For what we do on the farm with this tractor, the Hydro was the way to go, bar none, and we are getting more efficient at operating it. We like how the throttle is linked to the pedals, too. Very good feature.

This 1643 isn't as good on fuel as the 1540 was. Part of that is the engine (4cyl vs. 3cyl turbo), and part of it must be the Hydro transmission.

While the 1540 had a rattle in the ROPS, the 1643 still has this rattle somewhere on the front of the tractor or loader. It only happens around 2,100rpm. Go under or over 2,100 and the rattle goes away.

Headlights are much better on the 1643.

We are picking up and moving large round bales wrapped in plastic and the loader is just...barely...able...to...do...it. But it does it, so we are happy. These things run about 1,100lbs or more, so they're pretty heavy.

Still prefer the joystick on the 1540 vs. the 1643, but we're getting used to it.

That's all for now.

Are you running fluid in the rear tires on your new tractor?

Am I understanding that with tach reading rpm's in the "green range" that you stuggle with 1100 pounds or are you running it at a reduce engine speed?

 

[hammerone40]

Radrock. I would imagine that could be a possibility. I haven't seen what the suitcase even look like. Makes sense tho.

Andy

 

[Wobblin-Goblin]

Are you running fluid in the rear tires on your new tractor?

Am I understanding that with tach reading rpm's in the "green range" that you stuggle with 1100 pounds or are you running it at a reduce engine speed?

Yes, we the rear tires are loaded, and yes, the tach was wound up. Remember, the bales are "about" 1,100lbs (could be more, could be less), and the skid-steer forks weigh a couple hundred, too.