Why were the IH 1066 and 1086 so much more popular than the 1566 and 1586?

Baranx4 · Sep 24, 2009

When you look at units sold the 15 series sold a fraction of what the 10 series sold. There isn't much of a power or weight difference but the 15 only had a 1000 rpm pto while the 10 had both the 540 and 1000. Locally you see pricing on the 15 series lower than a similiar 10 series.

art · Sep 24, 2009

The 15 series went to a heavier planetary rear which only had three speeds vs the four speeds.
The other reason is the fact that the 540 rpm pto at the time was on 85 percent of machines they might run at least in our area.

RickB · Sep 24, 2009

In their time, a 1086 was a big horse for many, if not most farms at least here in the Northeast. It was a bigger tractor than my dad ever owned, and we milked 80 cows and cropped enough to feed them and then some. As Art mentioned, the 15xx was 1000 RPM PTO only unless a dealer swapped out a two speed PTO from a smaller tractor. The three gear speed transmission in the 15 was another big minus. There were actually quite a few 1466's in this area, far more thasn 15's.

Yankee Clipper · Sep 25, 2009

I worked for IHC in West Texas when the 86 series were new in the late 70s and my dealers sold more 10s and 14s than 15s - for all the reasons above as well as it fit the dry land farming being done at the time. You could buy a 10 with duals for around $25K and it would handle 8 row equipment and a mounted cotton stripper as well.

First thing many did was to take the underhood muffler out and install a straight pipe - nicer exhaust note and it made it pull a bitmore.

You could take a 1086 and jack the HP to 150 so it would pull with a 1486 (145) and it would live - given reasonable care. Today you can't touch a pump without serious trouble coming your way.

What killed them was the transmission was basically the same as the '06 from 1963. The 86 series had a cable operated TA that would stick partially engaged and that took out many TAs. Old timers will know that the 06-66 sereis did not have TA problems like the 86 series did.

And they were sliding gear type from the old Farmall design of the '30s so they would not shift well. Put them against a powershift 4340/4440 Deere and the only ones left were the true believers.

The 50 series would have been a bigger deal had it had the 18 speed the Magnum had - harvester was broke and did not have the money to build it just before Case bought the ag division.

Oh well, long ago and far away - good memories for me, though

art · Sep 25, 2009

Yankee, I'd seen the 18 speed magnum transmission in a tractor long before the 50 series was introduced. They told us they were saving it for the next update!

Baranx4 · Sep 29, 2009

It's amazing that you even see more 86 series tractors selling for less than the 86 tractors. I thought the 86 fixed the cavitation problems.

RickB · Sep 29, 2009

Baranx4 said:
It's amazing that you even see more 86 series tractors selling for less than the 86 tractors. I thought the 86 fixed the cavitation problems.

Cavitation erosion and electrolysis of sleeves is a problem with just about any wet-sleeved diesel. The cure is proper servicing of the coolant; no more, no less. The reason many later series of IH and other brand tractors had less of that type of problem is that the cause was identified and a cure developed and promoted. There is no substantive difference in the cylinder block or sleeves of a 66 series or 86 series or 88 series IH with a 400 series engine.

deere755 · Sep 29, 2009

My uncle owned a 1586, it was power house. The only thing I did not like about it was the fact it was so short coupled and that made it ride rough. I also thought the hydraulics were weak compared to a Deere but at the time it would out pull the 4630 Deere we had.

dawoodwa · Oct 1, 2009

My cousin had the opportunity to buy either a 1086 or 1586 about the same price from a neighbor that was going out of business in the early 80"s. He opted for the 1086, was a good tractor but was light on the front end. We ran it door to door with 4440's and never had any real issues other than we couldn't get enough weight on the front end when we were cutting silage and pulling a NH 892 and a Dual dump wagon. Going up hills I would have to drive it with the brakes. When my cousin went out of business another neighbor bought the tractor and I ran it up until about 4 years ago baling hay. We had to replace the turbo twice that I know of and had to pull the cab once to do some work on the transmission. We had the T/A shifter disconnected but that was done back in the early 80's. Never went into the motor that I am aware of, had about 12k hours on it when it was traded.