Best All Haying IH Open Station Tractor????

Bill VA

Well-known Member
Reading and learning the IH tractors - wouldn't mind having as a "larger" haying tractor - so window shopping for kicks.

9ft discbine duties, hills w/square baler and wagon in tow would be the biggest chores. Weren't for the abundance of rocks around here,
perhaps some plowing with field refurb. Loader would be nice and the potential to use a 4x5 round baler one of these days too.

I'd been leaning towards the Farmall 400/450 models, but get the impression reading older posts, the 756 is just a great all around tractor, more
modern in features, more power, etc. Heavy in weight, heavy duty in build and I see generally lower prices with the gas version - which would
be OK for us no harder than we'd work one or roll up hours.

School me on the best IH haying tractor - would you hay with a 756?

Thanks!
Bill
 
Well, you asked for it,but i just never liked that gas engine in 656 thru 856 gas tractor's, i bought a new 656 gas, it had power when it hit on all 6, pulled a 13.5 foot disk with a 14 ft 100 drill. A neighbor told the IHC salesman they pull a big load with it,i admit it looked long hooked together, but the disk was only in the ground deep enough to take out the wheel tracks out. , traded that for a 806 diesel, still have it. only thing done to the motor is two sets of bearings. I would buy something like a 966 Diesel with a block heater. Or something diesel !!
 

If you want a good, old classic, go with the 450. If you want a few more features and creature comforts, with power to spare, you can't go wrong with a 756. Don't turn away from an 856 either.
 
I get it with diesel, agree it's a better engine. We've toyed with the idea of a gas tractor just for getting a tractor started when it's cold outside. What we don't have is power in or near the tractor shed. I could roll out a generator and power a plugin that way, but......

Thought about finding a JD 3020 or maybe a 4020 gas, but read much negatives about them. It sounds like IH had their ducks in a row when they made a gas engine, thirsty maybe, but good reliable running engines.

Surely not ruling out a diesel either, can't wet stack a gas engine though and price is generally lower - and hours.

I've seen 806 and 856 tractors, those would be a beast on this place, not sure we could ever work that much hp hard enough to keep it from continual wet stacking.
 
I really like the 400/450 tractors. Everything that is an M, but independent PTO and I gather live hydraulics. I would love to get a wide front end
400/450 with power steering.

One of the concerns with a larger/newer 756 type tractor is potential repair/rebuild costs. Don't know how a 400/450 would compare on that
front, but on a certain level, they look simple enough to service/repair.

Again - just window shopping and learning.

Thanks!
 
A 400/450 with a 9' discbine? You'd regret that. A 756 with the 310 German diesel would be a pretty good set up.

Problem is finding a good one that isn't used up - seems like a lot of them ended up on loaders and got abused.
 
Yeah, we had a 560 gas years ago on our Wisconsin dairy farm. That cured our ever having a gas tractor over 45 hp again. They have their advantages, but to say they're thirsty is an understatement.

Glenn F.
 
Any are good. wouldn't hesitate with any 400/450;460/560;756.706 is good too,but is harder to shift. However,a hydro. (Hydro70;656H;826H) would be my top choice.I put many hours annually on both a 756 and 826 Hydro. Also used to have a 300 and a 560 diesel. All worked well,and would recomend any of them.
 
I would say that the 756 would work a lot better then a 400. We run with a 706 (the 756's older sibling) does a great job with haying. The 56 series has a better shifting system(then the 06) along with a host of other upgrades. Being higher(then a 400) as well you can see over a small square baler (or other equipment for that matter) easier to see missed knots, how your help is holding up, or how the end product(how the stack is going, windrow condition...) is turning out.
 
If you could find a GOOD 856D you would own one of best IH ever made. With clutch, TA dump valve, and transmission brake set up right they shift decent. With the 12 inch 4 pad clutch there is a way mentioned by Pete 23 on Red Power forum where you SLIGHTLY give clutch a little concavity to make it spring away from flywheel. Make it shift like a Super M.
 
A lot of Hydros were sold in this area between vegetable farms and hay operations. I would not be afraid of a good hydro with a good individual history of the tractor,
 
If your baling in hill country and are even thinking about pulling a baler and a wagon then you want a heavy tractor with loaded tires , yea everybody is going to trash on me for sayen LOADED tires . You get on hills with a baler and a loaded wagon it dose not take much to have the tail wag the dog . I have had the 336 and a 3/4 full 9x18 shove my 806 and it weighs in at over 13500lbs , on the same not we bale hay at one farm that just mowing it will put a pucker factor to it as at the N/E end of the field while mowing a 1219 john Deere haybine will shove the 806 side ways on that turn as it is so steep because it is on a down hill as you make the right turn to head south across the head land . I make 20 rounds around that field just to get to the top of the hill to get on the flat.When we use to use the 706 with out any weight added there were many times that you jackknifed on that turn and had to back around to get untangled . We farm on hills so weight is a must . Back when i first started farming with a 450 D the tires were loaded PLUS four sets of donuts were on the wheels and when plowing we added one extra weight to the land side wheel.. Got shoved off many hills with a full gravity box full of ear corn when the ground was soft. Now as to a gasser 707-756 yea i USE to like them but not no more since you can not get gas that will work in them if your going to work them , even running a haybine will be enough to have one swell a piston and seeze up on ya .
 
The only Hydo's i like are on Combines and 750-850 John Deere Dozers. And on the latter it is wise to have spare O/Rings for the right Hydro motor and tools to remove the hen hole cover and remove the bottom plug so you can change that o/ring and hope ya like Hydro oil running down your arm into your arm pit and also be good at fixing something you can not see .
 
As much as I love my 400D and 450D I have to say that while they are both sufficient to do the job with a bit extra you would be far happier with a 700 or 800 series DIESIL tractor. As long as previous owners did not abuse the ether they start fairly well in the winter. I borrow a neighbors 706D to bale with occasionally and it is a nice smooth machine on that old 14T.
 
I agree with the 856 part. Can't speak on the rest but that is one nice sounding comfortable and powerful tractor to run for making hay.
 
A lot of Hydros worked out very well when they were not used for heavy drawbar work. There were a lot of 1066 Hydros around doing transplanting and vegetable harvest. 656 diesel Hydros doing loader work and pulling hay tools plus wagon and forage blower duty. Name a tractor and it will usually have some kind of disadvantage or failing. Just the nature of anything man made.
 
Amen, gassers will pull and work but most have to have the vent open to let air in the tank to keep the engine from sucking it flat!!!
 
The 56 series would be much handier than the older 400 or so set up. Also some of the newer haybines need more pressure than the older tractors will put out to lift them. Like the Deere 1219 has only one cylinder that looks something like a combine cylinder to lift it. Also the 361,407 engine will start good in the cold as a diesel. You'll like the extra weight if your on real hilly ground too.
 
Lots of good discussion regarding tractor model and size, but I saw no mention of front wheel assist - virtually a necessity for the loader work you mentioned.
 
Bill,

Could you remind us how many acres or how many tons of hay per year you plan to produce? Is the NH #68 still your main baler?
 
We had an 856 and a 966 - those are excellent tractors. Decades on the same farm and never an issue that I remember.

Get one that has been cared for and starting isn't an issue. Although it's much newer, my 886 has started every time all winter with no help. I've tested her pretty good a few times.
 
(quoted from post at 15:06:44 07/22/16) I get it with diesel, agree it's a better engine. We've toyed with the idea of a gas tractor just for getting a tractor started when it's cold outside. What we don't have is power in or near the tractor shed. I could roll out a generator and power a plugin that way, but......

Thought about finding a JD 3020 or maybe a 4020 gas, but read much negatives about them. It sounds like IH had their ducks in a row when they made a gas engine, thirsty maybe, but good reliable running engines.

Surely not ruling out a diesel either, can't wet stack a gas engine though and price is generally lower - and hours.

I've seen 806 and 856 tractors, those would be a beast on this place, not sure we could ever work that much hp hard enough to keep it from continual wet stacking.

You don't need to work it hard to prevent "wet-stacking", but you do need to run the engine at a realitively high RPM. Using a slower gear, and higher RPMs is whar a diesel likes.
 
We've got some steep hills, but don't work those. Use to be pasture, now loblolly pine for harvest later. Hills I would be working would be more shallow rolling and crowns. We would work our way around these fields, from side to top - where our shelters are placed (or will). The goal is to never ever point the tractor down hill with a load of hay and especially with a load of hay behind a baler behind a tractor. Increased hp is more for a discbine, maybe a round baler some day and power to pull a baler with wagon in tow up/around the hills to the top as we work. We can get along just fine with a haybine and 50hp or less tractors, but want to consider a larger one anyway.

I was on a wagon many years ago with a full load, behind a baler, behind a tractor. Not interested in going there even with a 4x4 and max weight.
 
We now have 20ish acres we've refurbed, if all goes well over the winter, another 15 on top of that. We've got more fields to recover, but there's a day job in the way. Would like to top out at 50-60 acres, but need to see if we have enough market to support it.

Baler - we've added a later model JD348 in addition to our trusty New Holland 68 - which we still use.
 
i tried that once also, i put a 540 adapter on the 1,000 rpm shaft, and run the engine at about a 1,000 rpm, very stupid idea, and baled hay,gonna save fuel, yeah right, that was my first experience with wet stacking and the last !!
 
"Now as to a gasser 707-756 yea i USE to like them but not no more since you can not get gas that will work in them if your going to work them , even running a haybine will be enough to have one swell a piston and seeze up on ya ."

Wow! What is it about today's gas that doesn't mix with one of these tractors? I've read where people get in trouble running 87 octane, but if using 93 or maybe 91 octane these piston issues don't materialize? In no way contradicting, but if the gas we've got available today won't work with these IH engines - yea, that's a big problem. Is this gas problem limited to '06 and newer gas engines or across the board with M's, H's, 300/350, 400/450 tractors too?

Thanks for the helpful info.

Bill
 
Well we have fought the gas issue for years with the melted pistons . when we could still get straight 93 octane we were getting along fine . Now the best straight gas coming down the pipe is 90 and to get what they call 93 is a blend . And it does not work out so well . My to close friends both have 706 gassers , one is a 64 706 and the other is a 67 . one from the factory as a 263 and the other is a factory 291 . The 64 was rebuilt back in 98 and it was then changed to a C291 with the 263 to 291 update . That kit came from the local Case I H store . when we did this we did everything and more . Had the cam rebuilt and blueprinted , had the crank checked and micro polished and all moving pieces and parts balanced . Head was done each hole was bored to accept the new sleeves and hand finished to with in two tenths of a thousants . Then each piston was miced and numbered and that hole was fitted to that piston all rings were hand fitted to each hole , the dist. was redone and checked on a dist. strobe for correct advance timing BY THE BOOK i left nothing to second guess. Once up and running i was vary happy with the results as it was putting out a shade over 87 Hp at pto and would torque rise to 94 . Ran great . it did chore work all winter long but no heavy feed grinding we left that to the 806 . when spring came i went all over the tractor before it was hooked to the plow . Put her on the plow and with 4x16's it was first high . Ran great all Saturday with a tank of gas from the little local gas station down the road as the fuel suppler had not brought the 600 gallons of gas yet . Sunday my friend came home from church and went to the field BUT filled the tank with the gas that came Saturday afternoon out of the farm tank . He did not make it back to the other end of the field when it seezed up . He calls me Well i'll look at it in the morning . Awhile later he calls back and said they got it to turn over and start but now it is knocking , ok then drive it to the shop and i will look at it in the morning , if it don't make it then drag it . well monday morning i fire it up and yep it's knocking and i get it inside and make a hole and tear into it . Got the head off and not just one hole was messed up but all six . all six pistons were scrap , all damage was ABOVE the top ring I have seen enough pistons burnt to know it was fuel related . Ok so how bad are the sleeves , so i called my machine shop and he came down with a ridgid hone and course and fine stones and we put the hone to the one just to see and it cleaned up so we did all of them then miced them to see how much we took out i had built in .004 skirt to wall and now we are at .0045 i can live with that so i ordered in six new piston and a set of rings . My buddy shows up that evening and he and i go round and round over this , he calls his nephew and his nephew agrees with me that it is fuel related . So his nephew knew of a lab that would test the gas and tell us what he got as he ordered 93 JUST LIKE THE OWNERS MANUAL says is the minim fuel grade to use , the lab report came back and told us just whos gas it was as we never said it told us what all was in that sample and that it infact was 87 not the 93 he paid for . Now here is where some guys on here do not under stand is that back in the sixtys when these tractors were made Reg. gas at the pump was 95 for the most part and the gas from Farm bureau may be as low as 93 , Sunoco there 190 was 93 there 200 was 95 and there 240 was 105 and the 260 was like 108-9 . Yes for the most part it had lead in it BUT AMMaco did not and there reg was 95 and there high test was like 107 . Gas started to change in 1975 as by then all the fast cars were off the road and everything being made was low compression layed back cam timing smog this smog that cat converters and the death of the gas tractors came in 75 . But we were still getting reg gas that would run them and you could still find 100 plus gas here and there , ya just paid more for it . I had to run hightest in my 73 Ford F250 because it had a 1970 428 S/CJ with a 10.5 compression ratio and a hotter cam a 735 CFM holley . At that time i had my first 706 gasser and it was a 67 with a 291 . So it got fed with the same gas that went into the pick up , fill the tank on the truck and fill the tank in the bed off the same pump . I never had a problem with that tractor . a couple years later another friend bought a 766 gasser and he was CHEAP and he bought the cheapest gas he could find . He asked me one day if i could help him plow as he was behind so i told him yea so he and i were plowing together and his tractor would start the pinging and almost die and he would have to let it set and cool where i was still going . I did take time and check his over and other then being at 20 degrees BTDC only 1 degree off i set it to the book and it seamed to help a bit . But he would not buy better gas , by the time field work was done so was his 766 as it has scored all six. He ate two engines , i did not do those as he had the dealer do them as this was before i opened up . But back to Eugene's 706 once we made sure of the gas all was fine till one day a new driver for the company that sold us gas he brought out a 600 gallon load and on the first fill up Eugene ate a piston only one this time and we saved the sleeve , i had delivered that piston to the fuel company and they ate the bill and came and sucked out the tank and refilled , ok all was well till two years ago when they stopped shipping 93 down the pipe line and went ot 90 and now the fuel rack is suppose to BLEND the al-ki-hol there and we ate a piston and his brother 706 ate a piston . Yep they WERE a great tractor for the dariy farmer the hobby farmer the guy that had a few acres because you did not have to be a master wrench to work on the engine just a timing lite and feeler gauge , they would start even down into the neg. 30's even with straight 30 weight oil , they complained a bit but started . You could handle 4x16 a 13-15 foot disc six row planter even in our hills mow hay bale haul wagons move snow what ever . They were great if you played the game with the low ash oil ( that took a lot of expensive learning ) to figure out and as long as you fed them STEAK they ran super . The way we felt about it was ok so hightest was twenty cents a gallon more so what the difference was not worth the problems when you burn 6-700 gallon a year. SOO we have given up on them yes i can rebuild one of them in my sleep and never even look at the book as all the spec.s are burnt into my brain just like the old big block fords and Chrysler engines . I have worked on somany that when i have to work on one i don;t care what it is i know what to get out of the tool box with out having to go back for something ..
 
50-60 acres of hay is a pretty decent size piece.

I would agree with the others, that you really want a lot of weight if it is hilly, a full rack and baler can get you in trouble pretty quick going downhill with a light tractor. I would also want a Diesel for the economy.

A JD 4020D is really optimum if you do not mind green. I think the 966 is just a great workhorse for red.
 
Do you have a 706 or 756 gasser that you actually use to farm with ?? how many engines have you ever built , would you know buy looking at a failed engine part to tell what happened ?? Have you ever picked up and owners manual for said tractors and read it?? Can you tell me the required minim octane for a 460-560 gas tractor ?? Did you make a living fixing tractors. Did you ever have and old mussel car from back in the day when we could get real gas ?? did you ever build engines for comp. well i have and i can . But it is like this the only way you will learn is to go buy one and stuff a set of plows on the back or put a chopper on it and go cut hay or chop corn . even mowing first cut hay puts a good load on them with a 9 footer. And when ya get down to it i really don't care if you believe me or not . also when you have a problem that you can not fix or have no idea on how to where do you come but here wanting someone to solve your problem , people like Owen , Pete or myself , the guys that know how to fix tractors . Usless i come on something that i have never worked on before of another color then i look for advice from someone that hows that color . but when it comes to Red from the letter sires to the early 86 i do know them .
 
For the last 4 years I use my 756D on a 270 JD disc mower and my 5 X 6 8465A CIH round baler, have some rolling hills which tend to make it snort, but that German engine handles it well. Just finished 60 acres cutting, raking and baling and maybe burned 30 gallon.
 
You don't want a front wheel assist on the era tractors you're considering. They are more museum pieces these days than useful features of a tractor. Everything's fine until something breaks and you need a part. Then you're dead in the water.

They also don't turn very short, so maneuverability is compromised. Bad for loader work.

If you need MFWA, then you should be looking at much newer tractors, which are of course probably way out of your budget.

Really unless you're talking about working in MUD, a 2WD tractor is just fine for loader work.
 
(quoted from post at 00:04:02 07/24/16) ...Wow! What is it about today's gas that doesn't mix with one of these tractors? I've read where people get in trouble running 87 octane, but if using 93 or maybe 91 octane these piston issues don't materialize? In no way contradicting, but if the gas we've got available today won't work with these IH engines - yea, that's a big problem. Is this gas problem limited to '06 and newer gas engines or across the board with M's, H's, 300/350, 400/450 tractors too?

Thanks for the helpful info.

Bill

I have never heard of any issues with modern gas on the old lower compression lower revving 4 cylinder tractors like the h,M, 300,350, 400, 450 etc. My clunkers all run fine on modern gas but in fairness I only piddle patch with em too. Even when they see hard work it is for 2.5 hours length of time maximum.

Lots of 656 gassers out there still in use. Have heard no issues on them related to modern gas.

Even quite a few 706 gassers out there still in use without issues although I doubt they see the heavy type work that the tractorvet subjects his tractors too.

I like my ole gassers because I can fix anything on them myself dirt cheap, but all mine are under 40 hp and are reasonably fuel efficient for the tasks I ask them to do. You start talking 80 hp to 100hp along with growing to 60 acres then I would have nothing but a diesel engine.
 
Honestly if I go diesel, I'll be looking at 4020's for sure - they are plentiful and prices are good too. Don't think I want a JD gas from what I've read and it's sounding like I might ought avoid the 06 and newer series IH gas machines too.
 
Oliver would be my pick in a gasser this size. 1650, 1655, or 1800.

1800A is most fuel efficient gasser ever made as far as hp/hrs/gal. I spent lots of time in seat of an 1800A gasser in my youth. My all time favorite tractor that I have ever run even over the International 1066 dieseal that came later. Much too big for my needs now though.
 
Agreed on all counts. The MFWD of the 60s and 70s was crude even when new and adding 40-50 years use certainly has done little to improve them. And I can't imagine the parts situation - especially on an IH of that era - could be handled at a dealership.
 
Its not. Someone even quoted a section from a manual on what to look out for when a mechanic starts blaming gas for issues that crop up on repairs.
 
(quoted from post at 14:08:47 07/22/16) Reading and learning the IH tractors - wouldn't mind having as a "larger" haying tractor - so window shopping for kicks.

9ft discbine duties, hills w/square baler and wagon in tow would be the biggest chores. Weren't for the abundance of rocks around here,
perhaps some plowing with field refurb. Loader would be nice and the potential to use a 4x5 round baler one of these days too.

I'd been leaning towards the Farmall 400/450 models, but get the impression reading older posts, the 756 is just a great all around tractor, more
modern in features, more power, etc. Heavy in weight, heavy duty in build and I see generally lower prices with the gas version - which would
be OK for us no harder than we'd work one or roll up hours.

School me on the best IH haying tractor - would you hay with a 756?

Thanks!
Bill
ft discbine takes just about every tractor out of the running except for a 806+ If you said haybine then a 450 would run it AOK. Some models of machines take more than others, but a good rule of thumb I was always told was 10 hp per foot. Not true for all machines, but it would keep you in the good as far as the combo goes. Discbines take alot of HP to run efficiently. That's the whole advantage of the things. You can pull them at 8-9 mph through a field and put hay down in a hurry. If your running a underpowered machine in 1st or maybe 2nd gear then your just not seeing any benefit to the mower.

That and personally I wouldn't run an open station tractor with a discbine. If something breaks/you hit something that rubber skirt only stops so much
 
(quoted from post at 01:38:36 07/23/16) As much as I love my 400D and 450D I have to say that while they are both sufficient to do the job with a bit extra you would be far happier with a 700 or 800 series DIESIL tractor. As long as previous owners did not abuse the ether they start fairly well in the winter. I borrow a neighbors 706D to bale with occasionally and it is a nice smooth machine on that old 14T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have owned 460, 560, 656, 686, 706, 856, and 966 in this class over the years. I still think a 656 diesel is a good replacement for a 450 and very nice to get on and off. But my sixth sense tells me you want one better. I would go with a 666 or 686 gear drive. They have about the same power as a 706 on the PTO. Mine has 73 PTO HP and is about 10 more HP than a 656 or about 20 HP more than a 450. The 686 has a beautiful platform to get on and off and the controls are in a natural position. You will find the larger 766 and 966 more clumsy to maneuver and turn with since they are a physically larger tractor.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top