Wide front end for Farmall H

Schwartz.

I will make you a chalange, you select the tractor model, you equip your wide front version as you wish. I will do the same with my narrow front model. Then we will go for a tractor ride, you take the lead and I will follow you anywhere you wish to go. By the way, the last time I threw out this chalange was 2 years ago, and guy has not taken me up on it yet. Rusty can vouch for this.

I agree with Hugh 100% on this. I would rather have a dual tricycle front on an H or M size row crop tractor, regardless of make, and it is just as safe or safer if equipped and operated correctly. On a wide front, there is less stability than a tricycle untill the front axle hits the stops and by then it is often too late.

Harold H

Believe me the only thing we may need a chain for is to tie you on the seat. I have a lot of hours in the seats of both Farmalls H and 300 and both with narrow fronts, and worked lots of hill sides with them as well. Yes we even took them in the bush and hauled logs on ice roads, not level roads either. I've also farmed with Farmalls 656, 560, 1066 and an articulated Deere. I do know what I'm talking about.

It was also end of row crop cultivation that ended production of narrow front tractors, and not the folks that imagined they were unsafe. As tractors got heavier with more weight up front narrow front did tend to bog down more in soft ground. I baled roughly 35,000 bales per year with 300 pulling wagon behind. Many times that old 300 did 4,000 to 5,000 bales per day. The 560 and 656 never exceeded that amount, why, because the narrow front 300 was more agile. I don't think I would have wanted a 6 cylinder diesel with narrow front. Also the larger tillage equipment we were starting to see in the late 60s, I think a narrow front would have created problems turning. It would have taken a lot more brake wear.

I saw the same problem when I went to the 1066 with conventional wide front. If one wasn't careful turning by not using enough brake that tractor would bury it's front axle. I dualed that tractor to get more traction without compaction, and that only made turning worse. If I had it to do again I would only buy a 100hp+ tractor in a 4x4 version. My neighbor had one and he could turn with 25' cultivator in ground and never touch the brake pedal. That is what I liked about the articulated, it's ability to turn under heavy load. It was all an evolution, to me narrow front was great up to 50 hp, by the time we reached 100 hp the conventional wide front was history. Where we go from here, who knows?