In a previouse post you asked about putting a 6 row head on a 95. DONT!A 95 is a 4 row machine at best. A 6 row head is heavy. So heavy the standard lift cylinders wont even lift. If they do,the rear endisnt heavy enough to counterbalance. I run a 443 on my 95. in good(200+) corn you are in low gear.Not so much for lack of power,but there is just not enough separating capacity for 6 row.I put 105 lift cylinders on,they helped a lot.And as mentioned earlier,with that much weight,something WILL break.You can thresh a lot of corn with a 4 row head.However if you absolutely must have a 6 row,better get a 105.I just finished my corn harvest. Probably beat 180 bpa.I was in low to allow time to separate.I could only take 6 rows pre round,instead of 8 because the combine didn't have enough bin for one full round pulling 4 rows each way.Only have one truck,so placing a truck on each end wasn't an option.And I wasn't going to 'deadhead' 3/4 of the way to the truck to unload.IMHO,a 45 is a 2row;55 is a 3 row;95 is 4 row;105 is your 6 row machine.
- Thread starter DeltaRed
- Start date
tomstractorsandtoys
Well-known Member
If he wants six row that means he has a six row planter. I would go with three row narrow. Plenty of capacity and extra bin space in long rounds. If I ever change to narrow rows that is my plan. Tom
I appreciate the response. The 6 row narrow planter is already here and is in good shape. When I was a little kid we had a 45 with 3 row head. I know you can shell 4 behind a 6 row planter but there’s a lot of curves around here that makes that tough. I wouldn’t be opposed to any x5 machine in terms of size.
coonie minnie
Well-known Member
I have to get out a manual and look, but is a 95 narrow enough for 3 rows narrow??? I know the market a 3 row wide head with a 95, but not sure about narrow.
Also, about 20 years ago, JR Hobbs wrote in green magazine about putting a 6 row row crop head on a 95. If memory serves, he had used 105 lift cylinders and perhaps some weight on the rear axle. He claimed that worked really well, but there is a lot less material in 50 bu beans vs 150 bu corn.
We put the 105 through a lot of 200 bu corn, and weighed 1/4 mile samples of up to 265 with her. With 6 rows going in, you were either in 2nd as slow as it would go, or in first. And even with a big grain tank extention, you dumped A LOT! Get on a hillside, and you really had to crawl as well. The good part was that at very slow speeds, there is very little header loss!
Also, about 20 years ago, JR Hobbs wrote in green magazine about putting a 6 row row crop head on a 95. If memory serves, he had used 105 lift cylinders and perhaps some weight on the rear axle. He claimed that worked really well, but there is a lot less material in 50 bu beans vs 150 bu corn.
We put the 105 through a lot of 200 bu corn, and weighed 1/4 mile samples of up to 265 with her. With 6 rows going in, you were either in 2nd as slow as it would go, or in first. And even with a big grain tank extention, you dumped A LOT! Get on a hillside, and you really had to crawl as well. The good part was that at very slow speeds, there is very little header loss!
Mark (EC,IN)
Member
- Location
- Hagerstown Indiana
Can you park the truck in the middle of the field? That is the same as having a truck at each end.
coonie minnie
Well-known Member
We did a lot of that with the 105.
tomstractorsandtoys
Well-known Member
I would stay away from a 55. With a three row head it will be maxed out in good corn,has a small bin and small unloading auger that takes a long time to unload. I just hauled my 55 to the scrap yard yesterday. We only cut soybeans with it and a few years ago it started getting compression in the cooling system and the cylinder bars were worn as well as much of the metal was getting very thin. A friend wanted the motor and we pulled lots of parts off it and still got $312. Not bad for a machine that cost me $1000 and gave 8 years of use with no problems other than maintenance. It was hard to park it as I think it must have never sat outside as all the paint and metal were perfect. After cutting beans with the 95 I would not want to go back to the 55. Tom
Similar threads
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.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy