Was there any advantages to the old style plow shares?

Jason S.

Well-known Member
I was just curious if the old style shares performed any better or worse than the throw away style shares that everyone started offering in the 1950's. The way they are made it would seem like they would plow a little different but I didn't know and I know some of you would know.
 
They were an Idea that worked 150 years ago to make, could do the casting easier than rolling steel. They all have a nose for suck. The earlier throway shares were just a flat piece of steel and no nose for suck and then they came out with the throwaway share with the same type of nose molded in and you cannot tell the difference between them and the cast share in operation. The new shares the steel in the nose is a lot harder so does not wear like the cast in the old shares so them you had to heat and reshapen to sharpen every few acres. You could do that with the new shares with a nose as well but buy the time they would need sharpening it is just cheaper to buy new. I could take those new throwaway shares and use them to rebuild the old wore out cast shares as the points and edges are no longer avaible to rebuild the cast shares with. I have hammered out many a share to sharpen years ago, helth would not allow it now.
 
The older type shares and bottoms were designed to plow from 1 to 3 mph. That said, their design was also optimized to keep the plow bottom 'sucked' into the soil at those speeds. As plowing speeds increased, the use of 'throw-away' type shares allowed the bottoms to stay sucked into the ground with less surface area than the older type bottoms due to their cutting angle being steeper and that they had a radius curve (Raydex...and radius) as compared to the older shares which didn't have much of a radius on the top surface of the share.

The throw-away shares keep their "suction" longer than the older type because the suction was achieved all along the length of the share as compared to primarily only on the point of the blacksmith type shares.

There was of course the issue of significant cost savings with the throw-away type shares since they could be made from better material with improved heat treatment processes that allowed them to wear better than the older type.

The Ray-dex design share essentially was the demise of the blacksmith in terms of the demand for agricultural repairs.

Some folks might think that the older shares would penetrate the ground better than the newer shares but assuming both types of shares are in good condition (not dull or worn) I've seen little to no difference. In terms of how they plow, I can say that older type bottoms don't like to be pulled at high speeds (4 plus mpg) since they're shaped to do the best job at slower speeds, whereas the throw-away type will pull harder and do a poorer job at speeds of less than about 3mph.

In terms of plowing quality, both types of bottoms will do an equally good job of turning the soil so long as they're pulled at the correct speed for their type and a depth not more than 1/2 of the cutting width of the bottom size.

I could elaborate further into this, but how much more would you like to know. Speaking from experience, I'm generally referring to John Deere type bottoms since they're most familiar to me.
Regards,
Tyler in IL
Plow Bottom Information
 
Wow - some comprehensive inof on that link! I am a Cockshutt guy and always wondered if there are any cross references to any plow parts between maufacturers as Cockshutt plow parts are a little like finding a spec of gold dust in a haystack!
Regards

Neil
 

There were way more problems with the "Old-Style Shares" NOT going into dry ground (or only going in about 3")than the newer style "Throw-away" type..

Ron.
 
dad bought a used 2 bottom plow in the early60's It looked like it had never been used, had throw away shares. That dam thing would not go in the ground even with 3 boys sitting on the back of it. Sitting in the old blacksmith shop 1 rainy Sat afternoon shooting the bull, dad ask him about it. He told dad to bring it in and he would put some suck in it. He said those new type lays needed help. He took them off and put them in his trip hammer, fixed it so good the darn JD had a tough time pulling it.
 
You kinda got to define "old style" share or bottom. There were so many different types, some that worked, some that didn't, in various ground that it's hard to make a comparison.

I can tell you this much, there isn't a blacksmith around anymore, even Amish, that can pound out an old style share to work right. That's the biggest difference.
 
Some blacksmiths only knew how to sharpen a lay one way. The smarter blacksmith knew what type of soil you farmed so he could adjust the lays to meet your needs.

Blacksmiths were already on the way out when the throw-away lays came out.
 
Yes, I realize that; but many folks use it as a generic term. It is really a testiment to support that Oliver was the leader in modernizing the moldboard plow bottom. What amazes me is that other plow companies were able to use nearly identical bottom designs when there were patents on the Oliver RAY-DEX bottom. Looking at the original sales literature from Oliver and comparing it to that of Deere from the early 50's makes me wonder if the patent had expired by then.


Tyler
 

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