international #37 disk

I would like to know how they compare with others and what would work behind my 400IH

I used to have one.Decent disk.I pulled a 10' with My super M.No objections to owning another one...

#37 very good disk but stay with one with 7" blade spacing, not the 9" version. A 9 blade on a side 11' or 10 blade 12' should work good for you. I would have to check my owners manuals to see if they made a wider model. And IHC measured them on the back gang, not front. Could have either grease or greaseless bearings and crank to level or self leveler. Because of the adjustable gang angle way better than any non adjustable units like Deere. Most times run in the straightest position unless real deep hard cutting then full angle.

I have a 10 ft. IH #37 disk that my dad bought used about 35 years ago. It worked very well with our IH 400, but was a bit too much for my MD in very worked up ground. I have replaced all the front disks over the years. I only wish it was a 12 ft. as I sometimes pull it with my JD 830 or my JD 6105 tractors. It' been a very good disk for me. Disks blades are still available from Case-IH. I think mine has the 7-inch spacing. Your 400 should be able to pull a 10 or 12 ft. Al

Many years ago dad had a 12 foot behind his 400 this was in 1960.

Thanks this helps , what is the issue with 9" spacing on the blades

I have heavier soils and I will only use 9 inch spacing.

It has to relate to the fact that the curvature of the blade coupled with the size and that a smaller or likely wore out blade will not cut as wide a path as a new blade of same size will and will in hard ground just cut a grove and not break up the soil between the blades and the wider spacing between the blades just makes more of a ridge betwen the groves that were cut on the first pass to have to cut up on second pass going cross ways. That disk was avaible with 16" blades that should have been considered wore out when it came from factory, 18" that whenwore to 17" need replacing and 20" blades that I have never seen on a disk like that. For to do the cutting to get rid of that grove I mentioned that you will get on full angle with a 17" blade on 7" spacing you need the full 20" blade to do the same amount of cutting to get rid of that grove situation. If your ground never gets hard then it is not a problem like it is here where the ground when you are trying to work it and it is like concrete and even with disk loaded at times you can only get 1" deep per time over and would have to hit the field 6 times to get worked enough for planting. My township name is Clay so that might give you some idea of ground conditions here. If you have a soft loam type of soil then the 9" could work but don't let the blades get any smaller than 17.5". It is the same as back in the 40's it was thought that a 16" blade pulled easier than an 18" and cut as well but that was proved false. That old disk that when new took 3 times over plowed ground to get ready for planting when the blade wore to 14" took 4 times but when they were replaced with the 18" that should have been on them to start with took only twice to get that plowed ground in shape for planting. That 18" blade on a 9" spacing is like that 14" on the 1940's disk. If you could go to a 22" blade then the 9" spacing would work but on the #37 disk there is not enough frame clearance for that. I think the later disks like the 370 probably had more clearance for the blades and could use the 22" blades and work OK in most soils. Have I completely confused you yet? If I have I will try again to explain.

I pulled a 10 foot #37 with Oliver 880 and 1550. I liked it, especially with the 880- can still hear that tractor sing at combat speed. Unfortunately, I can't hear much of anything else. . .

I have a 10' also. Very good cutting Disk. Been trying to find a set of levelers for it, but not having much luck. You will like the disk. Don