What NH models are similar to the 276 baler?

If you follow the forum a lot; you'll notice that I repair my NH276 a lot...

I don't want to scrap it for a different model; as all old balers will have issues; at least I'm getting familiar with this one. And when it runs, it's a very good baler.

Anyway, if I were to look around for another baler to either scavenge for parts or to actually get running as a spare; which NH models would work.

I've read here that the 270 has the same pickup feeder (the rotating tine bar) system.

Any other models that would be very similar to the 276?

320 or 326 are close to you 276. They are 105 strokes a minute.

In al the time I have been around and working on old New Holland balers I have found many parts work on them all. Knotter parts are pretty much the same across the board. I have found there is a bit of a difference in some of them like the feed system that pushes the hay into the plunger area and flywheel area but other then that most seem to be very close to each other. I have a NH271 and I have found pretty much every thing off a NH68 interchanges. I know a guy with a NH276 and yes it is a bit different then the NH271 is but ben to long since I messed with his baler to remember what is different

(quoted from post at 07:36:34 07/24/18) 320 or 326 are close to you 276. They are 105 strokes a minute.

Click to expand...

I've been skimming through model numbers in Messick's.

It seems that the 276's tine bar feeder system in the back of the pickup is unique. It seems that, once NH got away from the finger feed system (ala NH 273-style), they tried all sorts of slightly different rotating chain with tine bar or finger bar systems... the 270...the 276...the 278...the 320 and 326 that you mentioned.... all slightly different, it seems.

Yes is seems that up till the 271 or so the feed system was pretty much the same and from then on they changed things a bit. When I got the NH68 and the NH271 both where fence row machines and I took the best looking for the 2 and made one work using parts from both. Took a lot of oil etc. to get it up and running but it worked. I have not used it in 2 years but I bet it would not take much to put it back in service

(quoted from post at 09:28:54 07/24/18) Yes is seems that up till the 271 or so the feed system was pretty much the same and from then on they changed things a bit. When I got the NH68 and the NH271 both where fence row machines and I took the best looking for the 2 and made one work using parts from both. Took a lot of oil etc. to get it up and running but it worked. I have not used it in 2 years but I bet it would not take much to put it back in service

Click to expand...

In reality, it really depends on whether I want to commit to having a spare baler on hand. If I want parts; I can get them from Fry's (or another scrapyard)...or buy them new.

If I had two working balers; you're not going to take parts from one to get the other one running...you're going to use the spare one; while you fix the broken one...

In reality...it probably doesn't matter whether they are all that similar, except for maybe my own familiarity with one type of machine.

I'm just thinking out loud; because I saw a John Deere 214T baler in the local want ads. The price is right. If it can make a bale, even if it needs a little adjustment or pampering...

The JD 214T is not to bad a baler. Pretty much the same as the 14T is. I have one of both but there both parts only. My elf I prefer the NH balers over JD balers. I do most of my hay in big rounds and only do squares once in a while and even less now that it is only me and the wife here. Some how doing squares by ones self is not an easy thing to do but BTDT years ago. I've even got a spare round baler which I have not used in a few years

(quoted from post at 13:34:50 07/24/18) The JD 214T is not to bad a baler. Pretty much the same as the 14T is. I have one of both but there both parts only. My elf I prefer the NH balers over JD balers. I do most of my hay in big rounds and only do squares once in a while and even less now that it is only me and the wife here. Some how doing squares by ones self is not an easy thing to do but BTDT years ago. I've even got a spare round baler which I have not used in a few years

Click to expand...

So...in your opinion...
JD214T vs NH268

If cost and condition was about the same.

Which would you choose as a spare?

I used to run a NH269 for a friend. That baler used to do a few thousand bales a year without much issue; other than normal wear and tear.

Before I bought the 270 I checked out the feeder system and the pickup system and found many of the parts to be
interchangeable. It is a totally different system than the low body 273 and 275. I understand the 276 system so I can
work on it, and I even think the pickup assembly from a 270 or 271 will fit into a 276. Many of the later models used
the 276 system feeder so I assume that the NH engineers found it to be the best of their systems. For some reason the
actual tines seem to vary with every model, but the tine bar and channels are the same part #. Why????

The NH 565 which was made through 2008 still used this feeder system.

If the JD214T and the NH268 are about the same price and condition I would go with the NH over the JD. I ran Jds fro years till I got these NH and I'd not go back with a JD unless it was super cheap

(quoted from post at 15:12:37 07/24/18) Before I bought the 270 I checked out the feeder system and the pickup system and found many of the parts to be
interchangeable. It is a totally different system than the low body 273 and 275. I understand the 276 system so I can
work on it, and I even think the pickup assembly from a 270 or 271 will fit into a 276. Many of the later models used
the 276 system feeder so I assume that the NH engineers found it to be the best of their systems. For some reason the
actual tines seem to vary with every model, but the tine bar and channels are the same part #. Why????

The NH 565 which was made through 2008 still used this feeder system.

Click to expand...

Yeah...I got the same jist as what you're saying. I was looking through the parts diagrams at Messicks...and all of the models that you mention use the large spoked sprockets, the chain drive, some variation of the "tine bar" running on the chain....but yes...for some reason they changed up what kind of tines and such.

As I'm thinking about my 276 repair. I'm waiting for parts...but when I put that tine bar back together, I'm going to put a home-grown "interlock" on the spring loaded tine (what NH calles the "rice tine")

I know that this can get flipped over center and stretch the spring to the point where it can't bring it back.... what if I put a piece of cable or something there to let the spring stretch a certain amount to let the tine flip up as needed...but essentially stops it from going any further?

I'm wondering if some of these refinements made over the years were designed to fix some of the problem that I'm having...other than the problem of someone running intact bale slabs into the pickup....

The NewHolland. Because you already have and are familiar with NH.Plus many parts are interchangeable.Not so with the JD.Keeping things the same is much less complicated.

Ideally, I'd look for a spare 276. They are a great baler - and like you said, you could run your spare while fixing the other one.
I'd love to have a spare, but can't afford it. Luckily I have good neighbors that would bail me out
Pete

When my baler broke, I went up to my neighbor's place...

I had about a hundred bales left in the windrow.

I said..."You can have the hay. It's going to rain this week, and I just don't want to see the windrows sitting in the rain for five days."

He said that he had a bunch of hay to do, but he'd let me know...he finished with plenty of time to pick it up before the rain...

Never got it. Would have been less than a 1/2 hour to drive down the road and bale it up... and he could have the hay...which was good hay. I just loaded some out of the field earlier that day to horse customers, they liked it.

Many people are circling their wagons. My business is my business, yours is yours.

It's OK...farming is tough, I get it...but that's when we need to lean on each other more, it would seem.

The 270-271 preceded the 276. The 315 replaced it. The 276 and 315 were much heavier built. They all used similar feeding systems proven on the 67,68,and 69 balers. The 278 and the 320 were similar but with a different feeder system......Ron