Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo Auction Link (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

John Deere Tractors Discussion Forum
:

old vs. new; also a couple of questions...

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
rob g

11-26-2004 19:46:22




Report to Moderator

With all of the respondents on this site, I know some interesting discussion can be had on this topic. When attending plowing days, etc., has anyone compared the performance of various Deere tractors of the ages? How about a newer 50-60 hp Deere (5400 or whatever) against a 730 diesel? How about a 730 against a 3010 or 3020, same field, same day? How about a styled G with some of Mr. Hindrich's pistons against a 70 or 730? I realize this is a little like comparing sports superstars of different ages (O'Neal vs Chamberlain comes to mind) but this is doable. Try to keep the comparison as complete as possible; I have to believe that there are a lot of these types of experiences out there; please share.

On the side of the question...I keep hearing that appropriate timing on the Waterloo lettered series like my '49 G is about 25BTC. I am running mine at 19BTC; doesn't idle terribly well but really comes alive under load. I set w/ timing light. I have no close dyno access. On a long hill pull, tractor seems to have a little more power there than at 26BTC. Am I deluding myself? Tractor has electronic ignition and 55KV coil.

Question 2-I have the F1074 gas manifold. Am pondering a Heisler or Johnson manifold. The cam is stock and since I've redone most everything ahead of the crank including the clutch, I don't have an overwhelming appetite to dig into a cam change to up flow past my mild porting. Does anyone have experience with the cold manifold in the absence of the optimised cam? Any idea on power increase?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Regards,
Rob

ps- my $0.02 worth, Wilt in his heyday over Shaq; not even close.

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
BushogPapa

11-27-2004 18:18:00




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
I remember vividly when I was in High School..the farmer across the road had an 830JD with a 5 bottom pull-type plow, and a brand new 4010 with a semi-mounted 5 bottom plow... Same size bottoms.. Every round or two, the 4010 pullout at the end to let the 830 around...!!! (That strip of Black-Jack stopped the 4010 every round--the 830 just blew some smoke and kept on going...!!)



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
BushogPapa

11-28-2004 08:50:57




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to BushogPapa, 11-27-2004 18:18:00  
I have heard many times about farmers who bought the 4010 and thought it would replace the 730 or 830 with equal power... The 4010 was rated as "gross power" at the engine, or at 100% power at the PTO.. All 2-Cylinder JD's were rated at 80% power at the "Belt"...( Big Horses when compared..!!). There are times when the Torque of a 2-Cylinder is Mighty Impressive..!! Just don't expect an "All-Fuel" to have that same torque..they just don't have the compression. The Last of the "Cross-Motors"...!!! It was a pleasure to work them all day (and Hear them all nite in your sleep)...!! They didn't lul you to sleep with the same sound all day long..they "talked" to you in many different tones.. We had extreme valve burning problems with our late "B"'s until the original mufflers rusted off..They Still have the straight pipes on them.!! Not hard on your ears either..!! They sure would wake the neighbors when we started them up at 4:30 AM after setting in the field somewhere, and the mags got moisture in them..!!! They would crank and crank, then BAM....!!! Sounded like they would explode, then crank and crank again, and Explode again, until they finally started...!!!! If someone complained from their new house that we were keeping them awake at mid-night, it was funny how we "had to spread Manure" on that field...!!! Funny how that happens.....!!!!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
rob g

11-28-2004 18:23:33




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to BushogPapa, 11-28-2004 08:50:57  
Bushog,

Keeping all of the power measurement and ratings rules straight that have been applied over the years is really difficult. Do many of the shows in your area have a dyno that the guys can hook up to? My understanding is that it is becoming a little more prevalent; sure wish I could attend one around here to hook my G up to. I'd buy the adapter to go down to std.PTO size just for the chance. I do think there have been some modest confusion over the years; just the way stuff has been rated...gotta be competitive. Engine power vs PTO vs drawbar; 85%, 100%, max power vs rated power; tough to keep it all straight. If you want to see some odd power ratings, check out some of the ones on the new tractors. An 8520 for example produces more power by a lot at about 1700 rpm than at 2200 rpm rated. The beauty of electronically controlled engines! If you have witnessed some dyno work on the older stuff at fairs or whatever, share away.

My understanding is that the ones really disappointed by the New Gens are those that traded their 730 for a 3010. Anyone out there have experience with that?

Thanks,
Rob

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
rob g

11-27-2004 19:57:25




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to BushogPapa, 11-27-2004 18:18:00  
Bushog,

We had a 730D pulling 4x14's at the same time we took delivery on an early production 4020D power shift pulling 5x14's. In normal black loam here in central Ill.,the 4020 would run about a half-mph faster than the 730 and would occasionally lap it if the going stayed favorable. However, when the loam turned to wet clay or worse, gumbo, the 730 would stay in 3rd gear and gain some distance and lug where the 4020 would be quickly dropped from 4th to 3rd. The 730 had not been deliberately tweaked but may have been running a little higher power than production; also the 4020 would smoke very little so I wondered about its power, plus it was a powershift before they reset the pump to compensate. We had a later 4020SR with the pump set to 105hp; now that was a tractor...lit up the sky at night with a 1' cone of fire from the muffler when the governor opened up.

Thanks for sharing that. I was wondering about a 4010 vs 830 comparo; your observation puts that in perspective for me.

thanks,
rob

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChuckW

11-27-2004 16:52:03




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
If one contemplates the 2 cylinder JD's it is like having a stationary engine coupled to gears and wheels. It was a development of that arrangement and the advantage was the thrust of the crankshaft was about 3-4 feet max from the wheels, thus little loss of torque. Front end drive vehicles use the same principal. The concept didn't become obsolete but the limitation on cylinder size versus extra horsepower forced JD to go to the inline engines. Don't just take my word, it came from a retired JD mechanic friend. JD couldn't go on up to the 100 H.P. range with the 2cylinders and they couldn't effectively get rpm for pumps, pto arrangments that they needed. The 2 cylinder is more durable as rpm is less than 3/4/6 cylinder engines but something had to give. Personally I like the 2 cylinders and have had many of them, If I hadn't wouldn't be commenting on this post. And personally have feed many five gallons cans of gas to these beasts. My 520 or 530 sucks twice if not more fuel than that 38 h.p. 4400. I didn't just pull this out of my...have had many experiences. Personally I don't know why JD didn't experiment with diesel on the other 2 cylinders. Yanmar has sold the heck out of them. The hand clutch led to their demise as much as limits on needed horsepower. I like the late models 20 and 30 series.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
rob g

11-27-2004 19:41:04




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to ChuckW, 11-27-2004 16:52:03  
Chuck,
I agree, the gasoline versions like the 520, etc. were none too miserly on fuel. The 520 gasser had a fuel consumption at Nebraska of 11.45 hp hr/gallon. As I recall, the 720 wasn't much better. My G drinks fuel like crazy. But the diesel 720 fuel consumption record wasn't broken till, what, 1989? Comparing thermal efficiencies of diesel vs. gas, it takes a pretty lousy diesel to get beat by a great gasser. Insofar as the clutch; IMO the robustness would have been really improved with either a better grade of iron in the drive disc (nodular would have been best) or perhaps a little tighter interference fit? I think Deere made a mistake when applying diesels analogous to GM back in the late 70's or whenever when they tried to dieselize the 350CI gas engine. GM, or rather the customers, found the weaknesses of the 350 conversion, PDQ. Fortunately, the drive disc was well enough (over)designed, I think that it took a little longer for that problem to show up. I also question how often a wrench was taken to the retaining bolt. I agree, I like the later 20's and 30's as well...cut my teeth on a 730 diesel. Outstanding, wish I had one now.

Rob

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
DRK

11-27-2004 10:42:24




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
Is it true that the old tractors got there "pull" from their gears????? and not so much from engine HP.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

11-27-2004 07:29:25




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
Human nature will always rememeber the "Good Old Days" when things were better.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChuckW

11-27-2004 05:58:44




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
My reference to fuel usage was intended for gas vs diesel. I'm sure the 730 diesel was fuel efficent but compare it with a 730 gas. This is why JD and the others went to diesel.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChuckW

11-27-2004 05:12:08




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
On your timing question I believe 20 degree advance at high idle is the proper setting, but you need to check you magneto springs and make sure you are coming back to 0 or tdc at low idle, a little wd40 would assist. 20 degree advanced should give you the proper burn time.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
rob g

11-27-2004 14:04:09




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to ChuckW, 11-27-2004 05:12:08  
Folks,

No bubble to burst on my side; I'm just throwing some ideas to ponder. Chuck, thanks for the timing info; I assume your advice on timing is also valid for my distributor-equipped G(?). I realize some of the new stuff is really impressive; the miracles of electronic engine control where the torque rise can be optimized are tough to compete with. My request is for everyone to think back to some of the plowing days you've attended; who was hard to keep up with and why (other than the fact that a dude with an 830 was pulling a 4-14's...); my point is that comparison of a 730 vs a 3010 or a G versus a 70 is interesting; especially where the rubber meets the cornstalks in the field.

Great discussion; keep going!

Rob

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
leon

11-27-2004 05:04:38




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
Older tractors and heavy tillage implements were intended for use at much slower field travel speeds than are those made today, so one should somehow take this into account in any field comparrisons.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
ChuckW

11-27-2004 05:01:04




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to rob g, 11-26-2004 19:46:22  
On the old vs new, I don't believe you can compare old techology versus new. The old stuff is over built, bulky but highly durable and will out last 3/4 owners. There is probably more steel in the rear end of the old 720/730 than there is in the whole drive train of some later models. But on the other hand the new stuff will out perform with hydraulics and power. I have a compact utility JD4400 and it will out perform my 530 hands down. A lot of the old tractors that impresses folks is the popping noise but beyond that there are limitations. Late model diesels will operate on 1/2 the fuel and develope twice the horsepower. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Paul Winter

11-27-2004 05:36:24




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to ChuckW, 11-27-2004 05:01:04  
I hate to burst your bubble Chuck but very few tractors will burn less fuel than a 730 diesel and none will burn half as much fuel.Paul



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mike M

11-27-2004 06:48:53




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to Paul Winter, 11-27-2004 05:36:24  
Here's another bubble burster for ya. I ran my model M on a 5 foot finish mower and ran the same mower on a JD model 4100 compact. The 4100 with hydro was way better to run but that old M had more power and used a little less fuel.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
steveormary

11-27-2004 09:49:25




Report to Moderator
 Re: old vs. new; also a couple of questions... in reply to Mike M, 11-27-2004 06:48:53  
rob g

Always wondered about that myself. A friend had a 5510? with fwa and loader. I think it had about the same hp rating as my 706 ger diesel. I was always trying to get him to hitch up to my 15"tandem disk to see what would happen. He never did but I think it would have been interesting.

steveormary



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
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. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 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