I know nothing about these besides they look cool. What kind of tranny do they have? Is it like a syncro with a high/low? Is there any power shifting capabilities? Just curious. Thanks
 
Yes they are a synchro, with a high low, no power shifting. The 2 speed is in front of the tranny so it has a 2 speed pto also. They are really pretty simple. The clutch housing is in front of the hinge and everything else behind. Mostly used parts from row crop tractors. A 7520 and a 7020 share very few parts, one would think so till they are side by side, and there are very few parts that interchange. I'm just finishing a 7520 resto, hope to be done in a couple weeks.
 
Are you talking about the four-wheel-drive tractors from many years ago, or the newer 7000 series models
 
They where basically two JD 4020s hooked together. They had rear end issues. There where three sold within 4 miles of me here. All of them had rear end issue while still under warranty. Until about 10-15 years ago they would sell cheap as nobody wanted them to farm with. The collectors have driven the prices sky high now.
 
So they "all" had issues because you knew three of them that did? That's funny. 7520s were may more popular then 7020s around here. It didn't make the 7020s look good when a 5020 could almost keep up with them.
 
They are neat tractors. I myself have a 7020 but its in sorry shape. Two biggest drawbacks on them was the non live pto and loud dirty cabs. They had a good reputation around here but Versatile was the dominant choice in 4x4s.
 
"They had rear end issues"

WOW!

The ones around here were used for heavy tillage and I never heard of any "rear end issues".

For the most part they went "down the road" for tractors with more creature comforts.

The guy that rents my farm has a 7020 and a 7520 that have been "run hard and put away wet" and they still earn their keep as working tractors. Rear end issues NOT so much????????
 
The 7020 uses a 4620 engine, I always thought they were under powered. The 7520 has a 6030 engine and was a working horse. The 7520 I dealt with used to break a rear axle off every couple of years while plowing.
 
?????? Which Versatiles had loud dirty cabs because starting with the 700/800/900 they were quiet and clean. Best tractor we ever owned was a 950.
 
The 7020 and 7520 use the same rear transmission but the axle diameter is different I think.

The clutch housing on a 7020 is the same than one off a 4620; 7520 has 5020 clutch housing.

The 7020 get the 4630 engine at some point, which is very visible by the intercooler style and air intake location. At the same time, the 3 point hitch housing get changed from 4620 type (slanted cylinder) to 4630 type (flat cylinder, bigger piston).

I think that a 7020 with the 4630 engine is probably slightly more powerful and you can adjust the torque capsule as well to give it more torque.
 
One think that one guy told me about all the JD's 4WD, is that they were done "too much" based on the 2WD.
For exemple, he said that you cannot slide the engine forward without removing the front axle, because of the oil sump. JD could have designed a special sump that would have allow much easier servicing of the clutch, allowing the tractors to not be a money pit when they go in the shop.
 
Check with the fellows that actually used them axle and rear end issues on a regular basis. The ring and pinions had pages of service bulletins on them.

Talk to any one in a salvage yard and try finding any good rear end parts. You will have to get them out of the JD 4620 and JD 4630 two wheel drive tractors.

What I meant was that JD basically tied two rear wheel drive tractors together to make a 4wd one. The basic design was just a hopped up JD 4020. The 4620 and 4520 where the same thing just kept to 2wd.

The JD 4520, JD 4620, JD 7020 and JD 7520 Where not some of JDs best designed tractors by any means. They worked but nothing special.
 
(quoted from post at 08:33:07 08/20/16)
What I meant was that JD basically tied two rear wheel drive tractors together to make a 4wd one. The basic design was just a hopped up JD 4020. The 4620 and 4520 where the same thing just kept to 2wd.

The JD 4520, JD 4620, JD 7020 and JD 7520 Where not some of JDs best designed tractors by any means. They worked but nothing special.

Well, saying that the 4520-4620 where just a hoped up 4020 is not true. The hoped up is the 4320. The design of the tranny is very similar, but everything is much much bigger diameter, and longer. The 4630 has same tranny than the 4620, and it is not a lemon... Just a better clutch and the live pump. Trans housings are actually the same...

But I would agree that the 4620 transmission on a 4WD tractor with a 6030 motor is a bad thing. The 4WD version does not slip.
 
(quoted from post at 01:44:14 08/20/16) LOL! Vertisuckle had "loud dirty cabs" and the lack of a live PTO, as well!

Well Bob, the Versatiles you mock had something that the 7020 and the 7520 that Deere offered did not, mainly horsepower and lots of it. The 7020 and the 7520 were rated at 128 and 160 respectively at the draw bar, while Versatile offered the 700 at 160 draw bar, the 800 at 180, the 850 at 210 and the 900 at 220. Thus a lot of farmers in our area opted for the Versatile as they were comparable in price and could pull bigger equipment. "Green paint don't pull weight" was a common phrase at the time. But the 7020 and 7520 were quick attempts to get back into the 4WD market that had Deere abandoned after the 8020.
 
You can't compare a 531 or 619 to the 855 Cummins in the same hp range. Guys around here with Versatile 835s pulled almost the same size plows as the 8640s and there was a 40 hp different between the two. Versatile were cheaper to buy then JD and cheaper to operate and repair. We bought and farmed with a brand new JD 4640 and Versatile 950 back in the late 70s. 4640 had 155 pto hp. Versatile 950 had 348 engine hp. Yet the 4640 was only $15,000 cheaper. JD had a few advantages namely in the hydraulics and if you needed a PTO. But JD eventually learned their lesson and patterned the 60 series after Versatile using a modular design. The 7020/7520 did what JD wanted them to do and that as get them into the 4 wheel drive tractor market.
 
(quoted from post at 00:18:09 08/21/16)
(quoted from post at 08:33:07 08/20/16)
What I meant was that JD basically tied two rear wheel drive tractors together to make a 4wd one. The basic design was just a hopped up JD 4020. The 4620 and 4520 where the same thing just kept to 2wd.

The JD 4520, JD 4620, JD 7020 and JD 7520 Where not some of JDs best designed tractors by any means. They worked but nothing special.

Well, saying that the 4520-4620 where just a hoped up 4020 is not true. The hoped up is the 4320. The design of the tranny is very similar, but everything is much much bigger diameter, and longer. The 4630 has same tranny than the 4620, and it is not a lemon... Just a better clutch and the live pump. Trans housings are actually the same...

But I would agree that the 4620 transmission on a 4WD tractor with a 6030 motor is a bad thing. The 4WD version does not slip.

The design was the same just not the exact part numbers. There is very little difference design wise. They just beefed up the 1970 JD 4020 design.

As for the JD 4520, JD 4620 and JD 4630. Those tractors where low torque and 1000 PTO speed only machines. They where nothing special in the field. They soon where passed by much better tractors. A IH 1466 or 1566 will work the butt of the 46 series JD tractors. JD was trying to push the JD 404 engine too far.
 
I rather spend an extra hour in the field with a 30 series then
come home with my ears ringing and dirty in a 66 series.
Sometimes you have to look at the overall picture.
 
I may have to agree with you JD. The only two around here, one had the rearend go out after 3 years. The other one made it several years, but when I asked about it about 10 or so years ago (Always thought I wanted one to play with), the owner said the rear end is out of it. That's why it is parked. So, the only two that were local, back in the day, had rear end problems.
 
We owed a 1973 Jd 7520 and it was a great tractor for its time! I read people saying they had loud dirty cabs, compared to a 30 series yes but compared to a 4020 they were quiet, there hydraulics were not in the dash or fire wall and the cab was not sitting on top of the rear end, those things made a difference, we pulled a 31' JD 331 heavy frame disc with ours and my uncle ran a massy 4880 with a 903 cummins v8 with the same size disc and we ran circles around him in the field. We never had a rear ended issue or axle break. The only problem we ever had was we broke the hi-lo shifter fork in the front transmission box and that was my fault as I was not coming to a complete stop when shifting it. The big advantage the 7520 had was its weight to horse power ratio. Ours had 23.1x30s dualed up so it had a lot of flotation and traction so when we got it wet conditions I would pull my uncles massy 4880 out and turn around and disk his tracks shut. If that tractor would have had a live PTO I would still have it on the farm. We purchased it in 1977-8, and later in late 90s traded for a JD 8850, now that has its own story!
 
You are right on the very little difference in design. JD was smart, and kept the syncro range layout the same, down to the snap ring orders...

But the difference in size is significant. Here is a 5020 and a 4320 transmission shaft. The 4020 is about same size than 4320, and 3020 is much smaller.
The 4620 shaft is approx same diameter than 5020, but shorter.

TMP41366.jpg
 

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