Ultradog MN

Well-known Member
Location
Twin Cities
Ford Ns are great small tractors that are
capable of doing a lot of useful work for you.
Because of their world changing 3 point they
are certainly more useful than many old
fashioned "drawbar" tractors.
But they were merely the first tractors Ford
built (not including the Fordsons)
and by no means the best ones.
So hang onto your shorts fellas cause I'm gonna
bash them a little.
Here are a few things that are goofy about
them:
That front mount distributer on all but the
late ones was a rather? poor idea - cockamamie
even and compared to most other tractors, hard
to get to to put points in.
The early ones didn't even have a real drawbar
which I think was an odd oversight. Not till
the 8Ns did they get a real drawbar.
The early ones just had foot pegs to rest your
feet on. Fine for an old Harley but not so
great on a tractor that you might want to shift
your feet a bit after several hours in the
seat.
They all had flat head engines - beyond the
time most other brands had gone to OHV.
Flatties aren't so bad except for their low
compression ratios. Nor is it easy to do a
simple valve job on one unless you happen to
have the equipment at home.
No Ns had live pto or even live hydraulics.
Yeah, you get used to that I know.
The 8Ns had the most ridiculously FAST reverse
speed - almost as fast as 3rd gear and probably
the worst reverse ever installed in a tractor.
The 8Ns had that poorly designed two piece rear
axle which was prone to wear, seals leaking and
thus no brakes on the things.
The early 8Ns had a? poor steering box for
which no replacement parts are available today.
Later ones were much improved and they used
that same design till into the 1980s.
Ns had no capability for remote hydraulics, and
none of them had a temp gauge which was odd.

For comparison, just 3 years after the end of
the Ns Ford introduced the Hundred Series.
They had good steering boxes, modest reverse
speeds, live hydraulics, optional 5 speed
transmissions, optional live pto, optional
power steering, higher flow hyd punps with
remote hyd capability, more power from an ohv
engine, much better engine oil filtration,
better axles that were far less prone to seal
leakage, better brakes, axles capable of
supporting more ballast for traction and
stability, a better rear rim/center combination
for easier tire width settings, easy to get to
distributers and a host of other refinements.
All of the N's "issues" were resolved in them
plus they will pull more, lift more, do more
and are easier on the operator. They also have
longer lived engines and are not much bigger
than an N.
No they are not iconic like the Ns.
But they are superior tractors in every way.
Now here's the kicker:
A 600 can be had for just a few hundred $ more
than an N. Often they can be had for less,
especially a prettyfied 8N.
So here's some questions for the board:
Is it bashing the Ns to recognize their
limitations? Is it bad to mention their flaws
and lack of features? Wrong to compare them to
other models?
Wrong to recommend a Hundred Series over an N
to a prospective new buyer? Is it wrong to
caution a new owner about overspending on one
he just bought - knowing he'll never get his $
back?
Should a guy never mention an N's inadequacies
because someone who just put $5K into theirs
might feel bad?
Does mentioning a later tractor ruin the
happiness of a guy who's restoring his grand
dad's tractor?
Lastly, are we here all like the 3 monkeys who
see/hear/speak no evil about these tractors? Or
is this an open forum where all aspects of
these tractors can be discussed?
 
IMO sometimes you proselytize when the poster asks a fairly simple question regarding 2 9 or 8 N. Just answer the question. If poster asks which tractor to buy have at it. I really think you are better than you were years back. You did ask.
 
I have a 3000D and an 8N. They both have their place. My first tractor was a 1951 8n. I used it for several years before 'upgrading' to the 3000. Almost immediately I regretted getting rid of that first 8N. Sure that 3000 is nice when I'm plowing or disking, aside from that, I'd rather use the 8N, hence the reason I just got another.

From a cost perspective, it seems like everything for a non-N tractor is 2-3x more money and 2-3x more aggrevation to work on.

You won't hear me bashing any N's, or any other tractors for that matter. They all have their places.
 
I will agree with you on the short comings of the N's except that when they were new they were in high demand because of the 3 point hitch. Many small acreages at that time period. Production figures are outstanding for that era. It isn't really fair to compare to more modern tractors.
You know that the front mount distributor is only held on with 2 bolts, remove them and take it to your work bench and if you are careful no timing you adjust.
I just got done removing mine (48 8N) outside in 10 degree weather Tuesday. I found the insulator on the bracket the coil wiggly wire contact had an intermittent short to ground(lasted 70 years). Fixed it with a plastic grommet and took about 10 minutes today (7 degrees) to install. Started like it was 70 (plugged in). Blew snow for 2 hours and ran great.
 
I've had my 8N for around twelve years now. It came with a good Davis loader on it and a Gannon rollover box blade as well as a Woods M5 Rotary mower. I've used that tractor to maintain my roads and property all these years.

A little less than two years ago I spotted a new tractor sitting in a guys yard right up the road from me. He had about 5 or six tractors sitting there. I thought is was an 8N from what I could see of it. I got in to talk to the guy and found it was a Massey Ferguson 202 Workbull. It had a Davis loader on it with a bucket and a forklift front end. He said the Hydraulics didn't work on it. I made a deal with him and got it for $2000. I fixed the hydraulics by just removing the inspection plate and breaking some linkage loose. Anyway the thing runs great now.

But will I get rid of the 8N? Not on your life. That's my baby. It's relegated to being my mowing tractor now and the mower never comes off of it. The MF202 is the workhorse and does all the other work required. Of course it's the better tractor. But I won't get rid of my baby. Heck no !

Of course there are better tractors than the "N" but they are still good little tractors. Treat them right and they'll work for you.
 
Consider when it was designed, who designed it, and what other products were made in VERY high volume by the same company.

Some of your criticisms are very easy to understand once you do.

Dean
 
(quoted from post at 19:35:03 02/21/18) IMO sometimes you proselytize when the poster asks a fairly simple question regarding 2 9 or 8 N. Just answer the question. If poster asks which tractor to buy have at it. I really think you are better than you were years back. You did ask.

A experienced user review like this is just as valuable for the person with an N needing repairs that is wondering just how deep into it he should go and how much he should spend based on what his expectations are as to the end result.

If personal reasons, like it being grandpa's tractor, or a learning experience treat for the grandson, or parade classic notions predominate, then the N shortcomings are pretty much inconsequential.

I'm glad I didn't bring an N home to learn all of this after the fact so it is good that this info is out there. As it stands my only disappointments with the NAA are the rear axles and having to be Harry Houdini to do a valve adjust without removing the hood and tank.

t
 
I don't think you should worry about activating our triggers and causing us to seek a safe space from your microaggressions. Personally I prefer a straight answer, maybe colored with some humor every now and then.

It's a niche. I got mine from my brother-in-law when he needed money. I fixed it up a little and used it for five years. I recently purchased a 3600 and after I get it sorted will probably pass the 8n down to my son. He's building a house on 20 acres and getting some animals so he can use it and learn till he finds out what he wants or needs then move on. By then the machine will be 70 years old, not a bad service life. How many 40's-50's vehicles are still in service other than car shows or hot rods?
 
While not statistically sound, a quick review of post titles shows 4 or 5 WON'T START posts for the Ns..... a review of the Ford Forum showed me NO titles saying It Won't Start... and there are probably a ton more non-Ns than Ns... just sayin'.
 
In reply on a 8N Post amazing
Ultradog MN wrote:
(quoted from post at 06:01:09 07/11/07) Save the old parts.
These old tractors will outlast us all and some day people will be restoring not only the tractors but also the little things on them like the points, brakes, spark plugs etc.
An original set of points will have a dozen bidders on Ebay in 2035.
 
UD, I agree with everything you said about the inadequacies of N model tractors. I have two 8N's - one is a front mount and the other a side mount distributor. I thought they were the living end until I got the 4000 (early model). The N's don't get used much anymore but I could not appreciate the 4000 had I never owned an N.

To your question - This is an open forum and we all have freedom of speech. If anyone doesn't agree with you, they should consider it for merit and move on.

As this is an N forum, some may consider it impolite to bash them here - No one likes to hear they have an ugly dog. So if I had any advice, it would be to limit it to the Ford forum.
 
We shouldn't consider it "bashing" to state facts. It's like comparing my first car, a 404 Peugeot, to my wife's new Honda. The Peugeot was an excellent and reliable car and took me all over the eastern US, but it is nowhere near the Honda. You help people make more informed decisions when they know more. I love the 8N's, and I'm even more peculiar because I'm partial to the front mounts because I can take the distributor off and work on it on the kitchen table and get things precise and cleaned up well. There are not many farmers left for whom the N's were their first tractor after driving a mule or a team; I suspect if you could ask them about it, they would be filled with praises.
 
(quoted from post at 09:02:11 02/22/18) Consider when it was designed, who designed it, and what other products were made in VERY high volume by the same company.

Some of your criticisms are very easy to understand once you do.

Dean

BINGO! BTW a front mount is a P.O.S no excuse for it are just how EZ they are to work on... Chebby did it on there first LS V8's that idea did not last long... The item that requires the most maintenance and you can not work on it in its environment...

Then all the excuses and haft arse repairs N owners dream up... Its a wonder any of them are still in captivity...

For the most part they are fun to work and talk about working around there short comings... I like to make it better and more dependable than new some don't....
 
I work at a Chevy dealer. We have hundreds of new cars. HUNDREDS! They're great. I also drive the oldest cars on the lot. Period. One guy has a '64 Impala that comes out once or twice a year but when it does come out I've already had my '50 Ford out for the whole f'n summer. I choose to drive old cars. I don't much care for new stuff. I like to fix. I know how to fix.
I also chose a Ford 9n because old Fords are what I know. It's just a car without all that sheetmetal in the way. It'll stay with me until it won't go anymore. And I won't let that happen.
 
It's not about how I feel Steve.
It's about what I think.
"Ask a woman how she feels about this or that. Ask a man what he thinks."
I do think there is no one here who can control the dialogue on these boards. They can't control the questions or the comments.
I've tried it myself in the past (about sports threads) but found it didn't work so had to let it go.
By the way, as I reread my post this morning and the replys from others I realized I'd forgotten something.
I wonder who decided to put the clutch and brake together on the 9/2Ns.
It wasn't one of Ford's "better ideas".
Meanwhile, thanks to all who replied.
 
(quoted from post at 06:53:36 02/22/18) UD, I agree with everything you said about the inadequacies of N model tractors. I have two 8N's - one is a front mount and the other a side mount distributor. I thought they were the living end until I got the 4000 (early model). The N's don't get used much anymore but I could not appreciate the 4000 had I never owned an N.

To your question - This is an open forum and we all have freedom of speech. If anyone doesn't agree with you, they should consider it for merit and move on.

As this is an N forum, some may consider it impolite to bash them here - No one likes to hear they have an ugly dog. So if I had any advice, it would be to limit it to the Ford forum.
e wouldn't be needling anyone over thereon the Ford forum! Where is the fun in that?
Actually what we see is a common affliction that goes something like this, "I drive a Ford (put his preference here) because I'm smart, intelligent & well informed and if you drive a Chevy, Dodge, Toyauto (put other's preference here), then you are stupid, ignorant & uninformed. I always make the correct decision & the whole world should follow me". I feel certain that you have all seen it many times before.
 
I could pretty easily counter you jmor
but you're a guy who when he's losing
the argument starts attacking the other
guy's wife.
So I will spare her from being
sullied... Again.
 
I come to this forum daily to learn about 8n tractors, I could not care less about anything newer that ford made. I don't care if some are better than the 8ns. If I did I would go to the Ford forum.

If I wanted a new tractor I would go out and get one, I don't have two 8ns because they are cheap, I have them because I enjoy them and they do what I need them to do, no more no less.

If I was god and made the forum rules, I would make it a requirement to post on here that one must own a N.
 
(quoted from post at 11:41:22 02/22/18) I could pretty easily counter you jmor
but you're a guy who when he's losing
the argument starts attacking the other
guy's wife.
So I will spare her from being
sullied... Again.
There was no"attacking" peroid. A mere mention, nothing derogatory.
Quote, "Well, Jerry you may be an alright fellow after all! Seriously, congratulations and many happy years together! Wishing both of you much happiness," Dec 13, 2013, 7:54pm
 
(quoted from post at 08:53:38 02/22/18) Your comments annoy me less than your skinny column of text. :D

Kevin in MN

:lol: kevin, i was thinking the same thing. dang phones :p

but on the bright side, it reminds me of this entery from Uncle Shelby's ABZ book :)

202398785122bdba29583147d5e4b972.jpg
 
(quoted from post at 12:52:41 02/22/18) You and I both know the truth of this
jmor.
will stick with the recorded facts:
http://forums.yesterdaystractors.com/viewtopic.php?t=1087641&start=60
JMOR
Tractor Guru


Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 21396


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 7:54 pm Post subject: Re: In the fullness of time Reply to specific post Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post
Well, Jerry, you may be an alright fellow after all!
Seriously, congratulations and many happy years together! Wishing both of you much happiness.

Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
 

Jerry, your post reminds me of a story my granddad used to tell about a red headed scotsman that he worked with on a big job. Every morning, Scotty would ask if anyone on the crew wanted to go a few rounds. Nothing personal, he was just feisty and wanted to blow off some steam.

The realities you describe is a product of living in a capitalist society (think 55 Chevy's in Cuba). Capitalist innovate so folks buy new, better stuff and that makes the old stuff inferior. Thank heaven. I've got the only old tractor that I will ever have. No interest in upgrading (although I do wish Dad would have had an 8N vs. my 2N). A couple times a week, when I go out to feed the horses dinner, I sneak by the shop, turn on the gas, pull the choke and she fires up after turning over about 1/2 a turn. Her only job will be to pull a finish mower. She's got a home as long as I have one.

Your post is a great reference for those folks looking to buy an old tractor and smart enough to come on here for input, unfortunately I'm afraid it's going to get lost in the noise. Wish we change to title to Early Ford tractor evolution or something.
 
All things evolve over time and usually for the better.
That front mount distributor isn't such an odd duck though.
Look at the flat head V8s.

In their day, the Ns were quite innovative and raised the bar.
Ford continued to raise that bar in later models.
Nothing wrong with that and discussing the differences is
informative and can be learning a experience in context.

I wouldn't go as far as to say everything is better on the newer
tractors though. I'd rather change points in a front mount than
on my 3000s and the ordeal to change a carburetor has made me
decide not to rebuild the carbs on the later x000 series for other
people. I'm still doing the N, x00/x01 and early x000 4 cylinders
as well as other brands. Just not the 3 cylinder Fords.

You also mentioned the 8N's high reverse gear, which I always
thought was fast until I used the high reverse on my 3000s
with the 8 speeds. That gear is about double the 8Ns speed.
They do have two reverse speeds, but one is usually too slow
and the other way too fast. My 8N has three with the Sherman
combo, so I actually have more choices with it than the 3000s.
Assuming I'm not worried about changing PTO speed too.

Just like the 6V/12V discussions, this topic could be discussed
ad nauseam. There are good and bad points on both sides.
Luckily, this is a discussion forum and civil people can have
civil discussions without being banned from the site. :)
 
Good points Royse.
They all have their flaws.
Here are some more flaws on the three
cylinders. As you say they ARE a pia to
put points in. The Holley carbs were
cantankerous and lousy and can wear out
so they can not be rebuilt.
The tachs on them were notorious for
their failure rate. My first one had
stopped working at 2100 hrs and I've
never seen one last beyond about 4500
hrs before the proofmeter quit, the
tach quit and/or the needle broke off.
They went to 12 V in 65 but still used
that same old generator/Vreg combo.
Dumb. The neutral safety switch likes
to go kaput.
With twin sticks you do more shifting.
In their defence:
The diesels will run 10K hours without
an overhaul. No points OR carbs on
them. They could be had with 5
different transmissions.
The 8 speeds are tiller capable in
forward and in R/low you can literally
inch back to an implement or run a
snowblower. In R/high you can really go
fast. At least you have a choice.
Most have differential lock.
All have live hydraulics and are remote
capable. You can get live pto and PS.
All have 4 main bearings on a 3 cyl
instead of 3 mains on a 4 cyl =
longevity.
They are easier to work on than the
Hundreds - especially if you have to
pull the tin.
They are a heavier, more stable
platform than their predecessors and
have much more longevity. You could get
them optioned for any kind of ag or
industrial use.
A 50 year old tractor doesn't cost much
more than a 70 year old tractor. I know
you bought yours cheap - cheaper than
many guys paid for their Ns.
We all know old tractor values have
dropped a lot in the last 10-15 years
but the Hundreds and Thousands haven't
dropped as precipitously as the Ns.
There are probably 8 or more ads for Ns
on Mpls Craigslist on any given day.
The days of sentimentality are waning.
Folks that want an N because grampa had
one have it already or are passing on.
You might see a couple ads for Hundreds
or Thousands.
People who have them work them. And
they hang onto them.
There is a reason they do.
 

You are DEAD WRONG about those Holley carbs... I have never seen one that could not be fixed its the fixer tractor owner that is the issue... This is not my opinion its a fact its not like a front mount dist that I dread working on, those Holley's are as simple as it gets its the lack are willing to understand them its just to EZ to shell out a couple hundred to replace them. Of course I am bias they are more of what I am accustom to working on because they are a more advanced carb over any other and fit right at home with the other advancement on those tractors...

Those advancements are just more user friendly options :)
 
Hobo,

Here here for the Holley!

I have a single bbl on my '54. 3 ton IH. I've had that truck and carb for 40 years and just put another kit in it 4 years ago. Have a spare Holley carb in my parts but have never needed it.

Simple, easy to work on, float still not leaking and once I understood it and stopped copying what previous owners did with the check balls etc., it has been as dependable as the day is long.
 

Ultra, you are exactly right about all the shortcomings of the N models. You sort of just work around them. I have two, a 41 9N and a 48 8N. I used the 9N when I built a log house to mow, blade snow and haul dirt and gravel with rear scoop. Never thought I needed a front loader. When we moved out to a bigger place I got the 8N so as to not have to change implements as often and have a back up. Not great tractors but easy enough to work on and then fairly reliable, and just darn useful for little investment.

I now use one or the other to haul a manure spreader, no need for something fancy, just will it start and run and move, and will the PTO work. For other things I got a little Mahindra with a loader. Wish I'd got a loader tractor much earlier. The hydrostatic drive, power steering, live PTO and hydraulics are pretty nice, I have to admit. The 9N is doing spreader duty while I work on the 8N. No reason to have anything more sitting there outside waiting to move the spreader every third day.

To the point, I think bashing is not useful when someone has a question about fixing a problem. If someone comes here looking to get an N over something else, then the good and bad points can and should be related.
 
Agreed, Hobo.

Most of the problems that folks have with the Holley carb result from trying to use the incorrect (cheap) carburetor kit.

Design changes were made during the production run requiring the use of different gaskets on carburetors that look to be identical. Using the incorrect gasket(s) will result in seemingly insurmountable problems. Moreover, one cannot simply match up the gaskets in the cheap kit with the gaskets in the carburetor because it is quite common to find incorrect caskets in the Holley carburetor that were installed 25+ years ago when the carburetor was last overhauled. This is why I bite the bullet and spend the big bucks for a genuine CNH carburetor kit (tractor and carburetor SN verified) anytime I work on a Holley carburetor. Never had any gasket related problems when doing so but such problems were once common when using aftermarket kits

The Holley tractor carburetor is more sophisticated (and, thus, more economical) than other tractor carburetors of the era. No, it's not a Rochester QJ or 4V, but it's far from a MS.

One of the prices to be paid for the vacuum operated accelerator pump, which resulted in good, stumble-free acceleration (without overly rich fuel mixture) of the low RPM three cylinder engines upon which the Holley was used, is it's sensitivity to float level adjustment. Indeed, the Holley carburetor float level is specified to 1/32", whereas, the MS carburetors would operate well when the float level was 1/8" off, albeit with poor economy. The float level needs to be close to specified adjustment for proper operation.

Herein, lies the rub. The Holley carburetor is die cast aluminum. The steel float pivot pin is supported in holes in the aluminum float bowl. Heavy vibrations of the low RPM three cylinder engine cause the steel pin to wear the bores in the aluminum float bowl egg-shaped, precluding accurate float level adjustment.

I've repaired such egg-shaped holes with epoxy. It takes time, and is less than perfect but results have been good.

Dean
 
"those Holley's are as simple as it gets"

I've not had any trouble getting them to run on the x000's yet.
Although that stupidly designed accelerator pump can be a bear.
The one pictured here had the accelerator pump stuck pretty
good. Took several days to get it loose, but it runs fine now.
It's a spare on the shelf. I'll have to get an after picture.

That setup is far different than the Holley's I have worked on for
cars and trucks. If I were still working on race cars (and race
cars still had carbs) I'd pick a different brand. Any brand.
Just not a Holley. A Thermo-Quad would get the nod first.

But that's not my complaint on these tractors. It's the mounting.
The lines that wrap around the governor linkage, hook to the
fuel pump and hide the sediment bowl behind the carb and air
breather tube, which is, in itself, a PITA to get off and back on.
Rube Goldberg for sure on that set up.

11383.jpg


11382.jpg
 
Royse,

I see now as I suspected,
Holley's on tractors are a different kettle of fish.
Since my Cornbinder came with a Holley
I suspect that all the Farmalls did too.

Harry and Henry chose well with the Marvel
As updraft carbs go.
Mine's running marvelously since the YT kit. 8)

Gambled on the cheap kit and won!
My shafts were tight

Had a Marvel on my old Oliver crawler too.
 
"They are easier to work on than the Hundreds"

I don't know if this has been your experience, but when I was
growing up the guys working on cars/trucks would cuss the other
brands for how hard they were to work on.

For example, those danged Chevy starters that took shims.
Why couldn't they just bolt on like the Dodge starters?
Which, by the way, included a built in battery tester. ;)

Changing the rear end gear on a Chevy as opposed to a Dodge.
The dwell adjustment window on a GM distributor cap compared
to setting point gap and dwell on a Chrysler, etc.

What it boiled down to for me was that what I was most familiar
with was the easiest. Anything different was a learning curve
which made it more difficult.

Still, no way I'm fighting those fuel lines to swap and test
carbs on the x000's. Easy swap on other engines. Not these.
Its not rebuilding the carbs that's a problem for me, its testing
them. I don't do many JD two cylinders either. Another PITA.

The linkages on a Farmall M are quite interesting too.
I might drag another one of those home if I can make room.
 
"I see now as I suspected,
Holley's on tractors are a different kettle of fish.
Since my Cornbinder came with a Holley
I suspect that all the Farmalls did too."

Its pretty amazing how many ways they made to do the same job.
Side draft, up draft, down draft and multiple versions of them all.

Some Farmalls came with Zenith/Bendix, some with Marvel Scheblers.

Farmall actually had there own manufactured carbs for a while.
I can't tell you how long, how many, or who actually made them.
but different for sure.
Note the mounting flange perpendicular to the air intake and the
governor linkage being a direct drive into the front of the carb.
No "normal" linkage rod. This was a Farmall M I fixed for a friend.

11387.jpg


11388.jpg


11389.jpg


11391.jpg
 
Great photos!

It seems like Holley decided to leave the tractor carb market to the other good ones like Marvel, Bendix . . .
and concentrate their carb innovations on cars and trucks.

If they are a PIA to service on a tractor
then their hearts weren't into the marketing of them.

Didn't the 4-Barrel Holley hold a deservedly high ranking in the Transam days ?
:D
 
"Didn't the 4-Barrel Holley hold a deservedly high ranking in the Transam days?"

Not in my book. More marketing hype than performance.
To me, they were more like a Volkswagen valve train.
Works fantastic!
As long as you adjust it every other time you want to use it.
Ok, yes, that's an exaggeration, but adjustments were far more
frequent than other brands per hour of run time in my experience.

I've got a Holley on my 300 6 cylinder in a Ford F350. Works fine.
Haven't touched that carb in years. But I haven't run the truck
more than 10 hours in that time and always conservatively.

Bouncing them around an 1/8 mile dirt oval didn't work out so well.
 
Royse,
It seems you, Dean and Hobo think the
Holleys are great so I'll remove those
from the negative column on the 3
cylinder tractors and add it to the
plus side :)
I messed around with a couple of them
with kits from YT and couldn't make
them run right so I gave up on them and
put a Zenith on the tractor and that
made it Run. I just looked on Messicks
for a oem Holley kit and they are over
a C note.
I have one 3 cyl gasser. The fuel pump
had been disconnected and it was just
running gravity flow. All those fuel
lines that you dont like had been cut
off.
That gave it enough fuel for the PO to
feed a round bale now and then but not
enough to work hard. I put a small
electric fuel pump on it: tank - pump -
inline filter - carb. Holley was balky
so I just put a Zenith on it.
Not sure if I'll leave that elect pump
in it forever but it runs nice now.
 
I don't remember the size Allen, but that sounds about right.
It came with the carb kit for the Farmall carbs.
 
(quoted from post at 09:12:55 02/24/18)
Lawson, where did you find that style petcock brass fitting on the bottom of the carb? Assume 1/8th npt threads?

i'm with lawson, that thread sounds right to me too. i picked up a petcock for the MS on my 2N, at the advice of someone here. got mine at o'reilly's.
 
I have 2 8N's that I' let go of in a heart beat for something with about 10 more PTO HP and about another 500 pounds of weight. IPTO would be nice too.

IH/Farmall released the H in 1939 too. It came with an OHV engine. Lot of things I can say are wrong with an N and unless a collector only was looking for one I would not recommend an N to anyone. As UD says there are a lot of other tractors out there that are much more capable

OK the N was a great tractor in it's day but I will say only because of the 3 point hitch. If you have bad knees plus back issues and large hands the front mount dizzy is a nightmare and why both of mine were converted to EI.

Now that ain't saying they are worthless. The Farmall H today is about worthless for work just because there is no longer a good supply of implements for them.

If someone were to ask me what they should buy if they were looking at a utility sized tractor one of the last i'd mention would be the N.

Rick
 
"Holleys are great so I'll remove those
from the negative column on the 3
cylinder tractors and add it to the
plus side"

I'm not sure I'd go that far! LOL
Not a Holley fan. Tractor or automotive.
Vacuum driven brass accelerator pump with no seals in
an aluminum hole? Really? It works as long as the hole
is in good condition, but sure seems Rube Goldberg-ish.

11424.jpg


That 4000 engine that I put in the other 3000 was being ran
gravity fed, so I put it in the 3000 that way. The engine won't
run at full throttle for long without full fuel pressure.

The fuel pump is still on the engine, but all the lines were cut.
Not sure why. Maybe the pump is no good or maybe the PO
didn't like messing with them either.
I've got the lines and pump off the engine I took out if needed.

My uncle wants this tractor and not running at high RPM may
not bother him at all for his uses, so we'll see how it goes.
He didn't like the lines and pump, so we left it for now.
About the only thing left to do is change that ridiculous seat.

1974, 8 speed, live PTO, PS, single remote hydraulics, 14.9 x 24 rears.

11425.jpg
 

Those pumps stick @ about 40 years.... Other than that they are as EZ as any carb to repair I have ever been into... You just have to understand how the pump works and YES I will say that little simple circuit throws folks a curve ball... It no different than a MS anyone who takes the time to understand it can be a carb guru...

The best thing about a Holley no paint required to add value to the service... :shock:
 
"You just have to understand how the pump works"

They weren't all that hard to figure out, just a dumb design IMHO.
The fuel economy on these tractors with the Holley's also leaves
something to be desired. I don't have a Zenith for one to compare
the fuel economy between those two.
When I have some spare time I'll see if I have a MS that will fit.
What color should I paint it? JD green may increase the value! LOL
 
The fuel economy on the 3 cyls was a topic on
another board a couple of weeks ago.
Here's a C/P of the post I made about them
then:

"fortunately for us we have the great Nebraska
Tests which allows us to compare apples to
apples.
I think the number you are looking for is what
they call horsepower hours per gallon.
They have a couple of different numbers for
each tractor based on pto speed and wide open.
Hp-hrs/gal on a 1950 8N was about 11.2
On a 3000 it does make a difference which
transmission they tested. The straight up 4 sp
was more efficient than any of them. The SOS
was least efficient.
For the 8 speed the hp-hrs/gal was about 11.6
So not a huge difference between the two
tractors.
You mention you have a Zenith carb so keep this
in mind.
The original Holley was a fairly efficient
carb.
But... After 40 or 50 years the bore for the
vacuum activated piston which operated an
economizer valve (think accelerator pump) is
probably worn out. So the Holleys are balky,
cold blooded, finicky things.
You could find an original Holley, try your
hand at rebuilding it and you'd probably get an
improvement in hp-hrs/gal.
The Zenith is less efficient.
But... If you want your tractor to RUN, stick
to the Zenith carb.
Just for kicks I looked up the hp-hrs/gal on a
3000 diesel 8 sp.
It was 16+
You can see why the ag world went to diesels."
 

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