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?
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?