Ford 6000 experiences

JK-NY

Well-known Member
I didnt want to hijack Bern's posting about his Ford 6000 being put to work after a full restoration but his post and pictures/video got me to thinking about my Ford 6000 experiences. Probably 25-30 years ago I did some work on a neighbors's Ford 6000 and he let me use it to do some moldboard plowing and disking that spring . I was impressed with the tractor and found it to be decent on fuel use and a good tractor to run , selecto-speed worked well under a heavy load and good power steering, manueverability and comfortable for a tractor of it's vintage. I have put plenty of hours on other makes of tractors of similar size and age as well as newer and somewhat larger (and somewhat smaller) tractors so I feel I can make a fair comparison. The other things I know about a Ford 6000 are basically what I heard from my ex's late uncle who bought one new and when the selectospeed failed it sat at the dealership for quite a while (2-3 months if I recall )waiting for parts to repair it under warranty which upset him to the point of trading it off about a year after it was fixed on a Massey- Ferguson. The general opinion was that the selectospeed wasnt designed for the power the 6000 made which caused excessive failures and reliability issues and that gave the selectospeed (and Ford tractors) kind of a bad reputation. I own a 3 cyl gas 4000 selectospeed which has been a very good tractor for the nearly 30 years I have owned it. Anyone else have anything to share about Ford 6000 tractors feel free to join in.
 
I had a 6000 for a few years. The visibility, 2 speed independent PTO and SOS made it a great tractor for bailing hay. I never had any problems with the transmission. Unfortunately it had an apatite for crankshafts.
 
I don't claim to be a 6000 history expert by any means, but from what I understand, the problems with the 6000 were numerous when they first came out in 1961. So numerous in fact that they recalled all of the early ones and either re-worked them completely or else traded the customer for the new and improved models after swapping the tires.

Re-worked tractors had nearly every area gone into and rebuilt, including the engine, transmission, rear axle, hydraulic system, and more. It truly had to be an embarrassment of major proportions for Ford, from which they never recovered, at least with that model. It certainly explains why you don't see many of them around anymore.

If you think my statement about never recovering is a little far-fetched, think about the competition Ford had when the 6000 first came out. Deere had their 3010-4010 out by then, but not in a powershift version. If the 6000 had been engineered better, it certainly could have given the New Generation Deeres a run for their money.

All that said, I think it's fair to say that the Commander versions (1965 & 1966) had most of the bugs worked out by the time they were produced. By then it was too late to save its reputation.
 
Would like to add a little to what Bern as said, since I was working at a Ford dealership when the 6000 came .Our 6000 came, a 5 bottom fully mounted plow included. The only red one we ever sold. The owner of the tractor, already had a 961 gas, and he always remarked that you had to work the he@# out off it to get 3 gallon per hour through it. We were into the transmission a couple of times. When the blue replacement tractors became available the customer kept the ordinal and took the new one also. never did hear what dollars were involved. We totally rebuilt the red one in our shop, which really wasn't large enough, since the dealership had been very active Ford dealer since the Model T days. My memory of 50 years ago isn't real good, but do remember the hassle with
Ford about the steering cylinder, that was junk, but no parts were available, or some such a thing, brakes were another problem, another hydrogen tanks was added, and a lot of other parts an work.,.Spent most of that winter on it. Always like the looks of the red ones with the teardrop muffler shield. To bad some one didn't keep up with that.
 
4 main bearings might be fine for a gasser, but not a diesel. That 6000 engine is nothing more than a warmed over 1950s era truck engine with a cast iron oil pan. When I put mine on the dyno, I don't leave it at full load for very long. Just long enough to say been there, done that.

The 6000 has a very unique PTO, it's actually a 4-speed. You have the 540-1000 gearbox in the back, and then you have the 2-speed inside the trans. Very handy for light PTO loads. I did some of my brush cutting in the economy mode which gave me 540 PTO at around 1700 engine RPM.
 
I never hear of that before but would not surprise me as he sold a lot's of cars and TRACTORS, and probably had a good repore with Ford
 
My Dad traded a 961 gas for one when they first came out, then in the late 60's my BIL had a 961 & a 6000, both diesel. I always thought they should have designed the seat farther ahead on the 6000, more like the 961 had, but they were a lot of power compared to the 961.
Mostly I remember hauling corn to the elevator in town, pulling into the dump area, & shutting the tractor off. The elevator help would start shouting, "Start it up! You've got to raise the wagon!" They were always surprised when I would reach over, pull the lever & watch their faces!
 
I would agree and my guess is if the first 6000's were as good and reliable as the Commander versions they would have been quite popular and kept Ford a lot more competitive in the Farm tractor market. The 6000 was their first attempt to get into the higher horsepower market and it is too bad it went sour for Ford.
 
My first car was a 58 Ford with the 223. We still have a 63 Ford pickup with the same engine. As you said, they were good gas engines, especially for cars. I don't know of gas reliability on the 6000 but I know the diesels had problems because the engine wasn't designed for diesel compression. Too bad Ford and GM didn't learn from each others mistakes. When GM converted the 350 to diesel in the 70's I think they had the same problem.
 
My 1st tractor I bought was a late 6000 Commander. It was setting dead on the edge of a field where a college class mate rented the house. Many a party at that house. Each time I went out behind barn to relive myself I would talk to that tractor in my drunken stupier. Three weeks after graduation I returned to Big Rapids and looked up the farm owner. I bought the 6000 with a 4/16 Jd mounted plow, and a Ford 4 row cultivator. It was the spring of 1983. Snow was still on the ground. Mom Helped me drop the pan using a rope type fence stretcher in Dads dirt floor barn. I rented a few acres of idle soil that spring and that was my start into farming. I traded that tractor 4 years later for a larger tractor. I was exploring a salvage yard with a neighbor in 1996 and found that 6000 with the sheet metal removed setting dead again. I bought it, drug it home and replaced the limiting clutch, and sheet metal and here we are. It is safe to say I have alot of hours in the seat of a 6000 Commander. I have done heavy tillage, cut, raked, round baled, Square baled, Chopped hay, a 2 row chopper in corn, 2 row ear picking corn. Brush hog, Flail chopper. Corn planter. Grain drill, skidded logs for fire wood, and the list goes on. The 6000 I have has been a very good tractor. Yes the pump was juiced up, and it does have a nicer seat than the factory. I did install hydrostatic steering, but over all it is one stronger puller. Comfortable to drive and very quiet. The brakes are very excellent, as good as my 4020 of the same age. The only job this tractor did poorly at was a wood splitter. The hydraulic accumulator is to small to cycle the ram completely before slowing down from being empty. A large round baler will have trouble opening the gate all the way all so. It will get the job done, but will slow down before a full cycle. For a tractor of its age the SOS trans was before its time. To say they were junk is to speak with out personal experience. We have all heard stories, but time has proven most wrong. No junk trans can hold up to the punishment I gave this tractor with a turned up engine and still be running. Yes the input shaft failed a time or three, but no more than a standard trans tractor with the same hours needed a clutch job. I feel by the time they were badged a Commander Ford had most of the bugs worked out. There still is a few quirks in a Commander, but I have run almost every brand of tractor out there and EVERY one of them has something that could have been better. If you get your butt up on one and do a few chores you will see they have a nice big tractor feel to them. SOS trannies have a way they like to be shifted and used. It takes a little time to learn how to use them smoothly. No different than learning to shift a 806 while moving, or shifting a 4010 trans. If you are at max RPMS and shift a SOS it will be jerky. Shifting up, or down while reved up will not go smooth. Neither will a 4450 with a 15spd John Deere. I like the SOS enough to have 3 on our farm. Yes they all pull hay duties now days, but still work for their keep. I like my old Commander, and have put enough hours, and years on it to say that with experience. Al
 

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