Welcome! Please use the navigational links on your left to explore our website.

Company Logo Shop Now
   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver
 
Marketplace
Classified Ads
Photo Ads
Tractor Parts

Community
Discussion Forums
Project Journals
Tractor Town
Your Stories
Show & Pull Guide
Events Calendar
Hauling Schedule

Galleries
Tractor Photos
Implement Photos
Vintage Photos
Help Identify
Parts & Pieces
Stuck & Troubled
Vintage Ads
Community Album
Photo Ad Archives

Research & Info
Articles
Tractor Registry
Tip of the Day
Safety Cartoons
Tractor Values
Serial Numbers
Tune-Up Guide
Paint Codes
List Prices
Production Nbrs
Tune-Up Specs
Torque Values
3-Point Specs
Glossary

Miscellaneous
Tractor Games
Just For Kids
Virtual Show
Museum Guide
Memorial Page
Feedback Form

Yesterday's Tractors Facebook Page

Related Sites
Tractor Shed
TractorLinks.com
Ford 8N/9N Club
Today's Tractors
Garden Tractors
Kountry Life
  
John Deere Tractors Discussion Forum
:

Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions?

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author  [Modern View]
K Effective

08-13-2019 09:43:31




Report to Moderator

Thanks for reading. I have a late-1980's 336 square baler, so far we have run 2100 bales through it this year, it has not missed a single knot. Broke one shear pin in the VERY heavy first cutting windrows. Suffice it to say, I'm very happy with it. It is wearing out, but repairable as needed.

I have been offered an early 1990's 328 baler. Quick story, these are fellow grape growers. At one time, our co-op was suggesting using straw to mulch the grape rows vice weed spraying. These folks bought this baler, used as a demonstrator by the dealership, to bale straw for their grapes. They have never used it. It has sat in their pole barn for nearly 30 years unused.

It looks like just what they claim it to be. Not perfectly unused, but nearly so. Dirty like you would expect, but unworn.

The pick-up is about 6 inches wider than my 336. That may be the only thing I could ever complain about my baler, the small-ish pickup in large first cutting conditions or following a newer, large grain table combine balling straw.

They are not giving this baler away, asking $11,500. That seems reasonable, given the factors. However, I'm unsure if this would actually be an upgrade for me. I could use the depreciation this year.

Any advice is welcome. Including, "save your money for a round baler, you have no help already..."

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
K Effective

08-15-2019 18:43:26




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
I wasn't too concerned about the twine billhooks, I just noticed the old sisal in the baler when I looked in the twine box, and remembered there was a sisal-only hook discussed in my manual. It makes sense to use the multi-twine ones, and that's what I was hoping to get.

I didn't get back to the old folks today, had a couple of time-sensitive projects going. I'll call them tomorrow, I think I'm going to go ahead and buy it. I can keep my 336 through second/third/fourth cutting while I test the 328, and sell the old one off next spring if I'm happy with the new one.

I figure I'll offer $10K, they are asking $11,900. We'll see what happens. I may ask for a their bottom line, too. It's been posted for a while, and they missed the best time to sell- before first cutting. But, if they've been willing to sit on it for 27 years, what's another 6 months or so?

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
SVcummins

08-15-2019 09:15:36




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
I drug a international 440 all twine out of my aunts shed an open sided shed it had been sitting for at least 25 years still had plastic twine in it drug it home and greased it and put er to work . Also drug a 7700 combine off my uncles dry farm put fuel it and went to work . I would not worry a bit about it having sat.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
David G

08-16-2019 13:26:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to SVcummins, 08-15-2019 09:15:36  
Clouds are starting to look a little fallish SV.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
K Effective

08-14-2019 14:59:36




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Quoting Removed, click Modern View to see

Do you know if they still have different knotter set-ups for sisal vs. plastic? My operators manual for the 336 describes three types of knotters- sisal, plastic or combination. I never knew for sure which one I had, but they have worked well with both kinds of twine (country AND western?). I think it was a different type of duckbill, but I have kind of gravitated to the plastic the last few years. This new baler has two rolls of sisal in it- probably really old.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Roger in Iowa

08-14-2019 19:49:55




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-14-2019 14:59:36  
The 336 originally had "sisal twine" billhooks, they weren't called sisal twine originally. That is all they had. When plastic twine came out, the multi twine billhook was developed, and it works with sisal or plastic. Somewhere along the line balers then had multi-twine as standard equipment. 8 series balers have multi-twine billhooks. There was nothing else different about the knotters regarding sisal or plastic. You may be able to buy sisal twine billhooks, haven't looked in PC. Don't know why you would need them.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Roger in Iowa

08-14-2019 10:58:28




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
The knotters on the 328 or all 8 series are much easier to adjust and they have the razor blade twine knife.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
K Effective

08-14-2019 05:28:15




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Thanks for the info, JDSeller, I had looked on Machinefinder.com for pricing on a 338, but hadn't checked 328s yet. IF I was to be buying, I would probably go for the six bar pickup reel (338/348) only because I sometimes struggle with a fine, grassy second cutting not lifting into the baler, but rolling up and pouring off both sides.

I had one of those "Grandpa's Garage Cars" as well, ten years old with 20K miles. Battery, belt, calipers, lots of sitting-related problems. Once I got everything fixed, my son totaled it out in an April snowstorm...

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
SVcummins

08-13-2019 22:07:06




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
JD Seller

08-13-2019 19:21:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
There would be very little difference between the balers other than the pickup. The JD 328 Should have a wider pickup on it. The price is not terribly out of line IF it has as little wear as you say but it is getting close to twenty years old.

The trouble is there are new balers out there at bargain prices. Koenig at Greenville Ohio has a new 2016 baler for $18,900. I bet that $17500 would buy it. You would get warranty on that baler. There is a new one down in Texas for $14,999. Age does matter too.

One of the worse purchases I ever made was a car that only had 10,000 miles on it but had very little use for ten years. Every single seal on that car leaked because it had set so long. In the first year: alternator, water pump, rear end seals, transmission rear seal, and crankshaft seal all had to be replaced. So I wonder what kind of startup issues you would have with the neighbor's baler after it has set for so long.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
K Effective

08-13-2019 11:27:44




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Jim- yes, I was just counting the exposed tines. I did not look closely enough inside the cylinder to see that they are, indeed twin tines. Nineteen strippers makes sense, nineteen spaces between twenty tines (or, ten pairs of tines).

My baler came from my buddy's farm, when they had cattle they made 20K+ squares per year with it before moving to a bunker silo and haylage. It has been exquisitely faithful to me, with few repairs. A couple broken springs, flywheel bushing, tires and shear bolts is about all I've had to do to it.

I could only hope this newer baler is as reliable.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Hay maker2

08-13-2019 11:07:20




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
I ended up replacing my 336 baler 5 years ago. I could not begin to tell you how many bales that went though her. I could not make it tie a knot on heavy first cutting. It would tie no problem on second or third cutting.

The press was just plain wore out! with heavy hay it was flexing and that changed the timing / angle of the needles enough to where it would not tie heavy hay.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Hay maker2

08-13-2019 11:03:31




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
GUESS WHAT MY REPLY might be.
I would of guess: Ditto?

I guessed wrong :-(



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Tx Jim

08-13-2019 10:53:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Quoting Removed, click Modern View to see

By stating you 336 has 20 teeth you must be implying single not double teeth? JD parts shows 19 strippers for 336



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
K Effective

08-13-2019 10:47:45




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Easy, guys. I appreciate the input from both of you, and others as well. We part-time farmers (I like to call myself a fetish farmer- more expensive and painful than a hobby) rely on the experience of those full-time users and of those whose careers were spent repairing our tools.

Now I just need to figure out if the swap, more or less, is worth the cash. My old baler has some value as is, and this would buy me all brand new wear parts. Shoot, I didn't look too closely at the tires. I put new ones on mine about three years ago.
I suppose the $7-8K difference could be worth it for the rest of my career.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
K Effective

08-13-2019 10:40:40




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
My 336 has a four bar, twenty teeth per bar pickup reel, so this would be like-for-like swap, only six inches wider.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
K Effective

08-13-2019 10:32:21




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Thanks for your reply. No ejector on either baler- we load directly to wagons and stack by hand (I know, so 18th century, right?).

I just got off the Deere.com website, and the ONLY difference I could find from the spec sheet between new 328/338/348 is the 328 has a four-bar pickup cylinder and 104 teeth, the other two have six bar and 146 teeth. I'm sure this would help in our lighter, second cutting grassy crops. I'm on my way out to check on my 336, not sure which set up I currently have.

It seems the 338/348 have wire tie as an option, not on the 328. Sizes and parts are the same, otherwise, as you have said. The 348 shows slightly heavier weight, possibly from a larger driveline available.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Tx Jim

08-13-2019 10:27:32




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
Quoting Removed, click Modern View to see

Hay Maker2

I'll be happy to inform you that it's very difficult to GUESS WHAT MY REPLY might be. What's seems to be rattling your cage? Certainly not my replies to one of your posts which I think I've avoided for a while. If you choose to kick a sleeping old man so be it! Have you taken your medicine(Midol) today??

Have a nice day,Jim

Yes 328 has wider PU with 26 pickup strippers(78 teeth) VS 19(52 teeth?) on 336 plus 338 has 6 tooth bars while 336 has 4.
The backbone of JD small sq balers hasn't been changed a lot from introduction of 336/346 balers until today

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Hay maker2

08-13-2019 09:59:53




Report to Moderator
 Re: Square balers: 336 vs 328. Opinions? in reply to K Effective, 08-13-2019 09:43:31  
They are virtually the same balers other than the pick-up width. There were a few minor improvements, but then again your 336 could of had these minor upgrades too.

I know Tx Jim is going o tell me that I'm wrong and the PTO is different and maybe the pickup real, but the back bone of the baler is the same.

What about the ejector, does it have the 40 or 42 ejector? The 336 had the 30 ejector. I have seen some with the 40 ejector too. Once again these are virtually the same units (30 and 40 ejectors). Yes, there is an internal screen or an external filter, but once again they are virtually the same.

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

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
Fast Shipping!  Most of our stocked parts ship within 24 hours (M-Th). We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our fast shipping, low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2019 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