g pto size?

swindave

Member
why is the pto shaft on the model G so big?
ive never seen a implement made for it,
has any one seen a implement on one that would work on a G
and why did john deere make it so big?

did other companies do this too? thanks
 
I cant answer your question but I happen to have a JD PTO adapter that fits a G and reduces it down to standard size. That and a 6 Volt Pony Motor starter is about all the parts I have left.

John T
 
I believe you could order implements with the big knuckle back in the day... like a #64 chopper, 116W baler, etc. Early on, the ASAE standard wasn't there as a "standard", and Farmall F-12s and JD Bs had a smaller 1 1/8 shaft at first, too. Late G's had a standard 1 3/8 shaft. Back in the 70's dad converted our G from the big 1 3/4 shaft to 1 3/8 with parts from a salvage yard.
 
Everything about the G is overbuilt!!!! Just park one next to a Farmall M and you will see. My GM came off a mower and it had an adapter to go from 1 3/4” to 1 3/8”. The engineers over designed the G because they didn’t have computers telling them were to stop. My opinion is the G is almost like a 5010/20 as in being too heavy for the horsepower they put out in stock form. However JD was able to take that design all the way up to 50+ hp with no issues. IH tried to do the same with the M and they met with disastrous results with the initial 560s puking rear ends.
 
John T, did you weld it on and then almost twist the smaller part it off?

cvphoto52137.jpg
 
I have a 1938 unstyled G my dad bought new, has 1 3/4 inch pto. I also have an old pto coupler to fit it. I used it on #5 mower for years. I think the shaft end I have may have come off of a binder. My understanding was that deere thought they needed the heavier pto shaft with the G to keep from breaking it with all that power and torque(for the day)
 
I would probably would let it go neighbor. Hey I have another mid sized truck, a Chevy Colorado my golf cart wont quite fit in, I know you can fix that lol

John T
 
Won't break so easily. My dad had a 720 on a 50x Letz burr mill that plugged up, he opened the burrs up to resart, tractor at pto speed. Engaged clutch and broke pto shaft off smooth with the back of housing!
 
Where are you now? I am going to Bloomington tomorrow then down by Juda. Let me know I will buy it. My tractor is in. south east South Dakota. Hoping to connect with someone to at least bring it part way. Have wanted a G since dad and I put high compression pistons in a styled G. Good 12 volt battery would not start that G without opening petcocks. Sure used a lot of gas, however that thing would disc along side a 730 diesel Actually it used same amount of gas as before with the low compression pistons, Those pistons had a notch cast in side above the ring grove where the sparkplug went. I got hit by lighting while planting corn with that G. Flash hit exhaust stack killed the mag for a few seconds!!!
 
Lots of problems with your post. 1st, the 560 was a 60 hp tractor. And only a small percentage of them had problems with the rear axle bearings and differential shaft bearings, which IHC fixed free of charge. Very easy to tell when they were getting bad by the way the brakes engaged. Biggest problem area where where farmers mounted 4 row middle busters on them to form ridges to plant cotton on. Neighbor across the road farmed 320 acres with a gas 560 as his ONLY primary tractor, his two 8N Ford's were worthless, and his Cub Farmall only mowed his yard. 560 did everything except pick corn, he had an IH 203 combine, a picker would have been much faster. Our 4010-D only farmed 200 acres and had something major fail every year, we pulled the same 4 bottom 4 row implements as our 450 Farmall pulled without any problems for years.
G John Deere probably suffered from 412 cid engine only running at 975 rpm, shock loading the entire drivetrain and the weak link was the ASAE standard 1-3/8" pto shaft transmitting the 38 maximum pto/belt HP. The 1-3/8" 6 spline shaft proved to be capable of 100 hp with 4 & 6 cyl engines, 21 spline 1-3/8" shafts good to around 200. I've NEVER heard of a 38 hp Farmall M breaking a PTO shaft off. And I've heard of M's tuned for tractor pulling PTO dynoing well over 100 hp.
Dad had a JD R diesel for a while, delivered just before Christmas 1963, took it to the field in late March '64, sold it to Township road commissioner in April, maybe 6 weeks later to run a pto powered heavy-duty rototiller. It only had a 1-3/8" 6 spline pto, rated 48 hp, 416 cid engine ran 975 to 1000 rpm depending on year of tractor. Never heard of the pto shaft failing, but the gearbox ahead of there was a common failure, in fact the township tore the gearbox up every year for three years and traded the R for a 770 Oliver diesel that I was still running ten years later. Pretty common for farmers in our area to NOT loan pto equipment to farmers with only 2 cyl tractors, most farmers with 4 & 6 cyl tractors had no problem borrowing stuff. In fact, my Brother-in-law's Dad had the neighbor chop corn silage with his chopper, his silage wagons, his 560 on the chopper, Dad's '51 M on the silage blower, and did use his own WD-45 Allis to haul in, while his 720 diesel & 630 sat.
 
Down here in cotton land, I was always told the ones with the large PTO were for mounted cotton pickers that took a lot of power to pull.
A friend has one.
Richard in NW SC
 
Not my cup of tea but the G's had a good reputation around here. A farmer one road over and on heavier ground pulled 4 X 14's with a 48 G. Ran a number 5 mower and a New Idea PTO spreader. Stationary ensilage cutter with the belt. They all had their place. Grandpa bought his Farmall M because he needed at least 35 PTO horsepower for the stationary thresher and wanted clearance for cultivating. IH also had probably the best hydraulic system. Did not stop the other salesmen from calling on him. The Ford salesman pushed the 9N hard because he felt the acres plowed per hour would come out similar to the M but the 9N did not have the power for the power driven implements. Had grandpa had the money (he did but was very tight with money) in his mind he might have bought the 9N to use with the sickle bar mower of which he liked the 3pt hitch. As to 560's many were not pushed around here to the point of immediate rear end failure. Most farms here at the time had dairy and some had beef so most of the chores involved running PTO driven equipment. Also, most farmers were not well to do so when the tractor got upgraded many of the implements did not. A 560 would live a long time pulling a 3 bottom plow and 12 foot disk harrow. Mounted corn pickers were just about unheard of around here. Anyways, grandpa was looking for another tractor around the time the Farmall 400 and Oliver Super 88 were in production but shied away from making a purchase. Would have been nice to have one of the two sitting here today. I still have the literature he got from the dealers with numbers reflecting prices scratched on them.
 
There aren’t any problems with my post. If you read my post again I said “50+ hp”. That plus sign means more and last I checked the 560 diesel had 58 drawbar hp. And it didn’t matter how small or big the percentages were on rear end failures. It was big enough for sales to fall from over 20,000+ units to ~6,000. It was big enough to catapult JD into the number one spot for good. It was big enough IH had to throw up big tents in order to fix/update them all. Why can’t IH fanatics just acknowledge the 560 screwed up IH for good instead of just saying it was a minor recall no biggie. Also, the story I got from a collector who farmed in Iowa which was ground zero for these failures is the reason they shelled out is farmers were trying to pull 5 bottoms plows with extra weight hanging on. JD had already had a 5 plow rated rowcrop tractor the 720 for 2 years and IH in a rush to catch up with JD just threw a 6 cylinder engine into M chassis and prayed it would work.
 
We had and still have our Farmall M which was our haying tractor. Had a Farmhand loader it too. BTW, paint a Farmall M green I bet Dr Evil can find 10 things wrong with it.
 
I can see where overloading the 560 could be its undoing. I could see it pulling 5 x 16 on Arkport sandy loam here and some of the lighter Ontario-Honeoye-Hilton soils here but not much elsewhere. The 560 would be a 4 x 14 plow tractor pulling in 3rd gear on average outpacing a JD G by at least 1.25 MPH. I think the real undoing of the 560 was it just was not remarkable against its competition. Oliver 880. Case 900 (has a several HP advantage admittedly). Minneapolis Moline G series. It's been said that for price minded farmers that JD competed very well against the 06 series IH. The 806 was a great tractor but if you can buy a 4020 synchro for several hundred less then that is what many farmers did. Most of the farmers in the neighborhood bought based on price. Some did well and others paid the difference plus some to the dealer's shop and parts department.
 
To be fair I doubt very many 720/730s pulled 5 bottoms too but they were at least engineered to handle the load if asked to. I’m actually kind of a closet Case fan of some of their tractors. The Case 900 was competitor the IH 660. The 900 was very stout rugged tractor with a nice slow turning big block engine with an unbreakable drivetrain. 660 was a 560 engine wrapped up even tighter in front of a suspect drivetrain. I had one collector tell me the 660 actually had more problems then the 560 but they weren’t well known because they were a wheatland tractor with low sales. The evidence is in the service bulletins and recall notices.
 
Those rear ends failed in earlier tractors, too. My grandfather had an MTA- the last Farmall here- and the rear end failed planting corn in 1969. Yes, it had duals on, and yes it was pulling two JD 494 planters with a "squadron" hitch, something not dreamed of in 1939 when IH last did any engineering on the rear end. Never mind Deere hung that combo on 720s and 730s, never mind those horses were only rated 2-3 hp more than the MTA. Farmall's rear end didn't hold up. My dad is still swearing at the planting delay today.

That tractor got replaced with a 4020. That 4020 has had a 466 in it since 1988, and has over 30,000 hours on it. And no, nothing back of the clutch has been replaced in all that time. There is a reason Deere became number one.
 

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