Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Attention Forum Users: On the 28th of December 2023 at 9:00am Central Time, we will be taking the forums down for maintenance while we prepare the new forums for your use. Please click here for more information.

Discussion Forum
:

JD 50 vs. Farmall M

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Tye

04-11-2002 17:47:15




Report to Moderator

My friend and I had a discussion between which is overall the better tractor, a JD 50 or Farmall M. Despite the fact that the Farmall has has a few extra draw bar horsepower over the 50. I need ammunition for the fight the next time we talk tractors!!




[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
steve

04-12-2002 20:19:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
i have no problems with our JD 70 with the pto, or any other part of it. i'll take it over our white 2-135 or our oliver 1750 because you cannot beat that hand clutch on those tractors. i've only been running it for about 3 months now because it was put in the barn for a bad muffler but now it's running just fine and there were no problems with it before. so i'd take a jd over a farmall



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G-MAN - do we really need another color war?

04-12-2002 15:53:07




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
Nobody is going to change anyone else's mind about their favorite tractor. I'm sorry I even responded to the original post. Yes, Deeres had problems. Yes, IH had problems. They both also had a lot of good points. As far as Deeres being obsolete, nobody can say that the Ms weren't getting a little dated by the time they stopped making them too. After all, they started building them in what, 1939? The same year JD started styling their tractors - so neither design was a spring chicken by the early 50s. Just my two cents .... again.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Denny Frisk

04-12-2002 07:58:00




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
O-K O-K....I Read all the arguments....Heard all the excuses... BUT, When Which company came out with a NEW Model tractor, WHO COPIED WHO??? Did IHC ditch the 4 & 6 cyl. smoothness? to go to a 2 cyl. engine.... Or did Deere ditch the old 2-cyl? Deere followed the industry by what?? 10 Years before they had a "Shift-on-the-Fly" transmission to do what the IHC's T/A did in 1954? Even Allis-Chalmers beat Deere to that punch... I've spent enough time on IH M's & H's and all manner of 2-cyl. Deere's to know Which one I'd pick for most ANY Job I've ever had to do. You can have the LPTO on the Deere's.... I'll take the ergomonic's of an IHC any day... You don't have to have 3 arms, 2 heads or legs 6 feet long to run them! I guess the fact IHC's outsold the 2-cyl Deere's about 2 to 1 in 1954 says lots of Farmers at the time agreed with Me.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
in what year did IH bring out a full powershift? and i'm not talking about hydrostats either

04-13-2002 15:43:55




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Denny Frisk, 04-12-2002 07:58:00  
nt



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Lash

04-12-2002 20:25:26




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Denny Frisk, 04-12-2002 07:58:00  
I resent that remark "Even Allis-Chalmers". Heck AC was way ahead of most companies on new designs. Also in 1954 the WD-45 was the #1 selling tractor. Look it up.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
TP from Central PA

04-13-2002 15:34:19




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Lash, 04-12-2002 20:25:26  
But you know everyone wanted the GREAT Farmall Super M-TA in 1954!!!!

Just kidding, to-each-his-own!!! Enjoy your AC!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Chuck McDonald

04-12-2002 12:23:26




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Denny Frisk, 04-12-2002 07:58:00  
hehehe,
You are right that Deere's can be awkward in places however...you might look at IHC's sales figures in 1959-60 model years. Even with "outdated" 2-cylinder engines JD outsold IHC! Why....ummm lets see...the engineering in IH's might have something to do with it: wonderful T/A (hehe dont make me laugh, you change them every spring), cramped operators platform, METAL PAN SEAT (i mean come on...john deere had a cusion seat since 1948! AND AT THIS POINT IT WAS A CUSIONED FLOAT RIDE SEAT NO LESS!), 2-point fast hitch (or lack therof in terms of speed. You cant hook one of these up by sitting in the seat, I KNOW I HAVE TALKED TO MANY AN OWNER! Also to any other implements on the maket!) and well thats about enough in my mind. Oh yeah, JD came out with new models and IHC was still selling the 450 which was nothing more than a super super MTA farmall with differnt sheet metal oh yeah and a white strip on the hood and grill. John Deere went to 4 and six cylinder motors because it would have been impossible to make any more power from the design. Look at an 820/830 JD, the thing is MASSIVE! So John Deere didnt give up on the idea...it had reached its design capability limits! All I have to say is John Deere did with 2 that everyone else it took 4 or 6 to do!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
TP from Central PA

04-12-2002 18:57:04




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Chuck McDonald, 04-12-2002 12:23:26  
Actually the T/A is a handy piece and is great when used right. And another thing "Oh yeah, JD came out with new models and IHC was still selling the 450 which was nothing more than a super super MTA farmall with differnt sheet metal" is not accurate either! What do you call a 630, a 620 with different sheet metal!

Oh by the way, don't talk to fast hitch users, you go use one yourself and then see! You'll by a "Junk IH" just for the fast hitch!!!!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Denny Frisk

04-12-2002 14:16:20




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Chuck McDonald, 04-12-2002 12:23:26  
Your really young aren't You... Weren't around back in the mid 50's when those tractors were new. I specified 1954 sales figures. IHC was bulding 325 Super M's per day at FARMALL and sending parts to Lousiville to build 50-75 more per day. Never said anything about 1959 or '60. Nothing the matter with the engineering in the 460/560 that more field durability testing wouldn't have uncovered except the Marketing DUMMY's Made them rush them to market. The 656/666/686 use the same basic rearend as the 560 with more HP and NO durability problems. If You were replacing The T/A's every spring in Your IHC You weren't adjusting and using them correctly. Or Did You even have one? And Deere WANTED to use the IHC FAST-HITCH but IH wouldn't grant them permission. Otherwise the 3-point would be gone. Since You've only "Talked To Owner's" You really don't know first hand how much better the F/H really is do You? And the 450 was only made in 57 & 58. '59 & 60 was the 560 era...'55 & '56 was the 400 model. The 450 was NOT made from 1954 till 1960. Your comments on the Poofy Ride seat are ALL wrong in My estimation... CONVEX lower cushion, flat backrest.. Hardly the shape of any human's anatomy I've ever seen. 5 Gal. bucket with a burlap sack would be as comfortable. And as far as not being able to make bigger 2-cyl. tractors, the 820/830 were actually small in comparison to some of the REALLY old gasoline tractors made in the 'Teens & early 20's. ALLIS CHALMERS made engines that the displacement was measured in the HUNDREDS of Cubic FEET, so bigger 2-cyl. engines COULD OF and HAVE been made...Deere had Just seen their Future.....and if They didn't change, it was a short one! You Young guys get SO EXCITED about Nothing... Look at a fact or two and jump to ALL KINDS of conclusions with no basis in fact. Opinions are fine....And it's great to exchange ideas...But Please be more accurate in Your facts.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
how efficient were those huge engines built in the early part of the century? not very - that's why they were huge

04-13-2002 15:50:25




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Denny Frisk, 04-12-2002 14:16:20  

nt



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Quit arguing!!!!!

04-12-2002 15:44:02




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Denny Frisk, 04-12-2002 14:16:20  
You're right ther have been some enormous displacment two-cylinder engines built. But, try to mount one on the front of a tractor and still be able to see the ground ahead of you. Man you OLD guys sure like to argue and you are ALWAYS right. No wonder you've never been able to keep a wife.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Denny Frisk

04-14-2002 16:07:04




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Quit arguing!!!!!, 04-12-2002 15:44:02  
Actually, I've been married to the same Great Woman for 24 years.... And SHE'S the One that's ALWAYS RIGHT. No argument about that!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bob Semrau

04-12-2002 05:34:46




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
I scan this group because I have alot of JD implements, so usually I keep my mouth shut, but I somehow feel compelled to comment on this post. I would rather have an Oliver Super 88 or 880 (keeping to the same time period) than either the JD or the Farmall ! I own a 1600 myself ...



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Henry J

04-12-2002 04:14:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
Tye

They are both great ole tractors and were mainstays in their day. That is why neither one of you will ever win the argument. Think about it. The world looks a heck of a lot better to me through my color blind antique tractor eyes.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Larry Ks

04-11-2002 23:14:58




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
I've read what you all have said, and I've sure enjoyed reading it. It makes me think back to being a kid....My Dad farmed with a 50JD, a 630JD and 2 CIHCs....he raised mostly live stock, but farmed some ground to....My dear old Uncle had an M, so I"ve been around all those tractors...(my uncle passed away last summer). We had a JD 3 point mower that fit on the 630, and an IHC mower that bolted to the drawbar and was lifted by the powertrol....I've spend many hours mowing hay on both of them. Its sure amazing sitting here right now, thinking back. We had a 3 point JD plow my Dad got with the 630, when he bought it (brand new)...I'll never in my life forget plowing with that tractor the first time, I was just amazed, it seemed so huge and so powerful, and you'd sit there and look back and it looked like you were just really getting over the ground....(We'd been plowing with the 50 and 3-12s...and the Super C and a 2-14s up till then)(the 3-12s was a JD plow...trip rope) Times sure have changed....The 630 is sitting in my Dads machine shed right now, the plow is sitting on planks (the shears are greased to), I can't remember the last time its been in the ground. He's used that tractor every day this winter to feed hay with, if it snows he puts the JD 3point blade on and pushes snow...It needs painted...been overhauled once...has some bends on the grill where a chain slipped one time, other wise its pretty much perfect. (I almost forgot...he had the PTO rebuilt a few years ago, and I put a new end on the starter one time) other than that I can't think of anything he's ever had to do it. I can remember lighting a cigarette off the exhaust manifold when I was a kid....(that was damn hard to do to!!! but it worked....I've long since quit smoking...) I'm sitting here remembering back all those years, and all the things that tractor has done....my goodness, I don't know if you could ever ask for any machine to perform like it has, and still does today....I'm not so sure its a matter of which tractor is best, I think its more a matter of how you use them, and how you take care of them. The Super C IHC we plowed with is sitting in my shed, and its darn near perfect to, its done more than its share of work over the years, but its just darn near as good as new. Funny ain't it, you'll let a new pickup and a new car sit outside and make darn sure the tractors are in the shed.....

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Tye

04-11-2002 20:42:26




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
Ok it looks like the hands down winner is the JD. I appologize, I should've asked to compare the M with a JD 60. An H would've been more in the 50's class anyway. Thanks for all the responses.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jason

04-12-2002 08:12:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 20:42:26  
red power all the way



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
MattMN

04-11-2002 19:16:15




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
Tye, on the Deere forum, it's pretty obvious that most people here will give the 50 the nod as being the better tractor. Go to the Farmall/IH board or the Red Power forum and you'll see that the M would be favored over the 50. It's all personal opinion. Matt(1950 M)



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
gary in Ks

04-11-2002 19:03:24




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
Lets quit compairing a 1954and newer to a 1954 and older. Lets try compairing the JD 50 to a farmall 400 and the farmall will out shine the JD any day



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Steven M

04-11-2002 19:44:59




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to gary in Ks, 04-11-2002 19:03:24  

NO lets try compairing a 620 or 720 to a IH 400 The IH 400 GAS had 50.78 belt hp
JD 620 Gas 48.68 hp JD 720 Gas 59.12 hp

IH 400 6-V electrical system. JD 620 or 720 12-V electrical system.

JD 620 or 720 Advanced Power Steering.
IH 400 Power Steering ????? ?????

JD 620 or 720 Universal 3-point hitch
IH 400 fast hitch. Where is that today?

JD 620 or 720 Custon Power-Trol
My 620 has better hydraulic then the farmall 460 i had.

JD 620 or 720 Duplex Carbuetion
IH 400 Just a updraft

JD 620 or 720 Float-Ride seat
IH 400 Pan seat

JD 620 or 720 Roll-O-Matic
IH 400 What's that!!

JD 620 or 720 Quick-Change wheel tread.
IH 400 Hammering,lifting, or tugging

JD 620 or 720 Easy to clean grille
IH 400 Not so easy

JD 620 or 720 Al-Weather Manifold
IH 400 ????

JD 620 or 720 6 speed IH 400 5 speed with TA. You can have that TA! JD still John Deere Today
IH ????? ????? ????? ????

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jim

04-11-2002 22:21:27




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Steven M, 04-11-2002 19:44:59  
You forgot one thing
620 720 hand cluth
400 foot clutch



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
TP from Central PA

04-12-2002 04:02:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Jim, 04-11-2002 22:21:27  
Forgot another:
JD 620 or 720 Two-cylinder engine(makes alot of useless noise)
Farmall 400 Smooth four cylinder power(quiet and very torquey)

And another:
JD 620 or 720 Brake pedals for each foot(mainly so you forget where they are)
Farmall 400 Brake pedals for the right foot(where they are supposed to be)[see Deere even moved them on the "NEW" generation of power]

And another:
JD 620 or 720 Has a PTO engagement pedal placed so you can only reach it from the seat(keep climbin on and off when grinding feed)
Farmall 400 Pto lever is place so you can reach it from BOTH the seat and ground(saves your knees)

JD 620 or 720(well atleast the ones I have ran) Only one remote hydraulic outlet(mainly to put that great "Deere Hydraulic System" to work)
Farmall 400 two remote hydraulic outlets, with a third if you pin the Fast-Hitch up(No wonder IH's Hydraulic system is worse, people are using two or three remote cylinders on them, instead of one)

And last but not least:
JD 620 or 720 a three point hitch that you have to fight with for a day to get it hooked up
Farmall 400 a fast-hitch that can be hooked up from the drivers seat(Even Deere wanted to buy into this system in the '60's, they knew how much better it was)

See, NOT EVEN DEERE was Perfect!!!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jason schott

04-12-2002 08:16:51




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to TP from Central PA, 04-12-2002 04:02:01  
you are so right JD just seems more akward thatn a
farmall



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
This guy knows his stuff!

04-11-2002 20:30:47




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Steven M, 04-11-2002 19:44:59  
I am Impressed.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Steven M

04-11-2002 18:23:33




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  

Tell him the John Deere 50 is a better tractor because it has,

Live PTO
Duplex Carburetion
Cyclonic Fuel Intake
Hot or Cold Manifold
Live Hydraulic (Power-Trol)
Roll-O-Matic
Since 1954 Factory-engineered Power Steering
12 Volt Starter and Lighting
Quick-Change Wheel Tread
Six speed Transmission,with 1-1/2 mph creeper gear
Fully Adjustable Deep-Cushion Seat
Automatic Crankcase Ventilation
Easy to clean radiator grille
Easily accessible clutch
Full-View Instrument Panel

The 50 also has a much better Governor.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Lash

04-12-2002 20:52:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Steven M, 04-11-2002 18:23:33  
You could come up with stuff like that from most companies.
WD45 Allis : Live PTO "Traction Booster" Hydraulic hitch Position Control "Power Crater" Pistons Spin out rear wheels "Snap Coupler" Hitch "Center Fire" cylinder head Live hydraulics Piston type hydraulic pump Variable pressure & volume hydraulics The best governor you can't deny "Delayed Lift" hydraulics Helical gear transmission Wet hand clutch (handles hell)

All this as standard equipment.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Tye

04-11-2002 18:34:17




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Steven M, 04-11-2002 18:23:33  
Steeve, I am not an M expert. Are these things that you mentioned for the 50 things that the M doesn't have? Like live pto and live hydraulics-the M doesn't have these things?



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Steven M

04-11-2002 19:03:56




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 18:34:17  

The M doesn't have Live PTO or Live Hydraulic. The first Super M-s doesn't have it also. The super MTA had live PTO
M & W made a live hydraulic kit you could put on a M or Super M IH used this on the Super MTA 400 and 450



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G-MAN

04-11-2002 18:21:09




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
What year did they quit making Ms? Depending on that, I think an M/60 comparison would be better. Even so, the 60 is going to be the better tractor.
Power steering, live hydraulics, live PTO, the hitch, seat comfort, and the list goes on and on. The only thing the M might have over the 60 would be the foot clutch. But then again, if you didn't like or at least tolerate hand clutches, this whole conversation would be a moot point. Give me the Deere anyday, although I do want to re-restore my grandpa's M (first tractor I ever drove) so he can go pulling with me and my G. I own a 60 and have spent a lot of time on the above-mentioned M, but this is still just my 2 cents.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
JDLOVER

04-11-2002 17:58:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to Tye, 04-11-2002 17:47:15  
duh...its a deere. Hands down is a better tractor. Of course the M has more HP but power is not everything. quality not quanity.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Phil Munson

04-11-2002 19:29:04




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to JDLOVER, 04-11-2002 17:58:13  
Most of the M's around today have had the 4" aluminum pistons installed. Many have had live hydraulics and power steering added. For about fifty years our MD has had, with an M&W hand clutch, live PTO. Don't get me wrong I like JDs. The 50, 190"3 engine, the M a stock 248, and with 4" overbore, 264"3 are not really comparable. With the high compression fire dome pistons I have seen a good M crank 70 HP on the dyno. It takes a bunch of JD 3020D to stay ahead of a good M on a disc. Of course, the M needs a good man just to carry the gas to it on hard work. Do you really intend to compare a JD 50 to a another tractor which can pull a disc along side of a JD 3020D? The nifty 50 is a sweet tractor, with a great operator platform and more usable transmission speeds. To avoid drug testing or therapy try comparing it to an IH Super H or 300.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
two banger

04-11-2002 19:27:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: JD 50 vs. Farmall M in reply to JDLOVER, 04-11-2002 17:58:13  
The 50 is more modern except in the engine when doing PTO duty. The old two bangers are known to knock pto knuckles to pieces compared to a smooth running M.



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

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
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. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 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