(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Why did the Fast-Hitch fail?

F

Fritz Maurer

Well-known Member
The Fast-Hitch was the ultimate in ease of implement hookup. It was so easy that there were "tractor square dances" held at county fairs across the country. Yet, introduced in 1954, it failed to go ten years. There is no wrong answer here, I'm interested in your opinions. One complaint I have is that in later years, people tried to convert them to 3-point systems, then bad-mouthed the Fast-Hitch when it balled up into a knot. Well, what they failed to realize was that all that had to be done was to insert 2 pins in the proper places, and the hitch pockets were locked rigid to the wishbone. Man, that hitch will do anything! It is adjustable in several directions, can be made to swing, float, or be locked in all directions for use with trailing implements. If you use a swinging drawbar with trailing implements, it'll do that too. When fully locked in place, the hitch is the precise SAE Standard height for PTO operation. With the exception of the leveling crank, all these adjustments were accomplished by changing two pins. It could also be used to jack up the back of the tractor to service the tires or change tread widths. With all these features, how could 3-point prevail? There was a rumor in Red Power Magazine a few years back, that John Deere wanted to build the Fast-Hitch, for their tractors, under license. I.H. was said to have refused, due to the Red VS. Green mentality. I personally hope this is false, because it would have been an extreme exhibition of stupidity. With John Deere building the Fast-Hitch, we could have put the 3-point where it belongs... in China. Fritz
 
Did you or a relative design the fast hitch and expect more royalties or something? Obviously the 3 pt. hitch was better and that's why it's used on every brand of tractor made today and is more popuar than ever.
 
Is 3 point better though? To put on our 3 point sickle mower on our new NH it's a GIGANTIC pain in my hind quarters. If you aren't perfectly square to it it doesn't go on. Same with the bush hog. And it's not just us, some people I talk to have similar equipment and don't like it. Sure wish it would swing and ajust to what we need but nope. Think I'd rather go with the fast hitch
 
I believe you already answered it john deere, oliver, moline, case etc. werent using it. A good interesting topic though.

Pretend your a farmer in 1956. Your old A john deere Doesnt have all the options you would like. So you visit your local dealers(your not sold on any particular make of equipment) on the lots are some internationals with a fast hitch and other makes with three points. Well youve got a old 8n at home yet and all your implements are 3pt. with a few drawbar pull pieces. you think it would sure be easier to get the tractor with the 3pt. and not have to do any conversions or adapt existing equipment to work with the fast hitch.

Any way i think that is what i think was going through peoples minds. personally im not fond of either, i like hooking up to the drawbar. but im from wheat country not rowcrop country. 3pts are for snowblowers and bale carriers where im from. most every tractor built before 1980 around here came without 3pts with the exception being john deere.
 

I"ve never used a fast hitch, so I can"t speak from that perspective, but along with growing up working on a farm, I"ve worked a long time in the IT industry.

With computers & networking, I"ve seen cases OVER and OVER that every time some company triea to push the market around with some proprietary system that was closely/solely tied to their company, that product usually died a quick death.

People just like interoperability and the market place usually rewards that in the form of who wins and who loses...


Howard
 
Fritz, this is only speculation on my part but my guess is because there were only two members supporting the implement. As implements were getting larger it would have soon become impractical to do heavier lifting from only those two points. It was a good system that worked well but it almost had obsolescence designed into it because of it's inherent limitations. Just my opinion. Mike
 
If I recall my history correctly, IH wouldnt let anyone else use it, because of the implements being IH as well. Theres a pic somewhere of JDs version of the fast hitch, dont recall where I saw it now, but Ferguson release his license and everyone used it instead.
 
Tell me what is better about a 3PH. I can switch from disc to plow to disc on my 140 in 5 minutes. It takes 2 people 30 minutes to hook up the Vicon disc mower on my 3PH 464. It's almost as bad with the disc, fertilizer spreader, aerator, etc on the 464. Besides, with a Fast Hitch, I can adjust the pitch of my plow from the tractor seat. With a 3PH, I have to get off the tractor EVERY time I create a land to mess with the third arm. In my opinion, the fast hitch is far superior, but I really would like to know why you think the 3PH is better.

SF
 
More of a business than technical reason. 3pt had a fifteen year head start, and by the time the Fast hitch came out the patent on the 3pt was just about expired so licensing issues went away.

I had a Farmall 200 for a while and liked the fast hitch, but it wasn't enough better to knock the 3pt off.
 
But why didn't it stay around for small tractors? It seems like tractors under 50 horsepower would be able to pull anything they could lift with the fast hitch. Sure, they couldn't lift a 6 bottom plow, but what 50 horsepower (or under) tractor could even move with that thing hooked to it? Also, large discs have had wheels for a while. With the fast hitch, the hydraulic line would do the lifting, and the actual hitch would only support the tongue weight.

Just something to think about, SF
 
From what I've read, Deere wanted to buy the rights from IH to use the Fast Hitch on deeres. i guess there are (were) six 730 Deeres with Fast Hitch. Negotiations fell thru. FH has a few major advantages. But the 3-point, with its inherent sloppiness, has some major, major advantages. One of its advantages is, in fact, that it is a bit sloppy; the front of the plow lifts a tad before the whole plow is lifted-which works great. The shorter draft arms allow for higher lifting. Even if FH is better than 3-pt, 3-pt wins in universatility. Beta was better than VCR, but only one company had it. Which one won out?
 
I.H. offered hook "blanks" to convert non-Fast-Hitch
implements, but I guess you're right...some people
just didn't want to deal with it. Fritz
 

from what i understand john deere did try to lease the fast hitch design but IH wouldn't give it up have an idea the right dollar amount wasn't offered

i do think the fast hitch is easier to use and alot handier but IH wouldn't let anyone use the design and that is probably the reason it failed

i have a 560 and a 412 4bottom fast hitch plow like it a lot
 
It's kind of ironic how most medium to large farms keep one old 1955 Fast Hitch tractor around. Back in to discbine or whatever, drop the pin in, lift the FH drawbar and move the impliment. A local non-IH dealer had an old 300 Farmall that they refused to sell. It was a major shop tool. Their hydraulic jack on wheels!
 
Also, too much junk underneath the tractor. Plowing corn stalks etc was not fun with them and or working under there. Notice though, all mfg's offer a quick hitch attachment so it doesn't take an army to hook up that heavy imp with the three point hitch.
 
So, with a 3PH, the best idea is to buy a quick hitch attachment? That is more money spent, when you could have the fast hitch and hook up just as quick without buying a quick hitch attachment. I do agree somewhat about the junk under the tractor. However, the junk is only lowered when starting a land. After that, the junk is raised, which provides a decent amount of ground clearance.

SF
 
I could write a book on this - have one, some plusses, lots of minuses. In short, think most farmers saw it, and realized that they'd have to buy a whole set of 2pt implements for it. I also have a Worksaver conversion kit, and use several 3pt impliments. Often the 3pt impliments must be shimmed to fit. Some don't work real well due to geometry of the system.
 
The 3pt. hitch came along before the fast hitch, stood the test of time and is still the most universal attachment on every brand of tractor made. The fast hitch not so much. You could have the greatest invention in the world but if not enough people are interested, is it still the greatest invention? Maybe the fast hitch was more expensive or the 3 pt. was just too established but what ever the reason, the 3 pt. hitch is here to stay.
 
Ok, let's go to sleep agreeing on something here. Can we all agree Allis Chalmers hidden under the tranny railroad coupler affair with the deadly snap open ribcage level top links is something that was good to disappear so fast? When I was small me and my cousin would race to hook stuff to the fast hitch, on his father's C and H- a mower was done and turning in 45 seconds if I rember right, and I have a Dearborn 3 point harrow that I can't dog down the lower hitch pins, 'cause each tractor fits it differently, one inward, other tractor same pin outward, 3rd massey, inward, other outward- with a shorter pin than the other two. Ya. IHC was playing poker face. And just maybe WE lost. But yeah, a big deal back then was moldboard plowing, and the top link and draft control was the cat's pajamas. And Dearborn designed everything anyone could possibly ever use- in 3 point. Another one worse than AC snap couple? the MF 'balance head mower'. 5 and a half point hitch, 2 days to hook up, and buy special sway bar brackets and pins too, I hope someone got fired for that thing....
 
If you look at that time frame in the 50s and 60s IH was not the only company with there own hitching system. IH had the fast hitch, AC had the snap coupler, Case had Eagel Claw, MF and Ford and JD had 3pt. With IH and AC and Case having there own hitching systems you could only use there mounted equipment. Brand loyaty only gose so far. With 3pt you could use anybodys equipment on your tractor. In the mid to late 60s everyone But IH had gone to 3pt as standard equipment on there tractors except for IH who held out to the late 70s and then droped the Fast Hitch. Hydrolic ends use to be the same way and now Pioner is standard now (remember the tool box full of adapters). It all boils down to Standerising. Any tractor any equipment. Its the American Way! Bandit
 
What I was getting at is other mfgs like the fast attachment abilities of the fast hitch so therefore came up with the quick tach for 3 point. Also, they make a draw bar to put between the two arms of the three point to (again) lift those heavy impl hitch's like the fast hitch can. But, with crawling around this winter while doing a lot of work on a 656 with a fast hitch, there is just no clearance under there and a lot of moving joints that wear out. They have their good points of course. Been around them for over 50 years.
 
Just had this conversation at our club plowday with a Ferguson nut...he claims they are no good because they don't have draft control...I invited him to hop on our Super C with 2-14 FH plow and show me where his Fergie did any better (don't get me wrong, our 2N plows like a champ with no draft control, and the 8N does with draft control, I am color blind so there is no brand bias here.)
I think that the FH was introduced too late, much like the excellent Eagle Hitch (not a big Snap-Coupler fan) and not marketed well enough once it was introduced. They were playing catch up and lots of people already had 3pt implements.
In my opinion, if IH had gotten in with it early enough it would be the industry standard now, ease of hitching, down pressure...really can't beat it!
 
The biggest reason the fast hitch failed was Internationals arrogance. They just about where the big gorilla in the farm equipment world in the late fifties. They tried to do too many different things and ended up doing some really bad. Some of the fast hitch attachments where very good, the sickle bar mower was great. Many of them where not very good, four bottom mounted plow with the trip hitch where you lost the whole plow when it hit something. Then rather than work with other manufactures to also make fast hitch implements they refused to license it to anyone, even short line manufactures that just made attachments.

Add those problems to the fact that JD and others came out with competitive tractors and IH hold slipped on the market.

I do know if you have a IH tractor with fast hitch, then it will be discounted when you go to sell it. Ih 706s will cost $1000 less with fast hitch.

I have many different brands of implements that are three point. I use them on several different brands of tractors. If I had fast hitch, eagle hitch, or snap coupler hitch then I would have problems switching my implement around.
 
The debate lingers, but the facts remain. The FAst Hitch AND the 3-point hitch are BOTH "public domain" now, as design patents have expired LONG ago.... If the fast hitch was all that the Binderoids seem to think, it would have made a big come back when the patents expired. Everyone would have been standing in line to get a piece of the greatest thing since sliced bread, wouldn't you think.

And for the record, Harry Ferguson didn't "release" patent rights to the 3-point hitch (as was mentioned in another post) . Patents expired, allowing any brand interested to share the design. And most brands elected to go with what works BEST. IH wanted to re-invent the wheel. Their wheel ended up being a square one.

IH went belly up because of a history of making horrible management decisions......just one MORE for the history books.....
 
The hitch didn't fail.

But the weight carrying capacity of the implement's hitch did.

The heavier the weight, the more iron it takes to keep the implement upright and square to the world.

Allan
 
The hitch didn't fail.

But the weight carrying capacity of the implement's hitch did.

The heavier the weight, the more iron it takes to keep the implement upright and square to the world.

Allan
 
I've seen them on 06, 56, and on one 966. When I asked about it the reply was IH was offering it on the 766 and 966 tractors if a customer ordered it. Supposedly this option was dropped after the second year of 66 series production. I don't recall seeing it in literature of the day. Maybe there were some unsold fast hitch units from 06 and 56 series production that the Farmall plant wanted to use up rather than scrap.
 
Who is going to come up with an all-new hitch system now, with all the 3PH implements flooding the market? In the 50s, there weren't as many, but the 3PH implements have been accumulating for 80 years. I agree that IH reinvented the wheel, but, in my opinion, IH's wheel was a whole lot better than everyone else's. Please explain to me why, in your opinion, the 3PH works better than the Fast Hitch.

SF
 
Remember, the 3pt didn't have a smooth transition as the world's universal hitching method without Henry and Harry gettin into each others face. What started as a handshake agreement ended much differently.

I have one fast hitch tractor with 2 implements bought with the tractor. I also have 3pt. tractor/implements. I do prefer the fast hitch but the small 3pt. implements on the Ford aren't difficult to attach but take a little longer. Don't have any big tractors or implements so can't comment on them.
 
The fast hitch might be better than a 3 point with fixed length arms, and no sway links but extendable lower links and crank adjuster make hooking up a breeze.

I usually fight more with the pto shaft than the 3 point. Even my 3000 lb+ 3 pt disc mower conditioner is easy to hook up.

If I had gravel or cement to park stuff on it would be even faster.

Neighbour had a bunch of fast hitch stuff. Its all painted up as lawn ornaments now. Couldn't sell it, likely the same problem IH had back in the day.
 
Ferguson DID NOT release his Patten. It was up for renewal and a judge said it should be in the public domain for the good the farmers. There is a story of the Ferguson System in the Farm Collector mag that cover the Ferguson story.

Kent
 
I completely disagree with that. The Snap Coupler system was and still is great if adjusted and maintained correctly. It is the best system by far, If you take the time to adjust it correctly.
 
I think it failed because the majority of farmers stated (by use of what was kept in their wallets) that they liked versatility more than brand loyalty.

There just weren't enough farmers with exclusive "Red in the Shed" and more importantly, not enough willing to change to all red equipment.

Innovation and marketing of new ideas is always a gamble, you just can't guarantee that the "flock" will follow.
 
OK I will. Fast hitch implements swing through an ever changing arc as they're raised or lowered. Implements would only be level at ONE given point. Any in field adjustment up or down requires operator to get off the tractor and make adjustments to the implement to keep it level as operating depth/height is changed.

3-point hitch with TWO pivot points keeps implement at a fairly level plane throughout the travel, eliminating the need to be off and on the tractor.

3-point geometry directs more down force to the front end of the tractor (with top link being attached to the tractor at a much higher point.) Results in a less ballast needed on front end to operate essentially the same implement.

3-point supports weight of implement much better (less strain on implement and tractor hitch point) due to 3rd mounting point.

The list goes on and on. You're entitled to your opinion, even if it is ridiculous. If the fast hitch was so fabulous, why did IH bail on it? Oh yeah....it was second fiddle in a one man band.
 
the fast hitch was more or less a proprietary hitch that worked on only what it was built for,while everyone and his brother made 3 point equipment.like allis and their snap hitch,it depended too much on customer loyalty, at a time when farmers needed economy..I tnink it was simply a matter of economics.low priced three point equipment was avalable,since ford for the most part had their equipment built from the beginning by outside sourceswith no exclusive right to anyone.Where the others used patented equipment hitch designs that werent copied because of patent infringment type lawsuits they sort of shot themselves in the foot more or less.if i went out today and built piece of three point equipment it would only be another in the crowd .if i built a fast hitch piece of equipment to sell i'd have to pay for the right.
 
I"m with Randy. The Snap Coupler is about as easy as it gets. You don"t have to be straight on like a Fast Hitch to hook up. The line of draft is better too. The patents expired on the 3pt so that"s what we got.
 
The topic is pretty much passe' now... everyone has explained it beyond my wildest expectations... but it should be stated that the Fast-Hitch absolutely HAD DRAFT CONTROL. I've never seen one on a Super C but everything above and including a 300 certainly did. Thanks to you and all others for shedding light on this topic! Fritz
 
(quoted from post at 08:14:15 06/21/11) I completely disagree with that. The Snap Coupler system was and still is great if adjusted and maintained correctly. It is the best system by far, If you take the time to adjust it correctly.
Click to expand...

You have to be kidding! Farmers back in that day maintaining something that they took for granted! I spent from 55 to 71 growing up in NJ. Then in 71 moved to MN. Joined the Army in 74. In those 3 years I came to understand that many of the older farmers just didn't know how to maintain a tractor. I worked for one guy that you stepped around holes in the hay wagons to stack hay. Another who had a welder and a busted up disk.......that he ran wired up with barbed wire. My own brother in law wanted his son to split a 1586 by supporting it on 55 gallon drums and boards so he wouldn't have to buy metal to build stands or pay to have a clutch replaced. Was at Ft Riley KS from 74-76. Worked for some farmers down there. 1ST one didn't know how to bleed the fuel filters on a 560D. Had a arc welder he got at auction....had it wired in....and never even tried it.

Dad had an AC with a snap coupler.....I wouldn't give you 2 cents for it. And he was excellent with his maintenance.

Rick
 
The Snap-Coupler worked as easy as the Fast-Hitch, that's true. But the Fast-hitch was just a sliver better because of the ease of conversion. All you had to have was two blank hooks, insert them into the sockets, back up to the desired implement, weld them on, you're done. The Snap-Coupler required slightly more fabrication, to attach the lift links.
 
I agree with your the 3 points you make. However, the 3PH still has a different pitch depending on the height of the implement. Also, the 3PH may direct force to the front of the tractor, but that takes weight away from the drive wheels. I can't argue that the 3PH supports implement weight better, but maybe the Fast Hitch just wasn't designed to carry extremely heavy implements? I am not overwhelmingly familiar with 2 point Fast Hitches, but on my 140 (1 point hitch), I can set the drawbar bail to be leveled by the front hydraulics. This means that I can change the pitch of a plow (or any other implement) for more or less "suck" without getting off the tractor to screw the third arm in or out. The bail can be pinned to the floorboard of the tractor for cultivating very quickly.
The 3PH certainly is better than the Fast Hitch for many tasks. However, I argue that the Fast Hitch is better OVERALL.

I enjoy this friendly discussion, SF
 
3-point stays very near level WHILE IMPLEMENT IS IN A WIDE RANGE OF HEIGHT, where fast hitch changes rapidly as lowered/raised.

Tranfering weight to front does NOT take weight off the rear. That weight remains constant. 3-point converts force applied through implement draft in the form of front down force. That's the very basic premise of Harry Fergusons design.

You can argue until you turn blue, facts speak LOUDLY....Fast hitch was ignored for the most part, even so as far as IH themselves. They eventually realized it wasn't popular, nor did it work as efficiently.

Looks like there never really was any advantage other than POSSIBLY saving a few seconds of time while hitching, and a boat load of DISadvantages. That doesn't sound like "overall better" to most folks. It sounds like the fast hitch went away because it never was a serious threat to the FAR SUPERIOR 3-point hitch design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Farmall Fast Hitch Plowing
Replies
10
Views
960
Absent Minded Farmer
Absent Minded Farmer
B
60 MF-35 3 point lift problem.
Replies
1
Views
184
Butch58
B
F
Farmall 130 hitch conversion
Replies
16
Views
556
BunkumBen
B
D
JD 1520 Independent PTO problem
Replies
7
Views
418
Jim.ME
J
crsutton81
Farmall Cub fertilizer attachment
Replies
6
Views
447
crsutton81
crsutton81
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.

Copyright © 1997-2024 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

Back
Top