(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Wide fronts/ Narrow fronts

P

Phil Scarborough

Member
I have always wondered why so many North American tractors have narrow fronts. Over here in England they are quite rare, our farmers prefer wide ones. It seems to me that stability would be a problem with a front end loader/narrow front combination. Can anyone explain why the difference in poularity?
 
Early wide fronts were not able to turn sharply like a narrow front plus when late summer cultivating corn the wide front would knock the stalks over.
The only time narrow fronts presented a problem was with an INEXPERIENCED (dumb) operator.
I personally have thousands of hours driving a narrow fron H Farmall doing all sorts of tasks including stacking loose hay with a F-10 Farmhand loader. Keep the load low (less than 1 foot off the ground) and you won't have any trouble.
 
Historically it had to do with row crop cultivation, and there are a lot of flat or relatively flat areas in this country where stability is not a problem. The early wide fronts did not turn as tight. I like narrow fronts for work in the woods skidding logs, I can turn tightly between trees and with the Farmall H i used to have and the 300 I have now if I turn the front wheels all the way I can turn right around with the inside rear tire remaining stationary. For loader work a wide front is preferable, I mostly only use the loader on the 300 for plowing snow which means that the weight up in the air is not that great since I have a blade and not a bucket.
Zach
 
Do you have the row crops over there like Corn or cotton that needed cultivating? They were much easier to put front mount cultivators on and then for corn harvest a lot had a mounted picker on and that would only work with a narrow front as the harvesting units were at the side of the tractor. One company thought they were going to make a workable 2 row mounted picker for a wide front but the whole thing was in front of the front axle and in any condition it would have been impossible to keep it on the row and then that 6:00 X 16" tire could not carry the load sticking out there. Then again the narrow fronts turned easier and quicker than a wide front on same model of tractor and when you made a 180* turn with a planter and you went back just 80" from where you came to the end you needed something that would turn fast and easy.
 
Both front mounted culitvators and mounted corn pickers either need or work easier with a narrow front. My wife hadn't seen a dual tire narrow front until she moved here from the west coast. The narrow fronts there are single tire, works better in flood irrigated fields.
 
Several reasons. The more original narrow fronts were vegetable tractors, made for working rows of vegetables in a truck farming envirionment. But the sngle fronts couldn't really support heavier implements, so the two wheel became popular, as much for flotation as for implement weight. Row crop farmers preferred the narrow front for working corn because of the tighter turn radius and sight line of the work at hand. Plus, they were very handy for backing wagons and towed equipment into buildings and barns and were somewhat cheaper to purchase initially. As the machines have gotten heavier, the wide front is most common now because there isn't as much torque on the frame, which has caused more than one to break after use from the leverage difference caused by the narrow fronts. That's from the pivot poit being much closer to the main frame- a narrow front naturally places more twist on the frame, especially with higher horsepower and weight. The stability is somewhat of an issue, but common sense operation of the machine also has a large role in safety. Any tractor can be rolled on a slope or flipped over backwards in certain situations. Personally, I have two narrow front tractors now, and still prefer them for most jobs around my place, even with the hills. But most were discontinued around 1975 as fewer farms worked corn and Ralph Nader became famous for sueing the makers.
 
There was somewhat of a stability problem, (or it could be a problem) if you tried to traverse uneven or steep ground with too much speed. When I was young we had a neighbor who drove up on a pile of dirt at the end of the field and flipped over on him. But, then again, I my next door neighbor flipped his wide front JD just a few months ago. He was just fortunate. (stupid,but fortunate). As has already been stated, It's just a matter of using common sense.
 
Row crops here were often cultivated with 2 row mounted cultivation "plows" the end of field tactic was to spin the tractor around on one rear tire contact patch and work the next two rows. Thus minimizing the repeated driving over the headland's plants. The "rowcrop" narrow front was far easier to manipulate in that effort, and its maneuverability is considered much greater. The high profile and large tire diameters with no front axle beam also allowed cultivation far into the growth season (pre-herbicide). Our "corn" could be cultivated with no top damage when it was 20 inches tall. Stability with either wide or narrow is close to the same. with the exception of wide fronts with springing systems providing resistance to tipping. (rare here, and not seen by me on very many European tractors in the photos I have seen. The pivoting point for a wide front is the front axle center just under the bolster. The pivot point on a narrow is the contact patch of the tire on the side toward the tipping. Making an interesting comparison.
A narrow front loader can place the bucket closer to obstructions and avoid being snagged on them in close quarters. Most of my seat time has been divided between narrow front Farmall H SH M 400 and others, and IH350U and Ford 8N style wide front. Jim
 
Actually the results of a universaty study only points to 2 times where a narrow front is decidedly more unstable. One is with a loader with the loaser raise. The higher the loader is raise to more unstable it becomes. The other is going downhill with weight pushing the tractor like with a loaded wagon.

The narrow front started to die out in the US when better steering came out in the late 50s early 60s, power brakes made steering brakes work better, row crops started to get planted with bigger planters (bigger than 4 row) and the mounted picker started to die out.

Rick
 
Hear is a real pain in the you know what. Need wide front or take loader off. AND move it out of the mountains.
a106281.jpg
 
Self propelled corn combines were not used or widely available to Midwest row croppers until around 1960-65. Many farmers "here" therefore had narrow front tractors to allow mounted corn pickers to be used. After corn combines came to be widely used there was no need or market for mounted corn pickers. I would guess much of our US Midwest terrain is flatter than most of the UK. We never had stability concerns with narrow fronts because of that. Also many narrow front primary tillage tractors were never used with a loader,they were purchased to be used for a single purpose--heavy tillage.
 
I truly think the stability between a narrow front and wide front is somewhat psychological. We grew up with narrow fronts and had a loader on one of the tractors. Never did flip any of them. It's like any other piece of equipment or tool You have to have a feel for what you're doing with it.

We also had orchards at home. We had quite a few 3 legged orchard ladders. Matter a fact you'll never see a 4 legged orchard ladder. A three legged ladder is much more stable than a 4 legged ladder. Have you ever seen a 4 legged ladder set on all four legs at the same time? They usually always wobble between three of the four legs. Tripods are all three legs too!
 
What about the pivot in the center of a wide front axle?

That pivot allows the tractor to lean way over on its side before the front end will do anything to stop it, and by then it's too late.

Wide fronts ride better because the odds of getting both wheels in the same chuck hole are a lot lower. But that's about it...

More stable in a rollover? I don't think they help at all.
 
Mcrisch you said it perfect...seems very few understand the
center pivot deal. I have seen it happen a few times,(
that being a wide front on a side hill.) That tractor is so far
over the center of gravity before the center pivot gives any
counter support.
 
Moving the rear wheels out further would help stability quite a bit. The rear wheels are probably in so far to stay between the sides of the bucket.
 
For a 4-wheel tractor, draw a rectangle that indicates the tire contact point of the tires. As long as the center of gravity stays within that rectangle, the tractor will not tip over.

Draw a triangle for a narrow front tractor that includes the point where the tires contact the ground. If the center of gravity moves outside that triangle, the tractor will tip over.

In this situation, the rectangle has more area than the triangle, thus making it less prone to tip over. Moving the wheels further out or adding duals makes the rectangle larger.

Just things to ponder. Needless to say, the vertical point of gravity changes with the height of the tractor and can make certain tractors more prone to tipping over. Guess that's why I like lower utility tractors.

The oscillation of the wide front is usually limited, but until the tractor frame stop contacts the wide front axle, the tractor is a actually a 3-point suspension, when the oscillation limits are reached, it becomes a 4-point suspension.
 
(quoted from post at 14:42:35 03/11/13) For a 4-wheel tractor, draw a rectangle that indicates the tire contact point of the tires. As long as the center of gravity stays within that rectangle, the tractor will not tip over.

Draw a triangle for a narrow front tractor that includes the point where the tires contact the ground. If the center of gravity moves outside that triangle, the tractor will tip over.

In this situation, the rectangle has more area than the triangle, thus making it less prone to tip over. Moving the wheels further out or adding duals makes the rectangle larger.

Just things to ponder. Needless to say, the vertical point of gravity changes with the height of the tractor and can make certain tractors more prone to tipping over. Guess that's why I like lower utility tractors.

The oscillation of the wide front is usually limited, but until the tractor frame stop contacts the wide front axle, the tractor is a actually a 3-point suspension, when the oscillation limits are reached, it becomes a 4-point suspension.
Click to expand...


Exactly what the study said. They added that most unstable point of operation for a NF tractor is with a raised loader and down hill with something pushing the tractor.

Sure you can tip a WF. But for example take 2 Farmall Ms. One NF and one WF. The NF is more apt to tip being operated inside the same parameters. Really wish I had bookmarked that study.

For all you guys stating that you have run NF tractors for years and haven't tipped one. That makes little difference to physics. Just because you haven't tipped one doesn't mean they are not more prone to tip in [b:26cfa9a9c1]certain situations [/b:26cfa9a9c1]. Doesn't mean every one or even most are going to tip. It's just a factor to be aware of on the operational envelope of that design. And yes safe intellegent operation makes a difference.

Rick
 
This has all been said, but I will do it again. With gusto.

My loader tractor is a Farmall M with live hydraulics, power steering, and a narrow front. As far as I am concerned you won't find a better loader tractor (that is gear driven). I am in Kansas so I don't have lots of uneven terrain to deal with, but I am still smart with my loads and don't lift the loader any higher than needed. In fact, the only time I can recall having the loader all the way up in the last 6 months was when I was in the bucket trimming trees. I'd like to think I don't weigh enough to tip old Molly over.

If you use a tricycle front tractor as a loader you will be amazed. It is like having a ZTR tractor. The things I do each day with my M would take dozens of backing turn arounds to achieve. I don't even have to push in the clutch to do it. There's no other tractor here that will drive through the gate and right to the feed bunk - it is nice to not have to think of things like that when I'm getting the lot ready.
 
The answer is quite simple. The original wide front tractors did not have much clearance under the front axle, so they could not be used for cultivating as late into the season as a tricycle gear tractor could.
 
Not the same thing at all. The pivot on the wide fronts lets it balance just fine. A narrow front acts like a wide front with a pivot at ground level.

The higher the pivot the more stability. The width of the wide front end only really comes into play once you have lifted a back tire on the way to rolling over.

With our hills here there are nearly 0 narrow front tractors left. Lots of antiques but all wide fronts. The few that a left tend to get rolled over and sons and daughters won't let their parents on them any more.
 
Phil, here is my narrow front in the British Isles! It sure does stand out on a show field! LOL
Sam
a106357.jpg
 

I know that a wide front tractor is slightly more stable than narrow but the other factors that come into play are far greater. In fifty years around tractors I have been involved in three near rollovers. All were on WFEs, none on NFEs. And I spend a lot of time on my NFE Fords.
 
American tractors with narrow fronts are older ones......mostly pre 1970. You can cultivate with a wide or narrow front......taller crops with a narrow front. But try mounting a corn picker on a wide front. Advent of corn combines was when popularity of wide fronts started. Much easier plowing with a wide front, no need for the narrow front.
 
Found one of the studies. http://www.nasdonline.org/document/906/d000746/tractor-overturn-hazards.html

As I stated before. In certain cases a NF tractor is more prone to tipping than a WF. Can't argue with that. Cause you never tipped one isn't a valid arguement. Sorry, it don't work that way. And just because you don't hear about NF tractors tipping today isn't a reasonable arguement. If I draw a 10 mile circle on the map around my place I can come up with one, yea one NF tractor that actually gets used in field work. A hobby farmer who cuts and bales hay with a NF Farmall M. Got an old guy who is a retiree who uses a brush cutter on about 10 acres of grass behind a 450 Farmall NF but that ground is pretty flat and he isn't and never was a farmer. There just are not too many NF tractors still being worked in farming operations today, only ones I know of are used as stationary PTO power. I do know of several people who have died in tractor roll overs. One on pavement when he tried to turn while going downhill, NF Farmall H, baler and loaded hay wagon. My Marine buddy's grand father rolled a JD A NF on himself on a side hill years ago. Got a nephew who rolled 2 WF tractors running too fast and turning too sharp. He is still around but a better operator today.

You NF guys don't take this the wrong way. I'm not a NF fan but really got nothing against them. I just don't care for how they look. The NF end had it's place but time has made them obsolete for the time being. With as big and as heavy as the modern tractor is today I don't think they will make a come back.

Rick
 
I don't think a wide front is any easier to plow with than a narrow. Maybe it's just me, but I see little difference.

If stability was as important as some of the safety nazis make out, we'd all be using crawlers!
 
Well, I certainly started a discusson here! Thanks for all the replies, I have learned a lot. Here in England, we don't grow cotton and only small amounts of corn, so we never had mounted pickers.In row crop work, our farmers seem to accept the damage done during repeated headland travel.
I will try to think of a different question next week.LOL
Sam, are you going to bring that beautiful row crop Ferguson to Newark in November? We would love to see it.
 
(quoted from post at 04:37:52 03/12/13)
If stability was as important as some of the safety nazis make out, we'd all be using crawlers!
Click to expand...


??????????????????????????????????????????? Nazis :roll: ? Stability isn't important :shock: ? Go ask the guy pinned under a tractor just how important stability is :( .

Rick
 
Those narrow front tractors also employed a high rear axle either through the use of tall tires or a drop axle arrangement such as in the Allis Chalmers WC and WD design. This enabled us to cultivate until the corn was high enough to canopy out and choke off the weeds on its own. Took longer to canopy out in those days because we were still addicted to horse width rows of 42" or so. Those old narrow front tractors all had some way to set the rear wheels out wider so as to straddle two rows. Either by sliding the wheels out/in on a solid bar axle or reversing the discs or a combination of that. Rear wheels were set in for plowing and out for cultivating. Thus the advent, in some cases, of spin-out disc wheels. Those old Allis front mount two row cultivators were the easiest to put on and take off. Drive in, insert three pins and go. Took less than 10 minutes and 9 of those minutes were spent attaching the rear gangs. BTDT (;>))
 
You've never seen a backhoe with a huge concrete block hanging off the front bucket, with the boom stretched clear out, going downhill to set the block for a bridge abuttment, have you? Back wheels come up, tips til the front axle hits the stops, then down the hill you go.

Wide front won't stop it from going over every time, but it might buy you a few seconds to turn into the tip and save it, or bail.
 
(quoted from post at 08:30:02 03/12/13)
(quoted from post at 04:37:52 03/12/13)
If stability was as important as some of the safety nazis make out, we'd all be using crawlers!
Click to expand...


??????????????????????????????????????????? Nazis :roll: ? Stability isn't important :shock: ? Go ask the guy pinned under a tractor just how important stability is :( .

Rick
Click to expand...

I was referring to the hysterical people out there going on about how tricycle tractors just appear to tip over 5 or 6 times a day for no good reason. If you haven't met up with some of these people yet, count yourself lucky. They tend to be the same ones that have never used a buzz saw or even seen one run, but they'll tell anyone that will listen that using one results in instant decapitation in 99.9999% of cases within the first 10 seconds of the thing being started. And don't even mention the stickler type log splitters to them.

Tricycle tractors are just as stable as a wide front when used within reason. They don't just roll over for no good reason. Personally, I've never seen a tricycle roll over, but I've seen 3 or 4 wide fronts on their side, mostly with loaders on them. Moderation and common sense is the key.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Janicholson
Re: Narrow vs wide fronts?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
ed12345
E
B
Narrow Vs Wide Front Strength With Loader
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
tractorguy2
tractorguy2
L
I was mowing when...
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
John Deere D
John Deere D
L
Schwartz Front End vs Narrow Front
Replies
15
Views
668
BarnyardEngineering
BarnyardEngineering
olgentdc
B-i-L Joel passed away His Eulogy 10-22--56/// 11-8--
Replies
9
Views
997
olgentdc
olgentdc
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