2+2 questions

The IH 86 series tractors with the cab forward rode much worse than the earlier 66 series did. When I see a 2+2 tractor it looks like the same rear half and cab as a 86 series. Did the 2+2 ride Better?? Al

The 2+2s were like driving a snake. Front went one way and tail went the other way with a lot of wiggle in the middle where the cab was.
Loren

I had a 3588 and it rode better that 2 wheel 86 series. Once you got on to driving the tractor they really didn't drive any different than an 86 series. My dad also had a 3588 and he cultivated with and 8 row wide cultivator. Flat land, contours, side hills it worked great. Especially on side hills. After he used the 2+2 to cultivate he would never consider any other tractor. My uncle had a 3588 and 12 row narrow, same experience.

The 2+2 rides fairly well i think. Unlike the cab-in-front articulation tractors where the cab swings the operator around just ahead of the A-joint, the 2+2 rear stays relativley stationary as the driver is behind the A-joint and the engine/fuel tank do the swinging up front instead. ?Point the nose and you shall follow.?

They were developing the Magnum Upgrade Articulated because of the 2+2 success however money was tight at the time and CIH opted for FWA instead. There is at least one of those prototype magnums running around out there.

I drove a 2+2 for a guy I worked for. It rode pretty good. I never did any heavy tillage work with it. I drove it on a twin rake rolling windrows and it seemed to be as maneuverable as a regular tractor.

Ride through the field i thought was great especially with duals on. It was road running they could be a bear cause they would gallop at least was the case with our 3588 the 6788 ran slower down the road it nevef galloped. Maybe tire type and air pressure were factors too. If i remember correctly that was with lots of tounge weight on the drawbar with the manure spreader.

I would love to have one around just not sure what i would do with that size machine too small for tillage and too big for odd jobs

We have one, a 3588. Used it for heavy tillage for several years. She's since been demoted to light 3-point field cultivator work in wet spots. The other answers all reflect the ride of a 2+2. They can be a little rough riding going down the road but all depends on the tires and load, etc. Depending on what you're pulling in the field they can be a little light depending if you have duals and weights, how big the implement is. This can affect the ride.

Not terrible tractors. Cheap HP. They are more than capable in mud. The crazy repairs, articulating components, overhauls, and coolers full of cold beverages in a non-working AC cab eventually add up. That's been our experience.

The 2+2's do have pros and cons. I'm satified with the ride they give. I have two 3788s. Each has around 3000 hours. I had the first for 12 years and the second over a year now. That one came from a neighbor who owned it for 25 years. What I don't like about the 3788s is they only have 1000 rpm pto. I don't push mine too hard. Only around 75 hours per year on each one. I pull a 496 20 foot disc and a 9 shank disc chisel with them. They could pull more dualled up with good tires, but I'm happy with them.

BJ-WI

I had a 3788 for a few years, It rode smoother than other articulated 4WD tractors I owned. I suspect it rode smoother because the cab was attached to the rear frame section while the others had the cab attached to the front frame section. The front frame half does a lot more bumping and shaking because it's wheels have to run in the ridges and holes, while, while the rear wheels are running in ground the front wheels have already flattened nicely.

I'm not understanding the "Snake" comment. If you had ever driven a 2+2 you would have seen the front and rear tires pretty much followed the same path on turns. I ran a White 4-180 for a week disking up flooded out corn patches, lots of turning, and only pulling a 14 ft disk the turns were at higher speeds. First day my sides hurt bad when I got out of that tractor, second. day I figured I'd pee blood that night. 3rd day I slowly turned the steering wheel, no pains in my side. 2+2 would not jerk you side-to-side. Also the Case 2470 I ran for a week steered nice and smooth, had 28Lx26 tires, floated across the field chisel plowing. The 8440 Deere I ran for the landlord jerked, but I was pulling the Glenco Soil-Saver that was 2-Shanks too big so slow I didn't need to jerk the wheel.

Most 2+2's only had duals on the rear, the Kimco axle on the frt was a little light duty for that big of tractor, plus with 4 duals, on sharp turns the outside tires on the inside of turns could lock lugs which kinda tore things up eventually. Stationary, a 2+2 had most of it's weight up front, working, pulling, or with something on 3-pt weight was closer to 50-50 frt to back. All by Design!

I have a pair of 3588s. I think they ride smoother than my 1086 does. and they almost "walk on water" (the reason I got the second one). they turn a little different than the 2wds, but once you get used to the turning, just "follow the nose".

I always thought the 86 series was many times more comfortable than the 66 series - but that was primarily due them have much better seats.

The only thing I ever noticed about the "cab forward" design was that the cab of an 86 series never caught on the unloading auger of a grinder mixer never caught the cab like it did on the 66 series.

I remember the guy who owned the Deere dealer had a toy 2+2 up on a shelf in his office. Somebody mentioned one of those things one day and he got that toy off the shelf and put it on the floor. He pushed it backwards and said if you give it to a kid to play with,that's the way they'll push it because that's the way it wants to go. LOL

For those interested I have put up some photos of the experimental articulated Magnum. If I remember correctly the front wheels would turn like a normal magnum until they stopped and then the articulation joint would kick in for extra turning.

I am also posting some photos of my fathers 3588 out working.

Here is a video of the 3588 out driving. The video is shot by a GoPro mounted in the cab. It gives a pretty good idea of the ride in the cab as well as how it steers.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9mjOGQm8fmA" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I suspect some of the comments about 2+2 tractors come from people who have little experience with them. I've owned a 3588 for over 20 years and it is one of my favorite tractors for tillage and planting. I have mostly John Deere tractors and believe I'm pretty color blind on tractors. The 2+2 will "gallop" on the road unless you adjust the throttle or have something heavy behind it. I've loved plowing, disking, planting and ripping as the footprint and balance of the 2+2 is superior to any non-articulated tractor and it excels in soft ground. You never have to use the brakes to adjust direction of equipment and turns on the headlands is a breeze with no skidding as all four/6/or 8 wheels are pulling you through the turn. The IH 466 is equivalent to my JD 466's in power and fuel efficiency. The downside to 2+2's were weaker drivetrains, especially if you turned up the fuel pumps a lot. Cab, AC and gear shift quadrant were not up JD's standards. The 2+2 is a different kind of tractor that will not appeal to some people but as a "die hard Green guy" I must admit I love my "red hair step-child 2+2. IH had a good start on designing and building some Super 2+2s but the merger killed the development and funding. JMHO

the IH 86 series was the first cab forward tractors seems like they get alot of negative comments about everything. i personaly like the 1086 its my go to tractor for light tillage planting haying and wagon hauling. now all the tractors are cab forward so why didnt the JD white and AC guys complain when those companys moved their cabs forward ?

nice pictures and video connor