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

Shop Now

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

Tractor Talk Discussion Forum

2wd Vs. 4wd

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Mitchissippi

10-11-2006 07:09:26




Report to Moderator

Last weekend I did a little experi-o-menting. My cousin bought a FWA 5610 New Holland with a front end loader on it. Then he bought a 10' Athens Off-set disc. Didn't know if he could pull it, but the price was right.

I pulled it with his 5610 and our 1066 Saturday evening. Neither tractor has rear wheel weights. The 1066 has front weights and Rice and Cane singles.

I tried both tractors in very hard ground and ground that had been disced before the last rain we had.

I can safely say that the FWA 5610 pulled the disc as good as, or a little better than the 1066 - running the 5610 in four wheel drive. In any ground I tried them in.

Been wondering for a while just how much defference the FWA makes. I'm sold on it.

Mitch

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
ed1

10-11-2006 20:11:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
I'm not familuar with the Athens 10'disk. If the disc's diameter is small and worn like my dads old 10' JD disk you may only need 40 hp to pull the disk. In this case I agree that the 5610 is the better choice. Hell I pulled the 10' JD disk with a farmall M with duals.

But hook up my dad's 14' white disk on soft ground and you'll be pulling it at 2 mph with the 5610 unless your just scratching the ground. Your 1066 must really need some attention if it's out pulled by a 5610 even with FWD. You simply cant beat the HP and weight of the 1066 compaired to the 5610 (twice the HP and twice the weight). It should pull circules around the 5610 on a bad day.

Set it up properly and turn up the injection pump and you've got a real puller. I've heard of 1066 pushing out over 160 hp and one pushing 180. The weak point is the ring an pinion and at 180 hp it won't last long. The DT-414 is a tough engine.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Dachshund

10-11-2006 19:26:58




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
Can afford FWA or 4wd! So I guess I'll never find out how good it is!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Leland

10-11-2006 18:52:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
I drive either a 7140 or a Mx240 with a brent 772 grain cart behind it and belive me having the front end locked in makes all the differance in the world and these are not small tractors .



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jonfarmer

10-11-2006 13:11:47




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
How about this. Fellow I worked for had 2 disks that were exactly the same, they were both Sunflower 10ft heavy duty Rock Flex wheel harrows. He had a 1466 with a coleman 4wd kit on it with single standard width long bar short bar tires, and he had a White Field Boss 2-155 2wd with regualar half worn long bar, long bar tractor tires on the inside and new deep tread rice and cain tires on the outside. The 1466 is 140hp and the white is 155hp, neither had any weights except for I think fluid in the tires. The White would outpull it on soft going, that 1466 I kinda didn't like because with the White it would always start spinning when I was heading for trouble and give warning, but that 1466 would go right along and then suddenly sink, and when it did that, it was usually very stuck, but the good news is that these 2 tractors could easily pull each other out. Gives alot better ride on duals over rought ground too. Oh yeah, this gound where I got to test them both isn't clled swamp road for nothing. I tell you what though, I later got to try a 4wd Allis Chalmers 8050 150hp up there with duals and fully weighted, and there is no comparison to those other rigs, it felt almost unstoppable, had 6 new rice and cane tires on it.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
PhilcaseinWPa

10-11-2006 09:57:37




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
A company I deal with some sells a raised bed plastic mulch layer. Makes the raised bed and lays the mulch with one machine. They recommend 60 - 70 hp for 2wd and 40 for 4wd.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
PJBROWN

10-11-2006 09:46:55




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
That's hard for me to beleave. I have a JD 2755 4Wd and this spring I got it stuck with a 10' harrow. I had my neighbor pull me out with his 1066 2wd. I 1066 pulled my tractor and harrow out like it was pulling a cart!!! They can pull a six botton plow with the 1066. I can only pull a 4 botton plow with my 75 hp 2755 and I run out of power not traction. 1066's are pulling machines!!!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mitchissippi

10-11-2006 11:44:57




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to PJBROWN, 10-11-2006 09:46:55  
I was surprised myself.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Brokenwrench

10-11-2006 09:32:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
Just a thought.
I wonder how it would`ve went if you dualed up the 1066 and added more weight. That`s when I think the HP difference would really show up. There are guys (and gals) on here who could tell you the exact specs on both tractors, I can`t.
A guess would be that the 1066 running pretty stock has to be close to 130hp. So if the 5610 has a loader you`d probably be fairly close weight wise and on a 10ft offset disc the fwa would be more of a factor than the HP. For heavy tillage I`d think the 1066 would walk all over the 5610. Besides it`d sound alot cooler too. I do agree though, if you`d had a 66 hp tractor without fwa, you`d have noticed a big difference between the two. FWA especially with a loader hanging out in front of it puts alot of traction on the ground.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mitchissippi

10-11-2006 11:43:32




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Brokenwrench, 10-11-2006 09:32:13  
Oh, I'd expect different results with weights and duals cause the ol 10 was for eva more pawing the ground. I couldn't get the extra hp to the ground.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
TomTX

10-11-2006 09:23:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
Mitch,
In our North Central Texas soils, you can figure about 10 PTO HP per foot of offset disk. I pull a 7 1/2 foot JD offset with my 2WD 67 HP MF and it has a FULL load when the disks really take the ground. I would think from talking to people around here that the FWD would add the equivalent of about 25 percent; this is not based upon science just opinions. Tom



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bill(Wis)

10-11-2006 09:20:46




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
My experience falls in line with yours. I can get away with a lighter tractor of less HP with MFWD. Something I like because of compaction, cost(including less fuel consumed), etc). This includes tillage and planting and when I include all of the utility work such as mowing, loader work (MFWD really shines on that one) grading, snow handling, logging, etc., I just would not be without a tractor with MFWD. The results you'll obtain in most field operations do not show up dramatically on the Nebraska data, however, probably because of the test conditions. That being an asphalt track verus the real world of undulating and differing field conditions.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Allan In NE

10-11-2006 08:41:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
Mitch,

Just for what it's worth, I think those 4 wheel drives are absolute monsters when it comes to doing a job. However, to my mind, they just are not worth the grits in terms of dollars charged retail.

However, I will say that the newer fuel economy features do get my attention. It’s almost unbelievable the way they just barely sip the suds.

Allan



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mitchissippi

10-11-2006 11:51:57




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Allan In NE, 10-11-2006 08:41:54  
Allan, I agree with your line of thinking. We use both tractors for chore work. All our row crop land is rented out. Sure, I could get by with lot smaller tractor to do what I do, but around here 1066's are cheap when compared to a smaller 4wd tractor. No more than I do, I don't know if I'd live long enough to see better fuel efficiency offset the cost of buying a smaller tractor.

Mitch



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mike (WA)

10-11-2006 08:25:07




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
I have one job that I have to do with a loader tractor every year- have always done it with either an IH 504 or Oliver 550 in the past. This last year I got my wife, the horse farmer, a new 4010 JD (no, not THAT 4010)- 19 HP, loader, 4WD, hydrostatic. I was skeptical because of the small size, but I'm really impressed. Not sure if the loader job was any faster this year, but it sure wasn't any slower, and was a heckuva lot more fun!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
RodInNS

10-11-2006 07:33:10




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
Hmm. That 5610S was doing well. At 66 hp I don't expect it moved a 10' offset very quick though? It'll do OK in light ground, but once you hit heavy soil and get the disc buried, it's either not going to have power enough to move it fast enough, or it simply won't pull it. I've been down that road with a 7710 and 9' of offest. Just the same, I see your point about the IH with 2 big wheels spinnin' and doing nothing. So far as I'm concerned, FWA makes the tractor. I wouldn't buy one without it.

Rod

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
RustyFarmall

10-11-2006 07:22:14




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
I can remember as a kid looking through the farm magazines and seeing the pictures of the tractors in use over in the European countries. Just about all of them were equipped with the front wheel assist. This was way back in the '50s. Kinda wonderin' why it took 40 to 50 years for the FWA to catch on over here in North America?



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mike M

10-11-2006 07:17:50




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mitchissippi, 10-11-2006 07:09:26  
I'm not real familar with those models. How do they compare in HP ?



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mitchissippi

10-11-2006 08:14:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: 2wd Vs. 4wd in reply to Mike M, 10-11-2006 07:17:50  
The 1066 has about twice the h.p. as the 5610.



[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