Tractors "running uphill" or "nose high"

mkirsch · Jan 16, 2011

For example, the Farmall 560 with stock 15.5x38 tires has a distinct "nose high" attitude.

Other glaring examples include the John Deere 420 and 430. The Farmall A with stock tires runs uphill, as does the Cub with the original 7-24 tires they came with in 1947. Plus the 806 with 34" rubber...

Were the manufacturers trying to achieve something? Did they think it looked good?

If you put bigger tires on to make the tractor sit level, you mess with the ground speed, and eat up power...

rrlund · Jan 16, 2011

You forgot most of the Massey Harris's.

camju · Jan 16, 2011

Are you sure all Jd's don't have there nose uphill??????LOL

rrlund · Jan 16, 2011

Well...in the air anyway.

Aaron Ford · Jan 16, 2011

I always thought that this was to bias more weight on the mains. I like the look.

Can't be good for fuel economy though.... Always running uphill like that.

J/K

Aaron

buickanddeere · Jan 16, 2011

You must be looking at the "W" row crop utility
chassis with 13.6X28 rears and 6:00-16 fronts. Put
the optional 11.2x34 or 12.4X34 on the rears and
stock 5:00-15's on the front. They level out.
The Utility, Standards,T's V's and highcrops run
level.
The tractor tires should be sized so the front end
is lower. This saves fuel instead of always driving
uphill.

old · Jan 16, 2011

I think the reason they are that way is o put a little bit more weight to the rear of the tractor so as to help give them a bit more traction. Sort of a way to shift the center of gravity of the machine to the rear a little bit. And yes almost all tractors seem to sit that way I know the Allis I have and the farmals etc all seem to do that

Bob · Jan 16, 2011

Ultradog MN · Jan 16, 2011

You mean like the pic below?
The JDs were some of the worst offenders.
I always assumed it was because they were a little like their owners - kind of had their nose in the air...

LarryT · Jan 16, 2011

AAWwwwww you guys need to stop kidding around and tell him it's all aerodynamics and it gives you a better angle of attack for short field takeoff's.

TGIN · Jan 16, 2011

I have a massey 22 with 34 in. rear tires and it sits level , most of them I have seen have 24 in. rubber and they are running up hill .

Anonymous-0 · Jan 16, 2011

I don't think it would make any difference traction wise unless it was almost vertical. Dave

Ken Macfarlane · Jan 16, 2011

You know it doesn't move any more weight back right?

Leroy · Jan 16, 2011

If you will notice those Deeres will be high on the front if equiped with the roll-a-matic but if that tractor has the standard front end settup then it will be setting level, the roll-a-matic requires more tire clearance to frame than the standard non moving up and down front wheels. And on the 420-430 series if equiped with the size that I would want the 34" and not the 28" that a lot of people wanted they sat level.

NW Ohio Tim · Jan 16, 2011

My dad, who would be 90 this year, always liked them high in the front. He said it was like a horse or a cow, you always pose them standing on a little crest with their shoulder high.

He grew up farming with horses and that was his opinion. Now I grew up with more modern tractors and enjoyed muscle cars and drag racing. I always thought the high rear low front looked like power.

It's funny because that's one thing we always talked about, our opinion of the high fronted tractors. I always figured they designed the early ones to appeal to the guys giving up horses.

Just my 2 cents.

Tim

Bob Bancroft · Jan 16, 2011

I have to add my vote for JD's as the worst offenders.
My cousin bought a new 4240. Eventually he put smaller tires on the front. He said it really did help the ride when pulling a semi-mounted plow. The front was less bouncy.
What has always bothered the he!! out of me is when a manual says "check oil when level"!!!!!
When what's level? The ground? What do you do with the JD high crop pictured- park the front end in a ditch?!

old · Jan 16, 2011

Is sure does when you really start pulling because if your really pulling hard the front end starts to lift and then in turn sure does put a lot of weight on the rear tires LOL. But yes it probably doesn't add much if any just sitting

old · Jan 16, 2011

Ya but it could also be to make it so as you start to pull something hooked to the draw bar that it helps with the lift you get on the draw bar so it evens it out when you pull.

ericlb · Jan 16, 2011

wow hang some curtains and this would be nice for a shooting stand in the off season, that thing is tall!

Fordfarmer · Jan 16, 2011

Ford 5000 rowcrop with 30" rear rubber, especially
if it had the optional 18" fronts... Never figured
out why anyone would want one set up like that.

Randy-IA · Jan 16, 2011

What about the -frame level, engine tilted down in back- which most tractors (cars, trucks, engines in general) are. Confounds me how yer supposed to 'check oil when level' . Which is supposed to be level? ;^)I'm sooo confused!

BushogPapa · Jan 16, 2011

If you were working rough ground back then, without power steering, you (like me) would be Eternally Grateful for that Roll-A-Matic front end..!!
While others would happily Break your arm, the JD would not..and was surprisingly easy to steer..

Slightly larger rear tires and they sat level !!

Ron..

wolfman · Jan 16, 2011

You surely don't see ANY high fronts at a pulling
contest. If one does show up that way, it won't win,
place or show.

Old Roy · Jan 16, 2011

yes JD was the biggest offender

LarryT · Jan 16, 2011

Oh Lord I love it. can you send me the original hahahahaha. lolrof. LarryT

Rick(MN) · Jan 17, 2011

As much as I have liked 560's through the years, that "running uphill" always rubbed me the wrong way. I had a late one that had the optional pressed wheels and with 18/4-34's it looked good. Tractor had a turbo and didnt lack for power. A comment was made earlier about weight distribution and got me to thinking. Back in the day...when people drove their tractor from the field to the county fair to pull. 560's were always a formidable competitor in their class because of the "balance". Was that just "dumb luck" on IH's part?.....or did the "running uphill" play a part in that?

Leroy · Jan 17, 2011

Actually they will win at the pulls, every year one particular wide front John Deere B seems to win the pull. Ever since I have been in the pull crew anyway.

wolfman · Jan 17, 2011

560s were just long wheelbased, well-balanced good pullers. Put 16.9s on one (most had 15.5s) & it was even a better puller.

Faster346 · Jan 20, 2011

(quoted from post at 12:35:26 01/16/11) My dad, who would be 90 this year, always liked them high in the front. He said it was like a horse or a cow, you always pose them standing on a little crest with their shoulder high.

He grew up farming with horses and that was his opinion. Now I grew up with more modern tractors and enjoyed muscle cars and drag racing. I always thought the high rear low front looked like power.

It's funny because that's one thing we always talked about, our opinion of the high fronted tractors. I always figured they designed the early ones to appeal to the guys giving up horses.

Just my 2 cents.

Tim

Where in NW Ohio are you Tim? I too am near there, and drag race!

Tractors "running uphill" or "nose high"

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Similar threads