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

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver
 
Marketplace
Classified Ads
Photo Ads
Tractor Parts
Salvage

Community
Discussion Forums
Project Journals
Your Stories
Events Calendar
Hauling Schedule

Galleries
Tractor Photos
Implement Photos
Vintage Photos
Help Identify
Parts & Pieces
Stuck & Troubled
Vintage Ads
Community Album
Photo Ad Archives

Research & Info
Articles
Tractor Registry
Tip of the Day
Safety Cartoons
Tractor Values
Serial Numbers
Tune-Up Guide
Paint Codes
List Prices
Production Nbrs
Tune-Up Specs
Torque Values
3-Point Specs
Glossary

Miscellaneous
Tractor Games
Just For Kids
Virtual Show
Museum Guide
Memorial Page
Feedback Form

Yesterday's Tractors Facebook Page

  
Tractor Talk Discussion Board

Re: inline 4 vs inline 6


[ Expand ] [ View Replies ] [ Add a Reply ] [ Return to Forum ]

Posted by Buzzman72 on October 14, 2013 at 08:23:06 from (74.138.185.198):

In Reply to: Re: inline 4 vs inline 6 posted by VicS on October 14, 2013 at 07:37:40:

None of the Farmall "letter-series" 4-cylinders had a balance shaft...and they did OK, for their era.

With a 4-cylinder 4-stroke engine, you have a cylinder firing every 180 degrees of crankshaft rotation; with an inline six, you have a cylinder firing every 120 degrees. If bore and stroke are equal between the 4 and the six--which seldom occurs--the six always has two more "mouths to feed" at any given RPM.

About the closest to the "all things being equal" that I know of in the IH/Farmall line are the 806, which had the 301 cid gas six...and the 544, which had the 200 cid four. [Since you brought up balance shafts, I chose a 4-cylinder that has one.] Same bore and stroke, just that the 806 had 50% more cylinders. The 544 was rated at about 53 PTO horsepower, and used 4.4 gallons of fuel per hour. The 806 was rated at 93 PTO horsepower, but consumed 7.4 gallons per hour to do it. So the 50% more cubic inches produces 75% more horsepower...and uses 68% more fuel to do it. [Notice, too, that the C301 in the 806 is rated at 2400 rpm max, and the C200 is rated at 2200 rpm.]

So which tractor is "better"? Depends on what your needs are for a particular job. If you need a 120 hp tractor, BOTH are gonna suck. If the job only requires around 50 hp or less, why not use the 4-cylinder and put the fuel savings in your pocket? And when you get to the point of needing 75-80 hp, the 4-cylinder is gonna suck. As I said, it all depends on what your NEEDS are. Y'know why 8N Fords remain popular? Because that's all the tractor some folks NEED for what they do with a tractor.


Replies:




Add a Reply

:
:
:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Advanced Posting Options

: If you check this box, email will be sent to you whenever someone replies to this message. Your email address must be entered above to receive notification. This notification will be cancelled automatically after 2 weeks.



 
Advanced Posting Tools
  Upload Photo  Select Gallery Photo  Attach Serial # List 
Return to Post 

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


Today's Featured Article - Picking Corn - by Rick Nikolich. It was the day before Christmas shutdown at work and I asked our lead engineering expert Scott Andrzejewski what he was going to do over the holidays. He said that he had some corn that he still needed to pick with an antique one-row New Idea corn picker. Scott has a nice farm about an hour north of Lansing in St. Johns, MI. He wanted to get the rest of his corn in by the next day (Christmas Eve). We had about an inch of new snow on the ground and single digit temperatures. So in the bac ... [Read Article]

Latest Ad: Sell 1958 Hi-Altitude Massey Fergerson tractor, original condition. three point hitch pto engine, Runs well, photos available upon request [More Ads]

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