# John Deere 7000 Net Wrap versus 9000 Net Wrap



## D.C.Cattle Company (Jul 19, 2010)

I just purchased a used John Deere 568 round baler. The gentleman that owned it prior to me said to use John Deere 7000 Cover Edge net wrap as opposed to the Cover Edge 9000 as it was weaker and was not holding up.

As I called around all the John Deere dealers within 100 miles of me (4 different dealers) they are handling Cover Edge 9000 *only *and claim there are no issues with this product.

Anyone had issues with this 9000 Net Wrap.

P.S. Not looking for alternative brand advice as I will stick with John Deere.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

To each their own, the most problems I've ever had with net wrap it said New Holland right on it, have had much better luck with Farmers and lately run nothing but Pritchett net wrap that costs over a hundred bucks less a roll than NH net wrap.


----------



## Trotwood2955 (Sep 4, 2012)

I'm not a net wrap expert but isn't the only difference in the 7000 vs 9000 the length of the roll? The quality of the net shouldn't be different. I use the Deere net wrap (just tama net in green color) in my NH baler and have had no issues yet.


----------



## Circle MC Farms LLC (Jul 22, 2011)

I never even knew there were two strengths of Cover edge. I just use what the JD dealer sells, never had an issue out of it really.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

A lot of guys here had issues especially in cornstalks when JD went to the longer rolls,they made it thinner when they made it longer.When the 3 baler service techs and aparts salesman quit useing it here it tells me something anyway.It sure did help my sales when they went to the longer rolls.


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

I switched from JD edge wrap this season. The new wrap i'm using is much better quality.


----------



## Tx Jim (Jun 30, 2014)

I use JD edge to edge net which is 13,200' in lenght on my 467 with no net strength/durability problems.


----------



## rajela (Feb 15, 2014)

swmnhay said:


> A lot of guys here had issues especially in cornstalks when JD went to the longer rolls,they made it thinner when they made it longer.When the 3 baler service techs and aparts salesman quit useing it here it tells me something anyway.It sure did help my sales when they went to the longer rolls.


What does the Pritchett roll of cover edge net cost and how long is it??


----------



## Tx Jim (Jun 30, 2014)

JD 4' edge to edge costs me $0.0225 per foot


----------



## endrow (Dec 15, 2011)

We need strength from the net wrap because the round bales we sell get a lot of handling. We bale and l load up and put in our barn . And then the person that might pick it up and buy it from us might take the Bale home and put it in his barn until he sells it then he will load it on that customer's truck and that customer will take it home . We want the netwrap to hold up for that whole process. Sometimes I think the number of wraps makes more strength than the actual brand of netwrap. When I bail rotary combine barley straw that I know is going to be for resale , I wrap that four times for strength. NOT sure what that means maybe some of YOU wrap them MORE OR maybe less


----------



## Colby (Mar 5, 2012)

JD net wrap is over rated. Wish I could find something different.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

rajela said:


> What does the Pritchett roll of cover edge net cost and how long is it??


Pallet price on 51" x 9840' is $193 a roll plus shipping

.0196 per ft

A roll wieghs about 103 lbs and is heavier then some other longer rolls


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

When I switched to Pritchett I went from 3.25 turns of standard Netex on stalk bales to 2.5 of Pritchett and the guys handling the bales said the Pritchett net still took abuse better.

I am using a roll of JD 64x8800 this summer that came with the baler, so far no problems.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Gearclash said:


> When I switched to Pritchett I went from 3.25 turns of standard Netex on stalk bales to 2.5 of Pritchett and the guys handling the bales said the Pritchett net still took abuse better.
> 
> I am using a roll of JD 64x8800 this summer that came with the baler, so far no problems.


Did you buy a new baler Gear?

Regards, Mike


----------



## Colby (Mar 5, 2012)

swmnhay said:


> Pallet price on 51" x 9840' is $193 a roll plus shipping
> 
> .0196 per ft
> 
> A roll wieghs about 103 lbs and is heavier then some other longer rolls


Do you sell it per roll? If so wants roll price. I'd like to try it.


----------



## jd4230ps (Dec 9, 2010)

Colby said:


> JD net wrap is over rated. Wish I could find something different.


Pritchett wrap is way better than JD. The 9000 JD is thinner. 9000 JD weighs 97 lbs. 7000 Pritchett weighs 93 lbs . That's all I need to know.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Colby said:


> Do you sell it per roll? If so wants roll price. I'd like to try it.


sent you a PM.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

I do not think Tama would change the thickness or quality of the net when they made larger rolls. I can not tell any difference in the Tama net made for Deere and other Tama net.

I am not a fan of Tama net. I bought a bad roll once that had random weak spots through out the roll. I guess a person can get a bad roll in any brand.

I have also joined the Pritchett following. A friend runs two 458 Deere balers. He borrowed a roll of Pritchett from me last year. This year he wanted 10 rolls and we split a pallet of 20.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

Vol said:


> Did you buy a new baler Gear?
> 
> Regards, Mike


Two years ago I bought a NH BR7090 and a NH BR780A out of Oklahoma, both used. The 7090 had 3500 bales on but was sort of a rebuilder as the stuffer had been trashed. I had it in the field that fall. The 780A was a pig in a poke, just needed some TLC. The 780A was to resell, but that hasn't happened yet. I am running that 780A this summer, and am using the full roll of wrap that was in the net box when I got the baler.


----------



## barnrope (Mar 22, 2010)

I know you didn't ask for this, and hate to burst any bubbles, but..... John Deere net is highly overpriced junk and I won't run it in any baler unless its a last resort. The best net in value and quality is Pritchett. I also like the CaseIH net however it is tad more expensive than Pritchett.

I bleed green in most instances.


----------



## jd4230ps (Dec 9, 2010)

Tim/South said:


> I do not think Tama would change the thickness or quality of the net when they made larger rolls. I can not tell any difference in the Tama net made for Deere and other Tama net.
> I am not a fan of Tama net. I bought a bad roll once that had random weak spots through out the roll. I guess a person can get a bad roll in any brand.
> 
> I have also joined the Pritchett following. A friend runs two 458 Deere balers. He borrowed a roll of Pritchett from me last year. This year he wanted 10 rolls and we split a pallet of 20.


Tim/South you may be right about thickness of Tama, but when Tama went from 7000 to 9000 the roll diameter and weight stayed about the same. So I think it must be thinner. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## javafarmbatavia (Jan 28, 2016)

We've been selling Krone Excellent Edge Net wrap 48"x11,800' and guys around here in Western New York have been switching over to that from many different brand names..


----------



## D.C.Cattle Company (Jul 19, 2010)

Thank you all for your input. I bit the bullet and bought a roll of JD 9000 Cover Edge. We'll see how it goes. I will keep the Pritchett brand in mind.


----------



## ozarkian (Dec 11, 2010)

I tend to to keep using what works for me. I have always used the JD Tama CoverEdge wrap on my JD 467 baler. Makes a nice bale that holds through the winter. My horsey customers think it pretty. I only bale about a thousand 4x5 round bales per year and knock on wood, I have yet to have a bad bale due to a wrap problem. I buy the 13,200 foot rolls. They are the most economical for me . If I don't have to stop and get off the tractor to mess with bad wrap, I'm having a good day.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

jd4230ps said:


> Tim/South you may be right about thickness of Tama, but when Tama went from 7000 to 9000 the roll diameter and weight stayed about the same. So I think it must be thinner. Just my 2 cents.


Makes sense to me.


----------



## Tx Jim (Jun 30, 2014)

ozarkian said:


> I tend to to keep using what works for me. I have always used the JD Tama CoverEdge wrap on my JD 467 baler. Makes a nice bale that holds through the winter. My horsey customers think it pretty. I only bale about a thousand 4x5 round bales per year and knock on wood, I have yet to have a bad bale due to a wrap problem. I buy the 13,200 foot rolls. They are the most economical for me . If I don't have to stop and get off the tractor to mess with bad wrap, I'm having a good day.


The 13,200' Ambraco(Tama) surface wrap I buy from JD is edge to edge not cover edge. I think cover edge makes a nicer in appearance bale than edge to edge but the rolled edge will allow more rain water between outside stored bales that aren't stacked exactly perfect. I also think JD surface wrap's green stripes gives hay eye appeal indicating hay has a greener color than it really possesses.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

Tx Jim said:


> I also think JD surface wrap's green stripes gives hay eye appeal indicating hay has a greener color than it really possesses.


Though I do not sell hay, we also use green Pritchett net wrap. People will drive by a hay field and notice what a pretty green color the hay has.

I have never noticed any damage caused by the over edge bales being stored outside. I know the arguement that the bottom will cup and hold water. From what I have seen, gravity just pulls the water through the net. Nothing really to stop it from going on through.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

My take would be different I think......if the bales are pushed tight together the edge being wrapped may allow water to seep in between the bales. That just seems like the argument for non-cover edge....idk


----------



## Tx Jim (Jun 30, 2014)

Some folks I know me not included when feeding choose to put rd bale on it's flat side & then remove wrap. In this situation Cover edge isn't as easy to remove as edge to edge.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

When I stack cow hay outside and shove it as tight as I can in a row, if I remember I'll take the 51" roll out and go back to a 48" roll. 48" is also a lot easier to get off corn stalk bales compared to the 51" or over the edge.


----------



## Widairy (Jan 1, 2016)

I use a skid steer for most of my round bale handling and feeding. I pretty much have to put the bales on the flat side to get the wrap off. For that reason alone I run the 48" wrap instead of the 51". If I get a tractor around here to use for feeding I would consider going to the 51" wrap again.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

I have never had a problem pulling the net off of a round bale when turned on it's end. I grab the tag end and walk around the roll. The extra 1.5 inches tucked under the bale just slides right out. I have fed a roll every morning with a skid steer this summer and have never felt the edge being covered made it more difficult.


----------



## Widairy (Jan 1, 2016)

Bedding packs with corkstalk bales, that would be a total failure. The stalks from the existing bedding grab the net that tucks under the bale and makes it difficult to pull without tearing. On the actual ground and dry hay it would pull off much easier. Whatever works for a person. I have had enough troubles with the cover edge net I stay away.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Another reason to use 48 or 64 vs the wider stuff is that it's not as close to roller bearings and less chance of getting net in them.

What people I sell net to do.

90% of NH or Vermeer guys use 48&64
90% of JD 7-8-9 series use 51&67
100% of JD 5&6 series use 48&64 it what fits
All my Kuhn and Claas customers use 48, I think that's what fits??

90% of the people that feed and bed and take the net off by hand use the narrower net
Guys that grind hay and use bale shredders use the wider stuff if baled with JD mostly

Guys that sell hay at auction tend to like the wider net also for the looks.

For a total I sell about 50% each wide vs narrow


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

Widairy said:


> *Bedding packs with corkstalk bales, that would be a total failure. The stalks from the existing bedding grab the net that tucks under the bale and makes it difficult to pull without tearing.* On the actual ground and dry hay it would pull off much easier. Whatever works for a person. I have had enough troubles with the cover edge net I stay away.


My experience also. One of my two balers will pull 64" net around the edges by a couple strands and even that makes the net more of a pain to remove. I don't even want to think what 67"would be like.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

Something I only figured out this year. The edge does not cover as the net is applied. The extra one and a half inches on each side does not stretch over the edge until the roll is ejected from the chamber. The tighter the net is applied, the more edge it covers.

The extra net that eventually slips over the edge is bunched up against the baler chamber, held in place by the hay packed against the chamber walls.

I do not get as deep a covered edge with the tougher net as I did with the thinner net. But I have never had the thicker net wrap caught in the roller ends like I occasionally had happen with the lighter net wrap.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Tim/South said:


> Something I only figured out this year.


Good observation.

Regards, Mike


----------

