# 4 or 6 cylinder for 100-120hp?



## GawasFarm (Jul 10, 2013)

I have been thinking about this lately as I would like to get a tractor in the 100-120 pto hp range. It would also be used not only for haying (obviously) but loader work and some tillage.

my question and thoughts to you guys who might have tractors in this range or size.

Since they are both making the same power would it be beneficial to run a 4 cylinder engine so fuel consumption would be down when doing easier tasks like moving bales and lighter work.

I understand you get a little more weight from a 6 but on a similarly sized platform like New Hollands T6 series for example you can get a 4 and a 6.

Winter thinking at work.

Alex


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

I'll take a six over a four any day if the tractor does any field work.


----------



## Chessiedog (Jul 24, 2009)

I have two 4 cylinder New Hollands . One is 90 ,other one is 110 . Go for the 6 . The 4's are ok on flat but don't stand up to much of a hill .


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

More loader work - 4 cyl for tight turning
More road travel - 6 cyl smoother ride
Big 3 point loads - 6 cyl, less fussy about ballast up front.


----------



## GawasFarm (Jul 10, 2013)

Well it appears to be overwhelmingly in favour of 6. Unless tight loader work which makes sense. I guess it is one of those cases where comfort and ease of use beat a little extra fuel consumption.


----------



## endrow (Dec 15, 2011)

Go 6 We have a New Holland T6030 Bought it new thought about A 5 series , glad we went with a 6 series tractor , It has the 6.7 115 hp 6cyl. engine And 18.4x38 tires . It is agile enough for small jobs and got the power for big jobs . Never had it on dyno but this thing can do what ever our 135 tractors will do .


----------



## cornshucker (Aug 22, 2011)

Unless you need the short wheelbase go with the six. As Smokey Yunick the great race engine guru once said the only thing better than cubic inches is cubic feet. LOL. Slowzuki about summed the whole thing up in his post.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

Agree with the other posts. If you are doing any fieldwork, the 6 cyl is a must. Cornshucker, my favorite saying has always been: There is no replacement for displacement.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

Would you rather have 6 horses hitched to your plow or 4?

6 horses are not that much more to feed and they do not get as tired at the end of the day.


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

Tim/South said:


> Would you rather have 6 horses hitched to your plow or 4?
> 
> 6 horses are not that much more to feed and they do not get as tired at the end of the day.


All depends on the size of the horses.

They do keep making improvements in the smaller motors. Dont be so quick to compare an old 6 cylinder to a new 4 cylinder. It would help if we knew if your looking at new or used


----------



## endrow (Dec 15, 2011)

It is also very important to get a tractor heavy enough to do the job .
Plan ahead far to often on hear a tractor is bought only to learn later it will not pull the discbine


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I have a fairly new (2011) 126HP tractor, but its a 4 cyl and 6.1 liters. Those are some big pistons for a 4 banger. Surprised its not 6 cylinders.

I think the move to BIG 4 cylinder tractors is for visibility and cost savings. Less moving parts than 6cyl and better reliability. Saves money. I'm seeing more 4 cyl engines getting bigger as the years go by.

All that said, I think I'd rather have a Cummins 8.3L in everything. Lol


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

hog987 said:


> All depends on the size of the horses.
> 
> They do keep making improvements in the smaller motors. Dont be so quick to compare an old 6 cylinder to a new 4 cylinder. It would help if we knew if your looking at new or used


I have both. The 100 horse newer Deere has to be in 4WD to pull what the old Ford 8000 does.

My 100 HP 4 cylinder is not the tractor my uncles 6 cylinder 100 hp Deere is.

It would be different if the pistons in my 4 cylinder were the size of the 2 cylinders in my old JD 60.

I like the smaller cubic inch displacement in my 4 cylinder. It is used mostly for hay and feeding. When I hook up to the disk or chisel plow I want the 6 cylinder.

The drawbar hprsepower is going to be more on a 6 cylinder tractor.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

The drawbar hp isn't anymore on a 6 automatically. Has to be a heavier tractor to get more drawbar hp.


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

Six cylinder motors usually have more torque. That is what you would notice pulling hard. Also longer stroke in the motor means more torque. The other thing with six cylinder is that the motor is naturally balanced.


----------



## ontario hay man (Jul 18, 2013)

Im going against what most guys say. I had a ford 7710 4cylinder. It was a beast for haying or field work or anything you throw at it. And it just sipped the fuel. It was plenty heavy enough.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I gotta agree, I'd rather have a 6cyl, but why wouldn't a 4cyl with same HP & torque be the same or better? Increased visibility, too. 
Oh and did I mention Cheaper to buy & maintain, less moving parts? Lol


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Its simply a wheelbase issue, in general the 6's are built with a long wheelbase while the 4 pots get a shortwheel base.

The hp and torque curves can look almost identical between a 4 and a 6. The 4 will usually have a bit better economy because there is a little less friction in the motor to have bigger cylinders instead of more of them and one less main bearing.

I happen to own a 100 hp 4 cyl myself and like it very much but it is more choppy on the road. A longer wheelbase gives a better ride. Not all tractors have their wheelbase tied to the number of cylinders but a lot do. Anything stressed block pretty much does. Something with the rails not so. Those white 2-105's for a rail type example, the 2wd version has a nice long wheelbase, ride very nice. The 4wd has the axle pushed way back so it will steel sharply but rides quite choppy.


----------



## cornshucker (Aug 22, 2011)

Hog987 brought up a good point about the 6 cyl. being naturally balanced, no need for a dynamic balancer which adds complexity and robs some of your power. All things being equal unless you need the visibility and short turning radius the 6 is the way to go if you are going to do tillage and need the front ballast. This coming from someone whose last tractor purchase was a 4 cyl. which I am very happy with. As for the long stroke it will give you more torque but you can have a long stroke in any inline engine 3,4, or 6 cyl. Some engine manufacturers use the same pistons and rods and valves in both 4 and 6 cyl. engines Cummins with the 4bt and 6bt and Perkins with the 1104 and 1106 engines are two examples. Common parts cut expense for them.


----------



## GawasFarm (Jul 10, 2013)

Very interesting points brought up by all. I will chew on it for awhile, I wish there was money to just buy those dedicated machines for the job but it will come eventually. We all have to start somewhere.


----------

