# Farmall M



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

My father in law drove the M home today. Wow that thing is nice! The previous owner was 87 years old and it's been in his barn for a while. The body is in great shape and it runs smooth. I took it for a spin today and was shocked at how strong it felt. Keep in mind I'm used to running a farmall 200. Now this thing is a real tractor.

I'm wondering if I should take the motor off the baler and convert back to pto or if I should leave it as is. Any benefits to going back to pto?


----------



## bool (Mar 14, 2016)

Someone will correct me if I am wrong but I think the M has a single stage clutch. This means that if you are in gear with the PTO engaged and you push the clutch, both forward travel and the PTO stop. At least with engine drive on the baler, the baler will keep running when you push the clutch. That is a good thing, and you will lose it if you remove the engine. So leave the engine in place.

Roger


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

M is lacking live power, leave the engine where it is...


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

That's why I asked. Thanks.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

I guess I'm wondering why I need the baler to continue to run if I've stopped the tractor? If I'm stopped then I'm not feeding hay into the baler.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

MyDaughtersPony said:


> I guess I'm wondering why I need the baler to continue to run if I've stopped the tractor? If I'm stopped then I'm not feeding hay into the baler.


A slug, plug, or just a heavy spot in the windrow you can always "ride" the clutch thru it and the baler keeps on baling.


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

Live power with a sickle mower is almost a necessity, life is too short for that kind of aggravation.


----------



## Hayman1 (Jul 6, 2013)

stack em up said:


> Live power with a sickle mower is almost a necessity, life is too short for that kind of aggravation.


I agree with Stack. When I was growing up, assuming I ever did, there were 4 tractors in every logging opp in the woods: Farmall Ms, & Hs or Jd Bs & As. Nothing else need to apply. they were tough boogers. However, I would never attempt to bale or cut without live pto, like Stack said, life is too short to suffer that kind of stress.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

An M is a nice tractor. I have a 1946 Farmall M myself. I also have a 1951 Farmall h. I use them on my haying operation but neither one is what I would purposely recommend purchasing for a haying operation.

A farmall 300 is a whole lot more tractor than a farmall h for similar money. A 350 is better yet but more $.

A farmall 400 or is a whole lot more tractor than an M for similar money. A 450 is better yet but more $

Number series have live PTO,live hydraulics, and better gear selections than any plain ole letter series tractor. Live PTO alone is a huge advantage on the baler when running a PTO powered unit. However leaving your baler engine powered still gives you the ability to stop while still powering the baler. I can not do this. I have to size my windrows perfectly (an idiot on the rake makes for a long day without live PTO on a PTO powered baler). Even then my only options for when the baler starts getting overcrowded is to pull out of the windrow or take my foot and kick the gear shift lever out of gear and let the baler clear. Once cleared I can then push the clutch in, put it in reverse and back up a little, push the clutch in again and put it in forward, and continue. This would be otherwise easy on a 300 or 400 push the clutch in let the baler catch up then let catch up and continue on your way.

Well the good news is that your sickle mower will fit the farmall M's u-shaped drawbar just as it does on the other 2 farmall's you have. So now you have 3 tractors that will run your sickle mower. Live PTO is not really needed when sickle mowing IMOP.

You will find that the M uses a lot more fuel than the little B or 200 used. If still a stock Farmall M expect 3 gallon per hour. If piston kitted to "super" status expect 4 gallon per hour (under full load of course). Doubt you could put 1.5 to 1.75 gallon per hour through the little B or 200 so you basically now have a new tractor that is going to burn well over double the fuel of the two tractors you had. Unfortunately, the new tractor will not do anything any better as far as running any of your current equipment that you already own for your haying operation compared to what you already had. You just gonna burn over double the fuel to do same work you were doing before.

The M will handle that 6' oversized bushog better (if you still have it) as that 6' was too big for the 200. That said a 200 would handle a 5' rotary bushhog cutter pretty well. An M would handle a mower conditioner but you seem to be putting off getting your plain ole sickle mower operational until winter. A mower conditioner has all those same problem parts plus many many more to worry about too so it is an even bigger task to keep a mower conditioner operational.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

Thanks for all the information and advice. I'm going to keep this question simple.

I am cutting mainly OG. Assuming I get my sickle up to par will it cut my field good? I mean other than the conditioner aspect what else would be beneficial to upgrade? If haybine will make cutting a lot easier plus condition and save me time. Then I'll try to get a haybine sooner than later. If the sickle will do good once repaired then I might just stick with it. I guess I'm just looking for a "what would you do."


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

The M will have a lot more mass to absorb the rocking of the baler and stop/start the baler and wagon load of hay.
I don't know if you see the benefit of the baler's engine or not. If so, skip this next part of my post. With the M, when you push in the clutch to stop/start the tractor, the PTO will stop turning also. Like others have said, if you come to a clump in your windrow and want to push in the clutch to slow/stop fwd movement and let the baler catch its breath, it will not because pushing in the clutch also stopped power to the baler. Also, running the baler off of the PTO, you can only regulate your fwd movement per baler stroke ratio by selecting a different gear. Most of the time in decent hay, 1st gear is too fast for my baler's liking...bear in mind that you have to run the tractor at PTO speed (Nearly full throttle) when baling with the PTO. If you keep your other engine, you can stop the fwd movement and the baler still runs; you can increase or decrease the tractor's speed with the throttle and/or the gear selection with baler having it's own power source. Furthermore, if the M breaks down for a day or two (flat tire for example), with the engine still on the baler, you can still use the 200, BN or whatever.
You will love the M, your love will waiver a little if you have to run the baler with the PTO.

73, Mark


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

Thanks for breaking it down extra for me


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

MyDaughtersPony said:


> Thanks for all the information and advice. I'm going to keep this question simple.
> 
> I am cutting mainly OG. Assuming I get my sickle up to par will it cut my field good? I mean other than the conditioner aspect what else would be beneficial to upgrade? If haybine will make cutting a lot easier plus condition and save me time. Then I'll try to get a haybine sooner than later. If the sickle will do good once repaired then I might just stick with it. I guess I'm just looking for a "what would you do."


A sickle mower or a sickle based mower conditioner both cut with a sickle system. A mower conditioner has all the same parts that the sickle does plus a gazzilion more to break. Neither will cut for spit if neglected. Both will cut fine if sections, ledgers, and guards are in good shape and adjusted properly. The reel on a mower cond does help keep the bar clear but plain ole sickles have been used since the late 1800's. A bit contankerous at times yes but more than capable of getting the work done

A roller conditioner is not as beneficial on grassy crops like orchard grass like it is on leafy crops. A 2 basket tedder would offer you much more benefit than a conditioner in your case especially with your particular rake which is not a helpful tool at all for drying.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

Thanks rank


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

I would really like to sell the sickle I have now because the guy my father in law bought the tractor from has a sickle with a hydraulic cylinder on it that he used on the M. I might try and sell what I have now but doubt I can sell it before winter. If the one he has is in fair working condition (which is sounds like it is) I think that cylinder feature would be nice.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

Farmall M pictures


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Nice looking M. Wish mine were that pretty. They got both the front and rear wheel spacing set wide. I would not like the front set wide like that makes it steer hard.

You realize a cylinder can likely be added to the sickle mower you own also? There were lots of optional configurations for the mower you have.

I would not buy another plain ole sickle now that you have the M. If you sell your current mower might as well buy a moco


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

I would rank if I had the money. What is the cheapest worthwhile conditioner? I spent $600 on the sickle.

It does steer hard... Kind of a pain.


----------



## Farmerbrown2 (Sep 25, 2018)

I seen a New Idea 7foot cutdisioner sell for $210 yesterday needed a tire and a NH 408 Discbine with new rolls and bearing ready to cut for $1200 . You just have to be in the rite place at the right time if I was you I would start looking at gregslist and auction zip and see what you can find hay prices are down you should be able to find something.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Moving the front wheels to the narrow spacing will help it steer a little easier. Thankfully my m has a Behlen add on power steering on it so it steers with 1 finger. My h is pure manpower but manageable and not too bad considering it is all well worn. Most m's are a handful on manpower to say the least.

Hesston 1110 (7')or 1120 (9') are my fav's with it comes to a moco


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

What about a JD 1209 haybine?


----------



## bja105 (Jun 20, 2016)

I love that M.
I am on Craigslist a lot. I see plenty of more modern mowers for under $600. Besides small haybines, there are the flail mower type, like the Cutditioner mentioned, or my MC Rotary Scythe.

Mine cost $500, and I haven't had to do anything to it. It has 6 grease fittings, a gear box, and a chain to lube. I use my hydraulic cylinder on it. Its a tough, simple machine. Grass definitely dries faster, since it scuffs the stems. I also use it to ted. Run ot with the knives higher, faster ground speed, and slower pto speed, it picks up the hay and throws it. The heavier hay goes farther, so it ends up on top.

http://www.tractorhouse.com/listings/farm-equipment/for-sale/8911062/mathews-company-7hdcl

http://www.tractorhouse.com/listings/farm-equipment/for-sale/10838077/new-idea-272The M will be handy, even with the tools you have now.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Well when you buying old stuff condition is more important than brand, but the JD moco's like the 1209 were not all that well regarded. Would I buy one if price and condition was right - sure. Would not be my pick to seek one out though.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Frankly, I would not buy anything unless I owned the tractor I was pulling it with. I was under the impression the 200 was yours and the B your FIL's.

What happens when your FIL decides to sell the M?


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

My father in law would not sell the M and leave me stranded. I do work on his property that he is physically not capable of doing. He would be putting himself in a bad spot if he did that. Is it possible sure anything is but it's highly unlikely.

He grew up driving a farmall M and always wanted to get another one. The only reason he's selling the 200 is because I can do everything I need to with the M. I understand your concern but personally I'm not worried. I'm pretty confident I'll inherit the M someday.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

Opinions on this unit

http://grandrapids.craigslist.org/grd/5779164030.html

Is it a good price considering the the needed repairs? Would the M run it?


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Good haybine in its day and immensely better than the JD 1209 when in good shape all things being equal. The 479 is the previous model and very similar to the New Holland 488 which NH still makes and sells today.

New Holland haybines were the best of the best in their day. 2 things I do not like about em though. The rubber rollers are only laminated on there and prone to peeling and when they start peeling it costs more to fix the rollers than the unit is worth. Also the wobble box can be a money pit when it goes and again costs more to fix than the unit is worth.

I like the Hesston 1110 or 1120 units because one roller is steel and the other is solid thick rubber (not laminated). Wobble box is very simple too. Not saying the Hesston was better than the New Holland when both were brand new but now that they 30 to 40 years old it is which one I think I can keep affordably keep running at this point in time. I am betting on the Hesston for that myself.

The M would power that 479 no problem. An h would run it too but only barely.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Forgot to ask: Why not sell the BN and keep the 200? I realize the BN is prettier but the 200 would be more useful on a hobby hay operation IMOP compared to the BN.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

I don't see my father in law parting with that. It's his parade tractor.


----------



## bool (Mar 14, 2016)

Is that your father in law's M in the photos? I don't see any hydraulics on it. So how would it control a hydraulic cylinder?

If the other mower is in better condition it might be worth buying. By better condition I mean knife sections not worn down to a point, sharp ledger plates, cutterbar better adjusted so it cuts properly. This way it would save you from having to fix up your existing mower. Otherwise it might not be worth it. A haybine would be more useful to you.

If that NH haybine needs new knife and guards that will add considerably to its price and it will no longer be a bargain. And you will have to do all the work. Focus on condition. Buy one that is ready to go. My $1000 461 haybine is 50 years old but in great condition and all I had to do to it before I used it for the first time last year was lube it and make a push bar from a piece of waterpipe.

Don't worry about the complexity of a haybine. It is still less complex than a baler, and you are getting your head around that. Worry about its condition.

Don't worry about fuel consumption on an M. Fuel consumption depends on power output, not engine size. An M will use twice the fuel on an H or 200 only when it is doing twice the work. For mowing and baling it won't be. For brush hogging it will be, but you need the power for that anyway. For the other jobs, it will not be working hard so it will only be using about the same amount of fuel as an H or 200 but it will have all that power in reserve if you happen to need it.

Roger


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

bool said:


> Is that your father in law's M in the photos? I don't see any hydraulics on it. So how would it control a hydraulic cylinder?
> 
> Roger


It has hydraulics. I don't see the remote (it will be a single hose as it only hay one-side pressure), but I see the hyd op rod and also see they hyd pump.

73, Mark


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

We have the hose off right now.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

bool said:


> ....
> Don't worry about fuel consumption on an M. Fuel consumption depends on power output, not engine size. An M will use twice the fuel on an H or 200 only when it is doing twice the work. For mowing and baling it won't be. For brush hogging it will be, but you need the power for that anyway. For the other jobs, it will not be working hard so it will only be using about the same amount of fuel as an H or 200 but it will have all that power in reserve if you happen to need it.
> 
> Roger


Well I own both an h and an m (both bone stock). IH advertised the m as 33% more tractor than a h and it is. It burns at least 33% more fuel at all times too. If it is has been super kitted it will burn even way more. You are correct that an m burns slightly less fuel when loafing along (although not much less). Well guess what an h burns less fuel too when loafing along and a 200 even less an h when loafing along.

Do not get me wrong; I love my m but the h is a miser on fuel in comparison. Put either tractor on a hay rake and you have to run 4th gear wide open throttle to get any speed on any plain ole letter series farmall. Raking hay is about the lightest work imaginable for either tractor. The h sips fuel, the m not so much.

As long as gas stays around $2 it will not be a big deal but when it goes back up and it eventually will the difference is huge when gas is near$4 a gallon. When gas was $4 a gallon I used my m only when I needed the hp (moco mostly). Use the h otherwise as it so much more miserly.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

Had to retire our M's from haying. We can pull the hay rake but not as fast as we want and the M was using 5 gal/hour of gas!


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

haybaler101 said:


> Had to retire our M's from haying. We can pull the hay rake but not as fast as we want and the M was using 5 gal/hour of gas!


Wow! Mine is not near that bad. Sounds like yours has had some serious kit work and jet work to consume 5 gallon per hour. Has to be a 450 kit plus hot cam etc....

Yeah the Super h, Super M, Super M-TA, 300, 350, 400, 450 have a much better gear selection in them (even with TA delete with models that had it). Biggest difference is 4th gear is faster. The plain ole letter series will not go fast enough to rotary hoe either which is why IH finally fixed the problem starting in 1953


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

I definitely plan on using the bn to rake. I'll need the M to bale but I'm hoping since it's not powering the baler fuel usage will be moderate. And then use the M as well for however I'm cutting. And I guess using the M for the hay wagon.


----------



## MyDaughtersPony (Jun 12, 2016)

I'll probably invest in a more appropriate haying tractor down the road. For now it looks like I'm making the best of the tractors I have access to.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

rankrank1 said:


> Wow! Mine is not near that bad. Sounds like yours has had some serious kit work and jet work to consume 5 gallon per hour. Has to be a 450 kit plus hot cam etc....Yeah the Super h, Super M, Super M-TA, 300, 350, 400, 450 have a much better gear selection in them (even with TA delete with models that had it). Biggest difference is 4th gear is faster. The plain ole letter series will not go fast enough to rotary hoe either which is why IH finally fixed the problem starting in 1953


Actually, I am talking about a SMTA. And yes, it has been doctored. M&W stroker kit with 4.25" Pistons, 450 head and 326 cid. Turns 75 hp on dyno with no sweat and pull it down to 300 rpm on the pto and it will hit 90. But, the rake is 14 wheel NH HT154 and I was trying to run low 5th on heavy ground. So now, I use either 806 or 966 and can scoot at 10-15 mph, whatever conditions will allow.


----------



## Shetland Sheepdog (Mar 31, 2011)

One thing that hasn't been mentioned would be adding an M&W hand clutch, which would give you "live" PTO on the M. That would make it a whole new ballgame!


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

MyDaughtersPony said:


> I definitely plan on using the bn to rake. I'll need the M to bale but I'm hoping since it's not powering the baler fuel usage will be moderate. And then use the M as well for however I'm cutting. And I guess using the M for the hay wagon.


Yeah baling will not be that bad in your unique case as you have the option of running the tractor at idle and stepping up a gear since baling is a slow speed operation anyway and you have another engine powering the baler. Switch to a PTO powered baler though and your will be 1st gear WOT to get the PTO shaft to the desired 540 rpm.

Put the m on your rake though and it will be 4th gear Wide open throttle and you will still only be going about 5.1 mph.

BN will sip fuel on the rake, but the ride will not be the best (little tires ride rough). The 200 would ride a lot better and use no more fuel.

If you buy a moco 3rd gear wide open throttle will be the norm. A stock m drinks 3 gallon per hour pretty easily when run at WOT, Super Kitted M's about 4 gallon per hour. 450 kitted m's about 4.5 gallon per hour. Miserly they are not.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

MyDaughtersPony said:


> I'll probably invest in a more appropriate haying tractor down the road. For now it looks like I'm making the best of the tractors I have access to.


Dance with the one who brung you.

Haying with what you can write a check for keeps it much more fun.


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

Shetland Sheepdog said:


> One thing that hasn't been mentioned would be adding an M&W hand clutch, which would give you "live" PTO on the M. That would make it a whole new ballgame!


Unless there is a different version of which I am not aware, a M/W hand clutch will make no difference on PTO as the Clutch is on the flywheel (hand or foot...hand is over-center and foot is spring) and the clutch disc drives the shaft from the disc to the rear diff yoke. The PTO shaft engages the PTO drive in the front of the rear end housing. The casting/spacer that connect the rear diff to the engine only houses the shaft and the HYD pump.

Interesting note: H and M have same wheel base and is made up by the length of that particular casting. The H's casting is longer to make up for its shorter engine and other components.

No live hydraulics on them either as the "belly pump" which is housed in the housing is driven by the front of the rear diff. (unless it has the hyd pump driven at the distributor...which his does not)

73, Mark


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

MyDaughtersPony said:


> I'll probably invest in a more appropriate haying tractor down the road. For now it looks like I'm making the best of the tractors I have access to.


Unless you find a bargain, it would be hard to pay for another tractor based on fuel savings on a small time piddle patch hay operation. Even if the new m is a gas hog feeding it excess gas will still be much more profitable than buying something else. As long as your use of the m remains free then use it.


----------



## Shetland Sheepdog (Mar 31, 2011)

The hand clutch, of which I speak, works by disconnecting one rear axle, very much like the hand clutch on an Allis Chalmers CA. Thus all remains in gear except the rear wheels.

I am inclined to agree that a 300 or 400 would be much more useful! Live hydraulics, independent PTO, Torque Amplifier & possibly power steering would make the tractor much more user friendly. The 300 actually has more power than an M, unless the M has been "supered".


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

glasswrongsize said:


> Unless there is a different version of which I am not aware, a M/W hand clutch will make no difference on PTO as the Clutch is on the flywheel (hand or foot...hand is over-center and foot is spring) and the clutch disc drives the shaft from the disc to the rear diff yoke. The PTO shaft engages the PTO drive in the front of the rear end housing. The casting/spacer that connect the rear diff to the engine only houses the shaft and the HYD pump.
> Interesting note: H and M have same wheel base and is made up by the length of that particular casting. The H's casting is longer to make up for its shorter engine and other components.
> No live hydraulics on them either as the "belly pump" which is housed in the housing is driven by the front of the rear diff. (unless it has the hyd pump driven at the distributor...which his does not)
> 73, Mark


An M&W hand clutch does give pseudo Live PTO. What it does is open the differential such that the tractor stops and the PTO continues to spin. Parts are getting scarce for these though and you have to tear into the differential to install it. Foot clutch must be used for gear changes.

I think you are mistakingly thinking of the M&W 9 speed option which give 4 more additional ground speeds and is useful for things like rotary hoeing. However the 9 speed also overspeeds the belly pump and the PTO shaft so it is not as useful for PTO applications at all.


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

Shetland Sheepdog said:


> The hand clutch, of which I speak, works by disconnecting one rear axle, very much like the hand clutch on an Allis Chalmers CA. Thus all remains in gear except the rear wheels.
> 
> I am inclined to agree that a 300 or 400 would be much more useful! Live hydraulics, independent PTO, Torque Amplifier & possibly power steering would make the tractor much more user friendly. The 300 actually has more power than an M, unless the M has been "supered".


I was wondering about that:hence my caveat of "unless..."  I've seen the hand clutches on the main clutch but never seen one in the diff, but wasn't sure it wasn't made. It always amazes me to get to other areas of the country and see other things which are unheard-of here. (I realize M/W could be ordered here too, but evidently no one did.) The 9-speeds of which Rank refers are more common here than the hand clutches to which I referred, but there are a few hand clutches around (the main clutch like the one that is on an O4/6 OS4/6); it merely replaced the foot clutch with an over-center hand clutch. Thanks for the schooling...I'll have to keep my eyes open for one!! Where was the lever located?

73, Mark


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

If you know where the left hand brake drum is then imagagine a 3 foot long lever sticking straight up out of a deeper brake drum replacement housing.

A couple copy and paste picture links (note: Pic 1 also has what I believe to be the Heisler 9 speed gear lever. The M&W 9 speed was cable operated on the shifter):

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=m%26w+farmall+clutch&view=detailv2&&id=7BB4CED1482F40E48490978EB5FB15961C3CA17F&selectedIndex=4&ccid=mzVQkuLv&simid=608025009308631117&thid=OIP.M9b355092e2ef38b667d110be9e00287ao0&ajaxhist=0

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=m%26w+farmall+clutch&view=detailv2&&id=61AD3710978077F3C45AC3D07058BD50704BA932&selectedIndex=21&ccid=LWG0tqep&simid=607992371856738625&thid=OIP.M2d61b4b6a7a95a03d047cdc10a4d9a02o0&ajaxhist=0


----------



## Coondle (Aug 28, 2013)

Tim/South said:


> Dance with the one who brung you.
> 
> Haying with what you can write a check for keeps it much more fun.


Very good advice. Live within your means and match your gear to your operation.

You are not doing a big patch or thousands upon thousands of bales. That M looks just great and your NH 66 baler with engine function is a treat.

I am downsizing my operation and have just reverted to a Hesston PT10 moco this year. Not as popular as a NH 459 or NH 489 around here, but I have had 4 in the past in the build-up stage and they do a creditable job. Dry-down is great with a relatively wide and untidy looking windrow but good resistance to rain damage without any need to disturb it with raking/turnung. A PT7 (the little brother) or a PT10 would be well within the capacity of your M.

You are learning fast and not only talking the talk but walking the walk. Keep on looking for upgrades to suit what you do and now at the end of your haying season then look sharply for bargains. Now is when they will be around.

It is the age-old story of supply and demand. There are not many who look for hay gear at the end of the season so although supply is down the demand is almost non-existant. When haying season comes around again there will be more equipment on the market but there will be many many more buyers looking because they did not plan/think ahead.

On the topic of hydraulics:

Once you have the hydraulic pump then it is very simple to get double acting hydraulics fitted up by tapping into the pressure line. Be careful to ensure each hydraulic circuit is protected by a pressure relief valve including power beyond if necessary. Note a pressure relief valve relieving into a pressurised line is not providing pressure relief, that is why power beyond valving is essential.


----------



## endrow (Dec 15, 2011)

MyDaughtersPony said:


> I guess I'm wondering why I need the baler to continue to run if I've stopped the tractor? If I'm stopped then I'm not feeding hay into the baler.


 If you're running and heavy material and somebody pushs the clutch in and the Baler stops instantly, let the clutch back out the shear bolt brakes. Then you gotta turn the plunger backwards about a half a turn pull some of the heavy out in the back side the plunger Maybe loosen the cranks on the Press start the Baler backup and reset the pressure and off you go. After that has happened a couple times you'll understand.LOL.. Back in the day with an old G John Deere I could pop the clutch snapp it into neutral and get hand clutch be engaged about a third of a second before plunger ever stopped. But with the Farmall m if you were bailing heavy the torque locked everything together you could not even get it out of here after you push the clutch in until all the torque was released from the Driveline.


----------



## RussNorthAlabama (Dec 28, 2014)

I spotted this conversation while looking for something else... very nice M... I was going to bring up the m&w, as my old super m of my dad's has that hand clutch... on the hand clutch, a good neighbor/friend with 40yrs of mechanic experience (before retiring) cautioned me (so i'm bringing it up) that while the hand clutch fixes the letting-you-stop-the-tractor-while-pto-runs issue, it doesn't stop the running-equipment-still-shoves-you issue... if you don't have it already, it'd be nice to have a ratchet pto adapter for bush hogging, or you'll get shoved into a corner eventually from the bush-hog acting as a flywheel and running the axles from that end... that may be common knowledge, but it was news to me that hand clutch wasn't a fix-all (and i thought i'd forward the caution). dad never used a ratchet-pto-adapter, but he hated caution. 

btw, my super m (its a '53 model) used 4gal/hr when i ran it a few times to crush feed with a new holland 355 feed mill... it'll run it, and the governor has to work with each scoop of corn or flake of hay, but it'll sure go thru the gasoline.


----------



## Shetland Sheepdog (Mar 31, 2011)

Russ, you are absolutely correct, if trying to stop by stepping on the foot clutch! However, if you have the presence of mind to use the M&W hand clutch, all is well!


----------



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

All this talk of non-live pto makes me love our 400 even more. Ever time I see a M or H they look primitive compared to the hundred series. Doesn't mean I'd be afraid of using a M or H. I really shouldve bought a H in decent shape at a consigment auction this summer for $750


----------

