# Best bigger tractor non-LH-reverser transmission



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Sorry if my topic title is hard to understand, but what I mean is if I couldn't afford a modern LH reverser transmission tractor with under 6k hours, what's the next best transmission equipped tractor?

I can't find anything with a LH reverser for 30k with 4WD and cab over 120PTO HP under 6K hours I really want to buy. I actually did find some, but they were off brands, bad tires, other expensive issues.

So now I'm looking at Ford or NH tractors with RH shift reversers, or Case IH 7xxx series, etc. 
Any suggestions? This will be used to pull discbine and hopefully a future large square baler.


----------



## cornshucker (Aug 22, 2011)

Are you looking to have a loader on the tractor, if not a power reverse is not that important nor is four wheel drive if you are not doing heavy tillage. That opens up a lot of possibilities for higher HP tractors. We have both on one of our tractors but when not using the loader rarely ever use the LH reverse or the four wheel drive. I know resale is higher with these features but if you pay a lot less to start with then you are as well off. Also how brand specific are you.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

You've got an 88 series IH in your avatar, so how bout that? I've never really heard anything bad about them. Venerable IH 466 engine. Trans has some powershift gears. More affordable than Case IH Magnum, but hard to find in MFWD.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

May have found affordable m135x, but haven't gone to see it yet.
McCormicks are real affordable, but uneasy about them.

Found Deere 7600 cab 4wd good tires, front fenders, 6700 hrs and optional 19 speed tranny for 35k
Just can't get to the 30k point I need to be under. Everything is mid 30's-40.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

JD3430 said:


> May have found affordable m135x, but haven't gone to see it yet.
> McCormicks are real affordable, but uneasy about them.
> 
> Found Deere 7600 cab 4wd good tires, front fenders, 6700 hrs and optional 19 speed tranny for 35k
> Just can't get to the 30k point I need to be under. Everything is mid 30's-40.


If you want to do big squares in the future you will need more power then this.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Teslan said:


> If you want to do big squares in the future you will need more power then this.


I thought 120 PTO would be enuf? 
I am open to going higher.


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

No wonder you need your landlords to be paying for your fertilizer! 

Seriously, consider an "off brand". Somewhere in the world that tractor is the most popular.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

JD3430 said:


> I thought 120 PTO would be enuf?
> I am open to going higher.


I was more specifically talking about the JD 7600 you were talking about. According to tractor data it's only 113 pto. Maybe you could get away with a 120hp on a NH big square (for some reason their minimum HP is less) I put our 120hp MF on our 3x3 baler when we first got the baler and while it worked I could tell it was really putting some stress on that engine. Plus it just wasn't quite heavy enough. Now we have a 155hp and it works wonderful on it.


----------



## DSLinc1017 (Sep 27, 2009)

We have two local farms that do our 3x3's for us. After quite a few conversations with them they wouldn't pull a large baler with anything less than 150 HP. Do keep in mind, we do have hills some of them are more like mountains!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8350HiTech said:


> No wonder you need your landlords to be paying for your fertilizer!
> Seriously, consider an "off brand". Somewhere in the world that tractor is the most popular.


Geeze, I thought you'd congratulate me for getting someone to pay for fertilizer. 
Kind of a "if you can get them to pay for it , good for you" on the fertilizer. Don't farmers get screwed enough? 
Also, If I stay the size I'm at, never expand, don't dream big, what's the sense in going into the business in the first place? I don't want to stay small, I want to get big. Also, Keep in mind, I'm selling a smaller tractor to pay for this bigger tractor, too. 
There's 2 big players down here who each farm many thousands of acres. I'm not saying I'll be big as them, but I'm not quitting at 150 acres. No way.

I'm not doing an off brand. Plenty of Belarus horror stories to go around.....lol


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Teslan said:


> I was more specifically talking about the JD 7600 you were talking about. According to tractor data it's only 113 pto. Maybe you could get away with a 120hp on a NH big square (for some reason their minimum HP is less) I put our 120hp MF on our 3x3 baler when we first got the baler and while it worked I could tell it was really putting some stress on that engine. Plus it just wasn't quite heavy enough. Now we have a 155hp and it works wonderful on it.


Thanks for telling me that. Kind of reminds me of trying to 4x5 round bale hills with my M7040.....it'll do it, but not without lots of downshifting. 
You are correct about the HP requirements on NH square baler. I was eyeing one of those up for a few years down the road. PTO HP requirements are fairly low at around 110, but that's "minimum". That might put me back into the same scenario as 4x5 round baling with a 70HP M7040.

What I was planning on doing was buying a tractor about the size of an MX135 and turning it up a bit, maybe another 20HP. Enough for a square baler, but no enough to trash everything behind the motor. Guy that sells them locally says he does it all the time with good results on the 5-9 Cummins..


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> I'm not doing an off brand. Plenty of Belarus horror stories to go around.....lol


A Belarus, sure. But you don't even want a McCormick. Heck, to a lot of people your M126 would be an "off brand".


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

JD3430 said:


> Thanks for telling me that. Kind of reminds me of trying to 4x5 round bale hills with my M7040.....it'll do it, but not without lots of downshifting.
> You are correct about the HP requirements on NH square baler. I was eyeing one of those up for a few years down the road. PTO HP requirements are fairly low at around 110, but that's "minimum". That might put me back into the same scenario as 4x5 round baling with a 70HP M7040.
> 
> What I was planning on doing was buying a tractor about the size of an MX135 and turning it up a bit, maybe another 20HP. Enough for a square baler, but no enough to trash everything behind the motor. Guy that sells them locally says he does it all the time with good results on the 5-9 Cummins..


I'd say an MX170 would be more ideal for a large square 3x3 baler. Bigger squares like 3x4 and 4x4 need even more. You also need good weight with the tractor in addition to HP. But nothing very good that large will be in your price range. Our 1998 JD 7810 was $69k 2 years ago with 4500 hours, which I felt was a fair price and it's worked great so far. I think I saw a 7810 on one of Machinary Pete's posts go for over $100k, but with much less hours.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Teslan said:


> I'd say an MX170 would be more ideal for a large square 3x3 baler. Bigger squares like 3x4 and 4x4 need even more. You also need good weight with the tractor in addition to HP. But nothing very good that large will be in your price range. Our 1998 JD 7810 was $69k 2 years ago with 4500 hours, which I felt was a fair price and it's worked great so far. I think I saw a 7810 on one of Machinary Pete's posts go for over $100k, but with much less hours.


Same seller has 170's and 180's, too. You might be right that a 135 might have enough twist, but not enough ass to hold back a big square on hills.....
Maybe I'm looking more at a boxcar 7xxx? They are typically in low-mid 30's with 6-7 k hours. No LH reverser. 
No wonder my "protege" down here runs a 7120....seems to run his NH 3x4 no prob.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8350HiTech said:


> A Belarus, sure. But you don't even want a McCormick. Heck, to a lot of people your M126 would be an "off brand".


Didnt say I wouldn't do mcCormick because its an off brand. Said I was uneasy about mcCormick because I had heard stories. Now that Phareus has reassured me, I might go With one. Still would rather CIH, Deere.
Never stated Kubota was a mainstream brand, either, but since Hoobers and Messicks carries them, service and parts are easier than McCormick or even Deere for that matter.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

JD3430 said:


> Same seller has 170's and 180's, too. You might be right that a 135 might have enough twist, but not enough ass to hold back a big square on hills.....
> Maybe I'm looking more at a boxcar 7xxx? They are typically in low-mid 30's with 6-7 k hours. No LH reverser.
> No wonder my "protege" down here runs a 7120....seems to run his NH 3x4 no prob.


Yeah the 7120 would probably do it. I was told about one of those by the my baler salesman the day after we bought the JD 7810. It was $45,000, but I can't remember the hours. Like others have said I don't think you need a LH reverser for baling hay or really anything, but loader work. Our JD 7810 doesn't have one and I've never missed not having the LH reverser even though all our other tractors have them. However I do miss not having a foot fuel pedal on it.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I like the 7xxx, but really like the LH reverser just in case I want to add a loader. 
If I could find something at or under 30, I MIGHT be able to keep M7040 and not worry about cost or need of loader on big tractor since both Kubotas will have loaders. 
If its going to be mid 30's, then small tractor will have to go and I'd have to live with 1 tractor with loader on my M126x. 
Best case scenario is keep small tractor with loader and find bigger one that's in decent shape for ~30k, run it for 1-2 years in front of discbine and batwing to see how she holds up and then start thinking big sq baler.


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

Get a Magnum.


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

No rent. Geesh. I used to date a girl outside Philly. If I knew land was free I would have told her that I'd move there!!!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

So you think a Maxxum is too light? Even a MX150 or 170? 
Can do magnum and keep small Kubota. If I try a 150-170, little tractors gotta go.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8350HiTech said:


> No rent. Geesh. I used to date a girl outside Philly. If I knew land was free I would have told her that I'd move there!!!


And I used to date a girl in upstate PA. Absolutely gorgeous. 
I'm glad I'm down here (most of the time, anyways)


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

The area was gorgeous or the girl? 

Also, multiple people around here run 7xxx Magnums on big balers and discbines.


----------



## Waterway64 (Dec 2, 2011)

I get the feeling you are talking two different tractor needs and you won't need the larger until you get a square baler.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Waterway64 said:


> I get the feeling you are talking two different tractor needs and you won't need the larger until you get a square baler.


I'd rather buy the horse before the cart. I can use the tractor right away for discbine or batwing. A square baler won't do much good without a tractor big enuf to pull it.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8350HiTech said:


> The area was gorgeous or the girl?
> Also, multiple people around here run 7xxx Magnums on big balers and discbines.


Girl. 
I'd go into detail, but this is a family website.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> So you think a Maxxum is too light? Even a MX150 or 170?


I would think the 150/170 would work on a 3x3, 3x4 on flatter ground. I have an MX170 and it is a happy compromise between the lighter Maxxums and a Magnum. Its a lot handier to drive than a boxcar Magnum, but noticeably heavier than my MX135. The MX150/170 final drives and rear axle are derived from the Magnums. 150/170 usually have a pretty steep price tag though.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Gearclash said:


> I would think the 150/170 would work on a 3x3, 3x4 on flatter ground. I have an MX170 and it is a happy compromise between the lighter Maxxums and a Magnum. Its a lot handier to drive than a boxcar Magnum, but noticeably heavier than my MX135. The MX150/170 final drives and rear axle are derived from the Magnums. 150/170 usually have a pretty steep price tag though.


Yup....noticed that, too. Would luv to have one.....


----------



## Bonfire (Oct 21, 2012)

Have you looked at a Deere 4455 with a 15 speed power shift?


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Bonfire said:


> Have you looked at a Deere 4455 with a 15 speed power shift?


Yes I looked at a few, even a 60 series. Most have a gazillion hours. Curved cab kind of looks tight. I hear they're tough tractors that last and last.


----------



## Bob M (Feb 11, 2012)

Forget about about newer and fancy, keep your smaller tractor and come on down and buy my AC 7080. Plenty of power and weight to do what ever you want baling wise, and the air conditioning works.


----------



## jeff outwest (Sep 13, 2009)

Ditto what Bob M has to say! Find a "Bomber Tractor"; an older 2wd 150 plus horsepower tractor that you can suit your needs.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

After fighting electrical gremlins this spring on our newest tractor I'm not so sure newer is better. Cost us a ton of money in lost revenue as the beans weren't getting planted when they should have been.

For as something as simple as baling hay I'd stick with older but proven. There is a lot of older model tractors that are reliable and don't require an electrical engineering degree from MIT to fix.

If it was me, I'd find a later 2-135 or 2-155 White or the next generation White that still used a mechanical injection cummins just to run a baler of any size.

BUT...we do all repairs except for injection pumps on farm, which was where the problems came in on the newest tractor, no lap top with a gadzillion dollars worth of diagnostic programs on it.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

http://www.tractorhouse.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=8126401

Regards, Mike


----------



## Bob M (Feb 11, 2012)

I have 15 "older tractors" that we use routinley here on the farm. When 1 breaks down there is usually another to use while we repair. Not sure I want the newer tractors. 30, 40 an 50 series john deeres work nicely for us, mostly 30 series. And no where near the investment. None of my tractors would be worth $30,000 and we are doing over 400ac hay and 500 plus ac straw.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

I second Bonfire on the Deere. I'd even look at a 4450 with 15 speed power shift. A 2wd model can be found in your price range, and in the 5,000 hr range.

Our 4450 was mfwd, turned up to 175 hp for years, left the farm at 9500 hrs. That tractor was worked hard, but on a strict maintenance schedule and was ready to keep going.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

mlappin said:


> After fighting electrical gremlins this spring on our newest tractor I'm not so sure newer is better. Cost us a ton of money in lost revenue as the beans weren't getting planted when they should have been.
> 
> For as something as simple as baling hay I'd stick with older but proven. There is a lot of older model tractors that are reliable and don't require an electrical engineering degree from MIT to fix.
> 
> ...


My neighbor who farms a lot of alfalfa acres up until last year used a couple of White tractors on this 4x4 MF balers. I'm not sure what numbers, but he had used them for years. Now he bought two new Versatile tractors. I guess they are fairly barebones tractors also.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Vol said:


> http://www.tractorhouse.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=8126401
> 
> Regards, Mike


Those only came with 540 pto's? Even our 1963 Oliver 1600 could be had with the 540/1000 rpm option if desired.


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

25k for a red belly Allis? Holy lord. I don't care if it has zero hours. Cousin had a 5.9 in his and couldn't get 10k.


----------



## cmd (Oct 26, 2012)

I agree, older large frame 2wd. a box magnum would work nice. I really don't think your going to need the 4wd if the tractor is loaded down pulling a swing-tongue or big baler. My father in law climbs some of the steepest hills around (and I mean steep) with a 2wd 4430 and 1431 NH Discbine.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Nah. I'm sticking with 4wd. Too many other instances and situations where I've used 4wd and needed it. 
Are box car magnums "non-electronic" tractors?
I can get a 7110 or 7120 just about any time I want. Would love the 8.3. Seems like perfect size. 
BTW: it's gonna pull discbine and batwing mower. M126 will pull round baler. When the time is right for square baler, I'll hook it to bigger tractor.

What about older Ford/New Holland with 150hp 7.8L genesis tractors?
And looking beyond the brand, what about the original question-the transmission. Is the Magnum transmission an easy shifter? Is there another brand with better transmission?


----------



## cmd (Oct 26, 2012)

The magnum is pretty much all mechanical. The genesis has a more user friendly transmission but is a whole nother world of electronics and likely your not going to find a decent one in your price range, you will probably not find many good magnums in your price range either but I'd look. Genesis though is way ahead in every aspect of operator friendliness.


----------



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

I'd buy and older IH 14 or 1586 or a 5088 series. Some had mfwd. Buy in good shape and maintain the devil out of it. Also. would consider a 4*50 series Deere with power quad. Im biased to that old stuff though


----------



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

Just buy a IH 2+2. Make some heads turn mowing and baling with that. Lol


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

Bgriffin856 said:


> Just buy a IH 2+2. Make some heads turn mowing and baling with that. Lol


Neighbors had a pair of them. To see one hooked to their 1431 discbine working in small fields was so weird.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Snoopy!!!!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I see the 7110 has 130+ PTO HP. Also has smaller rubber, 28's & 38's. 
I'm sure the 8.3 could be bumped up 10-20 without blinking. 
I will learn soon enough, but just curious, do you put it in "D", the slide the gear shifter up to the gear you want without clutching?


----------



## Rodney R (Jun 11, 2008)

My preference would be anything green, either a 50 or 55 series, if you want the 540pto it has to be a 44 or smaller. However, better deals can be found on bigger tractors, like a 45, 46, 47...... We have a 4640 on our 3x3, and we wouldn't want anything smaller, and I know that your terrain is similar. However, our neighbor has a 4440 on a 4x4 baler and his brother had a 7810 on a 4x4. The 55 series was really good, basically a 50 series with some improvement.

I'm wondering what you guys are calling a 'box car' magnum? I would walk away from anything that says only IH on the front - You will learn to hate the shifting in about 15 minutes. A 7120, 7130 would suit you fine - they have a decent power shift, an OK cab, decent hyds, and a good engine. I don't think they shift as nice as the JD15 speed, and the dash leaves a little to be desired, but an overall OK machine.

I don't know anything about blue ones, and no other color is worth looking at IMO.

Just remember that with a 3x3, it's not simply about the minimum HP required, it's just as important (maybe even more) that you have enough weight to keep it all planted when you go down a hill, the ground is wet, and there are a few trees at the bottom, followed by a cliff and a stream.

Rodney


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

The 71, 72, and 89 series Magnums can be run between forward and reverse and thru all the gears without the need to clutch.

I have been told not to turn up a "10" size Magnum as they have lighter final drives than their larger brothers.

Personally, I would rather drive a Ford Genesis. I like their method of controling the 18 speed better.

Just a little trivia, the first JD 8000s, the first Magnums, and the Ford Genesis all got their powershift components from Funk, a company owned by . . .

John Deere.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Love the JD 8000 armrest controls and side dash panel. 
Maybe I oughta avoid the 7110.


----------



## bowdie (Dec 31, 2011)

I have a 7210 been a great hay tractor for me.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

I'm not sure thats 100% correct, I think they owned a chunk of the shares for a spell or something of that nature.



Gearclash said:


> from Funk, a company owned by . . .
> John Deere.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

bowdie said:


> I have a 7210 been a great hay tractor for me.


Welcome to hay talk and thanks for the tip. The 7xxx has made sense to me for a long time.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Anyone think used CaseIH tractors are priced high because they're highly desirable? 
I'm finding they're 5k or more higher than comparable NH or other brands.
I know I really want older CaseIH, but price is keeping me out. 
Could have Ford/NH today if I wanted one.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

JD3430 said:


> Anyone think used CaseIH tractors are priced high because they're highly desirable?


Probably....and maybe there just might be a good reason for them being highly desirable? 

Regards, Mike


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Or is just the beautiful red color and the lore of the Cummins diesel? Lol


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

It's coming down to a '93 CaseIH 7120 with 6,500 hrs and a '96 Ford 8670 with 5,500 hrs. 
Ford 8670 has wide tires with lots of tread 18sp power shift and 27mph road speed $35k
CIH 7120 has typical tires and good tread 18sp power shift. $32k

Both are about 170 HP. Ford cab looks nicer, roomier. It also looks like it has a super steer front axle and a front 3 pt. Case has legendary 8.3 Cummins. 
I think the Ford is more user friendly, the CaseIH is tougher.


----------



## 6125 (Sep 14, 2009)

JD3430 said:


> It's coming down to a '93 CaseIH 7120 with 6,500 hrs and a '96 Ford 8670 with 5,500 hrs.
> Ford 8670 has wide tires with lots of tread 18sp power shift and 27mph road speed $35k
> CIH 7120 has typical tires and good tread 18sp power shift. $32k
> 
> ...


FWIW, before you go and rid of your 4 star pequea tedder, make sure you try the 6 star before you buy. I was all set to trade mine in on a six and luckily tried one out first, and wasn't impressed at all. Didn't sweep as nearly as clean as my pequea, and I'd of had to shell out 11,000 plus my tedder on the new one. Needless to say, i'd had been upset with my purchase come next summer.


----------



## cmd (Oct 26, 2012)

JD3430 said:


> It's coming down to a '93 CaseIH 7120 with 6,500 hrs and a '96 Ford 8670 with 5,500 hrs.
> Ford 8670 has wide tires with lots of tread 18sp power shift and 27mph road speed $35k
> CIH 7120 has typical tires and good tread 18sp power shift. $32k
> 
> ...


 and 8670 is not 170 HP stock and the 18speed makes it a euro import


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Yeah the ford is a euro import. The flotation tires, the front 3pt, the fenders and the high road speed are a dead give away. 
BTW tractor data says 8670 is 170HP 
http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/005/9/6/5966-ford-8670.html

7120 is a bread & butter US farm tractor.


----------



## Rodney R (Jun 11, 2008)

I know it's not green, but if the contest is between the red and blue one, then it'd be for sure the red one. I've heard too many guys tell me about trouble getting parts for a euro tractor..... Either way, be sure you check any sort of front axle pivot, cause you can easily drop 10k into a front axle, when something goes wrong.

Rodney


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> It's coming down to a '93 CaseIH 7120 with 6,500 hrs and a '96 Ford 8670 with 5,500 hrs.
> Ford 8670 has wide tires with lots of tread 18sp power shift and 27mph road speed $35k
> CIH 7120 has typical tires and good tread 18sp power shift. $32k
> 
> ...


While the cummins may be more "legendary", a genesis engine is a tried and true winner as well. This, to me, is an absolute no-brainer. Get the genesis. (I know, I know, I told you to get a magnum the other day but that was before these were your two choices)

Why? Because you want this tractor to potentially run bigger equipment someday (3x3 baler and I'm assuming bigger discbine) either tractor would do the job. BUT in the meantime if you hook the magnum to your 10' discbine or round baler it's going to feel way clumsier than the ford will. The blue one will be your best bet when you look at the present and future. Both have fiercely loyal advocates so if you want/need to sell it resale won't be a problem with either. Don't worry about it being a euro. There are so many of them imported that they're common. If you need something euro-specific and your boy Phareus can't get it, call Forrester Farm Equipment. They've brought so many European genesis over here they are absolute experts.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

The super steers are nice, leased one for a bit.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> BUT in the meantime if you hook the magnum to your 10' discbine or round baler it's going to feel way clumsier than the ford will.


The little seat time that I have had with the Ford (and many hours in a Magnum) would make me agree with this.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I was kind of thinking the same things you all were, but have been dreaming of a case IH or just an IH for about 30 years. 
The Ford genesis seems like the more sensible choice, though. 
I have to get up there and test run it next week and see if I can get the price down more. 
I promised myself 30k and I'm 5 k over already. 
I heard you can live with one kidney....lol

On edit: there really are New Holland tractor loyalists???? 
I always thought NH tractors kind of played a second fiddle to their hay tools. I never knew their tractors had a following like John Deere or Case tractors. Blue tractors always seemed kind of "blah" to me.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Lot of the larger model FWA blue tractors around here. A lot more of the four wheel drives pulling scraper pans.


----------



## cmd (Oct 26, 2012)

JD3430 said:


> I was kind of thinking the same things you all were, but have been dreaming of a case IH or just an IH for about 30 years.
> The Ford genesis seems like the more sensible choice, though.
> I have to get up there and test run it next week and see if I can get the price down more.
> I promised myself 30k and I'm 5 k over already.
> ...


When the genesis came out, if you compared it to the competition, I'm sure you would have understood why they have loyal customers. The gemini and genisis engines are good and around here ford/newholland tractors don't really take a back seat to anyone. On the HP thing, you are reading engine HP, no one really uses that number, you look at rated PTO HP for comparison. 8770 is 160 and 8870 is 180 IIRC once you get to the 8870 and 8970 they start getting more "spunky" -different inj pump.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8670 is claimed 145 PTO HP.
I don't use engine HP, either. Seller only listed engine HP. 
I got PTo HP off tractor data


----------



## GawasFarm (Jul 10, 2013)

I am going to throw my two cents in on this one as well. Although I don't have any experience with either of these tractors I would go blue AND yes I am a loyal blue lover although I will buy anything if the price is right .

The 8670 seems like it is going to be more of a versatile machine for you right now. With the supersteer you are going to enjoy turning in those fields a lot better while still having the FWA.

If I read right it also has the front 3pt which is awesome I mean easy to put weight on the front end if you do get the 3x3 baler later, but have you also considered mounting a front mower to run with your trailed mower?? depending on your hill situation this could also be a big benefit. I would love a front 3pt.

Everybody seems to agree that the powershift is much nicer and smoother AND it has a high road gear what I wouldn't give for 27mph running to some of my fields. Big plus if you are going to have some travelling to any future fields or custom work.

Anyways biggest thing is to go and run them because the machines will also tell you which one has been loved more and that makes the biggest difference.

Alex


----------



## krone.1 (Jul 28, 2013)

JD3430, your future Krone BP890 HS is not going to be brand specific.... it will push any color tractor along quite nicely!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Setback: 
Just found out my house needs a new water well. CRAP! 
My budget just got tighter


----------



## Bob M (Feb 11, 2012)

Hate it when life gets in the way of farming.. LOL


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Bob M said:


> Hate it when life gets in the way of farming.. LOL


Bob, you don't do any fields up in PA, do you? 
There's a guy up here on the border doing some fields with MD tags. He did a 3rd cutting last week. Couldn't believe it. He only got maybe 10 big squares off a 150 acre field.
Thought it might be you....

Gawas Farm,
I can't figure out what I would use that front 3pt for unless there's a front PTO to go with it.


----------



## krone.1 (Jul 28, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> Setback:
> Just found out my house needs a new water well. CRAP!
> My budget just got tighter


Just have to prioritize.....
IMO water is probably overrated.
How far is the nearest creek?


----------



## Bob M (Feb 11, 2012)

JD we do some hay in Pa. but that wasn't us. We made the last of our hay around halloween. I saw another so called "Hay Producer" mowing a field last weekend that might have a yield of 1/8 ton of hay to ac. I have no idea why he was doing this. Mowing grass hay very short in late November with very little yield. Rumor has it that he won't be in business much longer, only has rented ground and landlords not happy.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Bob M said:


> JD we do some hay in Pa. but that wasn't us. We made the last of our hay around halloween. I saw another so called "Hay Producer" mowing a field last weekend that might have a yield of 1/8 ton of hay to ac. I have no idea why he was doing this. Mowing grass hay very short in late November with very little yield. Rumor has it that he won't be in business much longer, only has rented ground and landlords not happy.


Sounds like the same guy up here. Has older Deere 2WD's and a older NH discbine and a big square baler. It's not one of the big guys I usually see up here. 
Thought it might be Teti from down in Oxford???


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

JD3430 said:


> Setback:
> Just found out my house needs a new water well. CRAP!
> My budget just got tighter


Is it the well pump or needing a whole new well? Well pumps aren't really all that pricey compared to tractors. But having to drill a whole new well is a very different price.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Nah I have this weird thing going on where when I get heavy rain, well gets contaminated with dark water. I thought it was a cracked casing, but we ran the camera down the well and it looked good. Pump is fine and will be used in new well.


----------



## GawasFarm (Jul 10, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> Gawas Farm,
> I can't figure out what I would use that front 3pt for unless there's a front PTO to go with it.


Well there I go assuming again and you know what happens when you assume. I always think of front 3pt having PTO included but if yours does not have a PTO that does change the weight of it in my mind. (still go with blue but its what I know) Front 3pt without PTO is going to be good for weight or pushing a blade.

Good luck with the well hopefully there is a cheaper option then new well!

Alex


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

AHH! 
I found a great use for front 3 point hitch. 
You can put a dual bale spear on it and bring bales in from the field. Now you can't load trucks with it or stack them (unless you wanted to add a forklift) but at least you can bring them in from the field and line em up!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I just got back from test driving 2 tractors. 
One was the Ford 8670 I spoke of earlier.
I really liked it. It just "fit" me right. I liked the cab, visibility, features, etc. 
NEW rear 600/38's. couple of small issues I noticed:
1. EGT gauge does not register
2. Engine coolant temp gauge does not register.
3. Front tires are maybe 25% and ones a GY other is a Michelin
4. One cracked front fender

Paint looked very good. Low hours (5800).

Other tractor '05 Case IH MX170. Cab felt smaller, BUT it has front suspension AND
LH reverser AND PTO buttons and raise lower buttons on fenders. Really cool. Also has front 3pt. 
Issues:
1. Tires pretty worn, maybe 20 % tread, but all tires match. 
2. High hours at 8,650

I like that the FORd has a lot more displacement with 7.8L, but who can argue against a 5.9L Cummins?
The Ford didnt have a reverser, but the RH reverser was EASY to shift. I like the idea of the MX170 front suspension. It also had a primitive buddy seat. 
The owner of the business repairs both tractors. He told me the CASE IH is cheaper to repair than Ford NH tractors primarily because of parts prices. 
CASE IH is $5,000 cheaper, but 8,650 hours scare me.

Pics


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> I just got back from test driving 2 tractors.
> One was the Ford 8670 I spoke of earlier.
> I really liked it. It just "fit" me right. I liked the cab, visibility, features, etc.
> NEW rear 600/38's. couple of small issues I noticed:
> ...


If the tires are worn enough that you feel they need replacing on the MX, there's 3k of your difference right there (not including the fronts as both have worn fronts).

If the MX has a road gear equal to the Genesis, you would certainly appreciate the front suspension even more. I can barely stay in the seat of my Valtra at 40k on township roads as it is also without suspension. Easy solution, stay under 25 mph on rough roads.

I'd still buy the Genesis. Especially if you ever get that mid-size baler. You can turn up the fuel on the ford, the MX is probably about maxed out with only the 5.9.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Yup, mx180 jumps to 8.3 Cummins.
Phearus offered to turn up fuel on Ford.
Funny I didn't mind the Ford RH reverser trans.
I really thought I HAD to have a LH reverser.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Bob M said:


> Hate it when life gets in the way of farming.. LOL


My job has a tendency to do that. Pays the bills though.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

8350HiTech said:


> I'd still buy the Genesis. Especially if you ever get that mid-size baler. You can turn up the fuel on the ford, the MX is probably about maxed out with only the 5.9.


Nah, 5.9's can produce awesome amounts of horsepower. Dad's dually had 500hp plus when he bought it, previous owner was drag racing it, Dad had the fuel shop turn it down as was tired of ripping transmissions out of it yearly. I'm getting around 400 out of mine without messing with turbo or the head (waste gate disconnected, 40lbs boost easy). Had the 5.9 in our 8560 Massey combine turned up to 250hp. You'll break the rest of the tractor before the engine gives up.

Not sure what they list the engine horsepower at on the MX, but the 5.9 used in our combine was set at 190hp stock.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> Not sure what they list the engine horsepower at on the MX, but the 5.9 used in our combine was set at 190hp stock.


MX170 is 168 engine hp. To me that's about enough for a tractor. I know in a pickup the sky is the limit. I have 3 5.9s, one in a Dodge Ram, two MXs, ranging from 135 engine hp to about 300 engine hp. The higher the hp, the peakier the powerband. It seems like with the higher hp, the power really doesn't come on until 1900 rpm. If the governor starts to pull that back before 2400 rpm, that's not a very big sweet spot. Just my observations.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Gearclash said:


> MX170 is 168 engine hp. To me that's about enough for a tractor. I know in a pickup the sky is the limit. I have 3 5.9s, one in a Dodge Ram, two MXs, ranging from 135 engine hp to about 300 engine hp. The higher the hp, the peakier the powerband. It seems like with the higher hp, the power really doesn't come on until 1900 rpm. If the governor starts to pull that back before 2400 rpm, that's not a very big sweet spot. Just my observations.


He said he'd turn either tractor up for me and that the Cummins could be turned up way more, but he didnt recommend turning up too much. He said excessive EGTs can start melting things and with 8,500hrs, it didnt seem like a great idea to stress out the tractor too much.

My problem is, I can't decide which tractor to pursue. I like the Ford better and I probably should like the Case IH more. It's newer and cheaper and I'm the one who said over and over I always wanted a red tractor, but the Ford just kind of talks to me. The new back tires, the cab is nicer despite being 10 yrs older.... 
I think the CaseIH hours scare me too much.....8650 hours....man that seems like a LOT.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

JD3430 said:


> I think the CaseIH hours scare me too much.....8650 hours....man that seems like a LOT.


We have that on the third tachometer in our Oliver 1855.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Would you worry about 8650 hours?


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

With the 8500 + hours it all depends on the price and condition. But than again the price difference might not be that much once some repairs are factored in. Has the tractor had any work done to it?


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

hog987 said:


> With the 8500 + hours it all depends on the price and condition. But than again the price difference might not be that much once some repairs are factored in. Has the tractor had any work done to it?


Don't know if any work has been done.
Hood could use reprinting, but its not too bad
Tires are 20-25% all around, but they match and no dry rot. 
Condition is average
Tractor is kind of loaded with front suspension, front PTO, front hydraulic outlets, rear 3pt raise/lower and rear PTO buttons. Also has primitive buddy seat. Some lights not working, little odds & ends.
$32,500. 
Ford could prob use front tires soon, too, but they're not too bad. 
I really would like to put tires on it, then it's about the same as the Ford, but still has 3,000 more hours. 
He says the CIH's are cheaper to repair. He can use McCormick parts which are a lot cheaper, but the same part.


----------



## cmd (Oct 26, 2012)

is that HTR services lot those pictures are from. I see what looks like a bunch of euro tractors around, makes me think of them but I've not been there in person.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Yes, HTR services. All Euro tractors. Front 3pts, flotation tires and front fenders give them away.


----------



## cmd (Oct 26, 2012)

I hear they have an amazing amount of tractors. Check out Lu-Lin Farm, I think they are on tractorhouse or fastline or both. They normally have some reasonable euros.


----------



## discbinedr (Mar 4, 2013)

If it was taken care of 8600 hrs. isn't that bad. I do hear they use them pretty hard other side of the pond....


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Both units started, ran, shifted fine.


----------



## DSLinc1017 (Sep 27, 2009)

Pre-buyers remorse is some times worse than post! 
One option that you haven't considered, and it is important.

How are the cup holders?


----------



## hillside hay (Feb 4, 2013)

DSLinc1017 said:


> Pre-buyers remorse is some times worse than post!
> One option that you haven't considered, and it is important.
> 
> How are the cup holders?
> Oh jeez! not the cup holders again!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Well, I'm still stuck. Can't figgered put what to do. Now I'm leaning towards the MX170. I hear nothing but great things about them and I think it all starts with the 5.9L cummin(g)s.
I think I'm going to go with the MX170 because its $5500 cheaper. 
Hours still scare me. Seems like a big rebuild is looming right around the corner.


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

Do you really need that much HP for your operation? Just asking cause your smaller tractors are very easy on fuel. At the end of the day, baling side by side my 145 pto hp tractors use 20% more fuel than my 105 pto hp John Deere tractors. Are you ready for the shock when you go from a Kubota to a ??? If i didn't need the extra power for seeding and tillage i would have all 105-110 hp tractors.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

carcajou said:


> Do you really need that much HP for your operation? Just asking cause your smaller tractors are very easy on fuel. At the end of the day, baling side by side my 145 pto hp tractors use 20% more fuel than my 105 pto hp John Deere tractors. Are you ready for the shock when you go from a Kubota to a ??? If i didn't need the extra power for seeding and tillage i would have all 105-110 hp tractors.


Moving up to 3x3 or maybe 3x4 square baler I will need the power. Current Kubota is 108 PTO HP.
But to answer your question, yes, I'm ready for extra fuel consumption.

What I plan on doing is seeing if I can live without my smaller 70 HP Kubota and then sell it, using proceeds to pay off the the bigger tractor. I don't have to sell it, but if I don't need it anymore, there's no use keeping it. Will miss having 2 tractors with loaders, though.


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> Moving up to 3x3 or maybe 3x4 square baler I will need the power. Current Kubota is 108 PTO HP.


Good luck with that. All you have to do to justify that is add acres. And we all know how easy that is. Especially when your preferred rent is less than zero


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

One odd benefit of the 170. Until you need the power, you could actually turn the fuel down.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8350HiTech said:


> Good luck with that. All you have to do to justify that is add acres. And we all know how easy that is. Especially when your preferred rent is less than zero


I just added 30 more with no rent 
Funny how you seem to question my judgement on this. I think its pretty sound. All my competitors are driving new 225HP Deere's worth about $350,000 doing a little more acreage and you seem to think I have a brain cramp buying a $32,000 case IH with 150HP??? Or am I reading you the wrong way? 
I'm tired of gettin beat to death in a 70HP short wheelbase Kubota. I want to enjoy life a little.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> One odd benefit of the 170. Until you need the power, you could actually turn the fuel down.


 No need for that. My 170 uses no more fuel than my 135 does doing the same job. Caught my attention, considering that the 170 weighs a good 3,000 lbs more. The 170 has an air-liquid aftercooler that the 135 lacks, and 3* more injector timing.

Many years of observation has me convinced that fuel usage is much more tied to how much power is actually being used, and not so much how much power can be made. Even a smaller diesel will get thirsty if it gets worked hard.


----------



## Rodney R (Jun 11, 2008)

I heard many times about guys turning the fuel up or down, and if the object was to save fuel by turning it down, it wouldn't help, cause they said that the smoke screw was just limiting the maximum amount of fuel - so if a guy didn't use the maximum, you might not turn it down enough to make a difference. But that's all hearsay, and you can take that for what it's worth.

Rodney


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Gearclash said:


> No need for that. My 170 uses no more fuel than my 135 does doing the same job. Caught my attention, considering that the 170 weighs a good 3,000 lbs more. The 170 has an air-liquid aftercooler that the 135 lacks, and 3* more injector timing.
> 
> Many years of observation has me convinced that fuel usage is much more tied to how much power is actually being used, and not so much how much power can be made. Even a smaller diesel will get thirsty if it gets worked hard.


I agree. I can idle along with bigger Kubota and pull the same thing as I can with the smaller Kubota trying real hard.
I know I'll use more fuel because I'll be using it on the discbine and 15' batwing. 
It'll use lots of fuel on a square baler going up/down these hills I have, too. 
150/170 also has thicker shafts, 50% more clutch and 100% more brakes than smaller MX's.
To me it's like buying a true medium duty over one of the lighter 4500/5500 trucks. You may not need everything the beefier tractor has, but if it has more mass, thicker components, bigger transmission shafts and clutch, it might last longer and not break as easily when you gotta push on it.


----------

