# 1086 & 4910 baler



## snowball (Feb 7, 2015)

I'am looking at a hesston 4910 , big square baler it's a got a 3 bale accumulator that if I buy the baler is coming off. I'am questioning if I can get away with putting a 1086 on it, I had the tractor dynoed last yr it has 163 hp I was going to dual it up I'am on flat ground, will it get the job done ? I have run the 1086 on a Case 8575 baler and got along but that is a 3x3 and now I'am talking 4x4, I'am not buying into the salesman's song and dance because he is the type that would tell me what ever he thinks I want to hear, just to peddle this baler I have no experience with a 4x4 baler. :huh: I some what question if I have enough ground speed variance with those grind-a-matic transmissions also


----------



## Maxzillian (Sep 11, 2014)

You must mean a 4910, haven't heard of a 4950 before. Going from the 8575 you'll be dropping from 41 strokes per minute down to about 25 so you gain a fair bit of mechanical advantage there. The op manual recommends 150+ hp so you might be ok. Biggest concern would be whether or not the tractor is heavy enough for the larger baler.


----------



## snowball (Feb 7, 2015)

Thank you for bringing up the mistake Maxzillian, I did mean a 4910 I had something else on my small mind when I was posting, Now I'am trying to figure out how correct it on the thread topic. Back to the point I was going to weight it to the max I have a full set of rear wheel weights and already have a full rack up front. I just wounder if I will get into trouble be'n on the lower end of the power requirement .


----------



## Maxzillian (Sep 11, 2014)

Well the minimum allowed was 120 so you've got a decent amount of head room.


----------



## snowball (Feb 7, 2015)

I caught some what of a break this afternoon I spent 2hrs on the phone with Roger from The Maize Corp. He was very helpful, he seemed to think the same as you posted. He has me thinking very hard about another 4910 that is in west Kansas He did tell me not to head to any field with more than a gopher mound with that 1086 on the baler


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

snowball said:


> Thank you for bringing up the mistake Maxzillian, I did mean a 4910 I had something else on my small mind when I was posting, Now I'am trying to figure out how correct it on the thread topic. Back to the point I was going to weight it to the max I have a full set of rear wheel weights and already have a full rack up front. I just wounder if I will get into trouble be'n on the lower end of the power requirement .


Vol should be able to edit the topic title for you.


----------



## PackMan2170 (Oct 6, 2014)

Roger from Maize knows his stuff.

That 1086 stock is like 130hp, which is on the light side. Would rather have something more like 150, but if yours is turned up to 160 it should be ok as long as your cooling system can keep up.

As far as weight, put a FULL rack of weights on the front (baler is tongue heavy) and water in your tires. If you can make 15000+ you should be ok. WATCH YOUR DRAWBAR with the weight, as I've seen 4900s/4910s break drawbars with careless operators. The outcome is not pretty.

Transmission may be an issue as well, because a lot of your ground speed for that baler will be right around the range split, so it may be a pain.

I'd say hook it on there for a season and see how you get along. Other option is look for a 3x4, which won't be such an issue with power/weight, but that transmission is just not the best suited for a LSB.


----------



## treymo (Dec 29, 2013)

Snowball, where is the 4910 in Kansas located out?

Trey


----------



## treymo (Dec 29, 2013)

There is a sharp one at our Agco dealer for 27K.

Trey


----------



## snowball (Feb 7, 2015)

treymo said:


> Snowball, where is the 4910 in Kansas located out?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Trey this one I think the town is Kalvesta But not positive because the info on the paper went though the washer last night after I got do with chore's he said it is 30 or 40 miles from Garden City 16,000 will buy it about 50,000 bales thought it but has been maintained by them and he said its ready to go. I'am probably going to pass on it it's just too far the freight is going to be close to 4 k


----------



## Jay in WA (Mar 21, 2015)

I used to pull a 4900 with a JD 4450. It did it but sure worked the snot out of it and with any hills the tail was trying to wag the dog. Large frame tractors work much better. I would recommend either going with a 3x4 baler or finding a bigger tractor. That didn't sound like much of a deal on the 4910 either. The west is full of used one's looking for a home.


----------



## treymo (Dec 29, 2013)

Snowball, I am about an hours drive from Kalvesta. Let me know if I can help in any way, if you don't want it I think I'd be interested in it.

Trey


----------



## 7130 (Mar 29, 2015)

pulled 4910 all over with an accumulator 1586 was 165 hp and the 15 only has a 3 speed main box your 1086 has a 4 if your ta is in good shape it will help with gear splits thats the only bad part on bailer is not having power shift. but they will do it. take some chain and put it from 3 point arms around the draw bar to help take some stress off the bar


----------



## hay rake (Dec 31, 2011)

it must be nice to live in other parts of the country. got a 1086 got a 4900 wouldn't dream of ever putting them together. i wouldn't want to test my pto that hard though i do know people that have run choppers at 240 horse and they took it.had a white 1-180 at 22,000 lbs and the baler with accumulator would push me all over going down the road. got a steiger 9230 on it now and love it. if you do try the 1086 i would make a good drawbar support. i don't think her rear end is going to like it. a 4910 like a 4900 is REAL tongue heavy. you'll also need a big front weight rack. we did tillage with the white with 7-8 weights on front. baling i had all 13 good luck


----------



## snowball (Feb 7, 2015)

I tossed that inbred idea out the window, I couldn't get the baler bought right and I like my 1086 to much to do that to it just gonna stick with the 3x3 8575 baler that is enough for it. Thanks for straighten me out.. I think next winter I will just check myself into the Betty Ford Clinic . because after further review of that mating , I must have some sort of addiction problem, That I'am unaware of..Thanks for the input everyone


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

I was gonna say. I wouldn't be thrilled at the prospect of pulling a 4x4 behind an IH 66/86 of any size, regardless of the hp. Just asking too much of the drawbar, rear hubs and axles.

Ran a 2x3 behind a 1066 for some years. That was a nice match.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Reviving this topic would a Massey 7495 handle a 4910? 
I'll be looking at one next week. I won't run it on any really hilly ground.
Would duals be a big help?


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

JD3430 said:


> Reviving this topic would a Massey 7495 handle a 4910?
> I'll be looking at one next week. I won't run it on any really hilly ground.
> Would duals be a big help?


Duals are definitely a plus for a 4X4 big square. Horsepower shouldn't be an issue, it's the weight aspect. Lots of guys running small 4WD (think Steiger Bearcat) cuz the baler will push you all around.
I run my 8570 with a 1370 Case and sometimes the baler has a mind of its own. A 7495 is considered a mid size tractor, I think you're gonna struggle A LOT with a 4910. My $0.02, it's worth what ya paid for it.


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

Also, if you struggle getting hay dry for a round bale, it’s gonna be a nightmare for a big square. Especially a 4x4. They are not very forgiving


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

stack em up said:


> Also, if you struggle getting hay dry for a round bale, it's gonna be a nightmare for a big square. Especially a 4x4. They are not very forgiving


But surely they're all going to mulch.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Yes, thats correct. I'm a "mulch king" so they can be 20% moisture, maybe even low 20's. .

I'm finding out the 4910 was designed mainly for baling straw and dry hay. However, I hear its got a heavy duty pickup head and a pretty decent size flywheel.

I guess I could start looking at 3x4 balers, but they are 2-3X the price.

As you once said 4x4's are "cheap"


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

So you're like onelonleyfarmer? The guy who couldn't spell properly when he signed up and misspelled lonely? Lol

I would be more and more concerned with the plunger arms than anything with a pickup in higher moisture hay. That's why Hesston built their XD balers in the 3X4 platform cuz the bale is just too damn big otherwise.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

.


----------



## Maxzillian (Sep 11, 2014)

stack em up said:


> I would be more and more concerned with the plunger arms than anything with a pickup in higher moisture hay. That's why Hesston built their XD balers in the 3X4 platform cuz the bale is just too damn big otherwise.


The plunger arms will be fine, they're designed to handle a certain limit of compressive load and the software is designed to control the density cylinders as needed to keep it from exceeding that limit.

The XD was built in the 3x4 size because that's the market that was driving heavier bales; largely trying to fill shipping containers to weight without needing a press.

If the market wants heavier 4x4 bales, there's nothing that will prevent any manufacturer from doing it other than cost.


----------



## hillside hay (Feb 4, 2013)

stack em up said:


> So you're like onelonleyfarmer? The guy who couldn't spell properly when he signed up and misspelled lonely? Lol
> 
> I would be more and more concerned with the plunger arms than anything with a pickup in higher moisture hay. That's why Hesston built their XD balers in the 3X4 platform cuz the bale is just too damn big otherwise.


Speaking of him, he bought a hesston 4*4 this year. He has a thorough video series on everything he did to make it bale higher moisture hay. Interesting stuff and the videos are short enough to just watch while you are downing your morning coffee.


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

Ok, I was wrong. Party on Wayne


----------



## PaMike (Dec 7, 2013)

stack em up said:


> Ok, I was wrong. Party on Wayne


I must have missed something....?


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

PaMike said:


> I must have missed something....?


You missed Wayne's World?!


----------



## hillside hay (Feb 4, 2013)

stack em up said:


> Ok, I was wrong. Party on Wayne


Party on Garth


----------



## Maxzillian (Sep 11, 2014)

hillside hay said:


> Speaking of him, he bought a hesston 4*4 this year. He has a thorough video series on everything he did to make it bale higher moisture hay. Interesting stuff and the videos are short enough to just watch while you are downing your morning coffee.


Yeah, some of the things he did was pretty interesting. I know he has ran Hesston balers in the past, but I thought a few of the things he did was a bit overkill. I thought it was kind of funny that he completely dismissed installing the plunger brushes (despite never having a baler that used them before) and went straight to adding plunger face extensions. I recall he also said the extensions would reduce the plunger load, but I have to respectfully disagree with him there.

The other thing he did that struck me as odd was to extend the doors of the chamber; I really don't think that does anything in the higher moisture hay he's baling and I'm willing to wager that if you look down the doors the extensions are bent by now. Regardless, it's his baler and he's free to do what he wants with it. It certainly seemed to keep him occupied and entertained while he was waiting on hay.

About the only thing he did that I thought was completely necessary was line the stuffer chamber with plastic.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

8350HiTech said:


> You missed Wayne's World?!


If he did miss it, he's very fortunate.

Ranks up there as one of the dumbest movies I've ever been dragged to see.


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

PaMike said:


> I must have missed something....?


Maxzillian and hillside hay proved me wrong.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

So anyway, the 4910 baler weighs 18,600lbs and requires a minimum 120HP.

Dealer says tongue weight 3,200lbs empty. Less with a bale in the chamber.

I don't know much about square balers, but if I'm not mistaken, that's not very heavy compared to many 3x4 balers and not much power requirement, either. Realizing that the power requirement spec of 120PTO is under estimated, but if I have 155, wouldnt that be adequate?


----------



## cjsr8595 (Jul 7, 2014)

On a side note, what is mulch hay and the market for it? mushroom growers?



JD3430 said:


> So anyway, the 4910 baler weighs 18,600lbs and requires a minimum 120HP.
> 
> I don't know much about square balers, but if I'm not mistaken, that's not very heavy compared to many 3x4 balers and not much power requirement, either. Realizing that the power requirement spec of 120PTO is under estimated, but if I have 155, wouldnt that be adequate?


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

I would say it will be okay, but speed takes power. I like to run 8, and that can use every pony my 1370 has. And that dynos 202. But most of the time you’ll be just fine


----------



## endrow (Dec 15, 2011)

The catastrophic event here is not if you cant go 8mph. It is if the tractor isn't heavy enough to hold the baler on the hills .. Saw plenty of big balers sitting in lower lots at dealer that probably got jack-knifed and smashed up.

I believe the Massey , JD3430 has will do the job if it has adequate tires and ballast.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

endrow said:


> The catastrophic event here is not if you cant go 8mph. It is if the tractor isn't heavy enough to hold the baler on the hills .. Saw plenty of big balers sitting in lower lots at dealer that probably got jack-knifed and smashed up.
> 
> I believe the Massey , JD3430 has will do the job if it has adequate tires and ballast.


Wish the damn thing had brakes. I have air and hydraulic brakes to the rear on tractor


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

endrow said:


> The catastrophic event here is not if you cant go 8mph. It is if the tractor isn't heavy enough to hold the baler on the hills .. Saw plenty of big balers sitting in lower lots at dealer that probably got jack-knifed and smashed up.
> I believe the Massey , JD3430 has will do the job if it has adequate tires and ballast.


Good point. My frame of reference is every 7495 we sold was on 46" rubber to straddle rows, but the Megabibs were an option, I just never saw one with them.

I say buy the baler, it's only money. I'd just hate to see you have issues when the hay is down and rain on the horizon.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

It's not really a big decision, but the idea of big squares and their ease of loading/shipping looks better and better all the time.
Not a huge expense, either. 
If my tractor was a big frame with 200+, I'd probably do it.


----------

