# Tractor H.P. to operate J.D. 348 Baler



## haybales4sale (Jun 1, 2010)

I bale 177 acres of hay and I'm in the market to upgrade to a new (new to me used) high capacity baler. Only interested in the color green.
I cut with a Hesston 8200 S/P Haybine.
Sometimes I ted, somtimes I don't. Sometimes I rake. Sometimes I don't. All depends on the weather conditions and type of hay.
I pull hay wagons behind my baler and stack bales on one of eight 8' x 16' flat rack wagons (120 bales to 160 bales depending running gear capacity).
I've been looking at both J.D. 338 and J.D. 348 balers. Leaning towards the 348 model.
I don't believe the 30 H.P. tractor requirement specified by John Deere.
Here's my question....Will my J.D. 3020 diesel operate a 348 baler?
A friend of mine told me the J.D. 3020 tractor PTO H.P. is enough but I'd wear out the PTO drive.
Any advise would be appreciated.


----------



## midniteplowboyy (Jul 1, 2010)

Shouldn't have a problem at all, unless you have big hills pulling the trailers. The 328/338 will take less horsepower because of the lower strokes per min.

That 30hp is the min, it'll make a good solid bale at that hp because you cant crowd it. I wouldn't worry about the PTO on a 3020.

We've baled alot of soybeans and alfalfa with a little JD850(22pto/hp) and JD328(with some of the 338 upgrades) and a 8 bale farmhand accumulator. It does pretty good until the accumulator trips, then 10 more hp would be nice. All our other tractors were 120hp+ and not enough slower gears, so the little 850 got used a bunch.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

haybales4sale said:


> A friend of mine told me the J.D. 3020 tractor PTO H.P. is enough but I'd wear out the PTO drive.
> Any advise would be appreciated.


I could believe that, used to run our NH 276 with Super 88's all the time, they'd handle it all right, but would always seem to wear the splines off the power shaft from the engine back to the PTO clutch. Never had that problem with bigger Oliver tractors.

Edit: Btw, if I recall correctly Super 88's had about 55-58 PTO HP.


----------



## aussie hayman (Nov 8, 2008)

Giday from Australia I run a 348 baler no trouble with a 5425 tractor. My only problem is the baler tends to push the tractor with the inersia load from the flywheel and plunger which sometimes makes me wonder wether the transmission can cope with this. Mick


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

haybales4sale said:


> I don't believe the 30 H.P. tractor requirement specified by John Deere.
> Here's my question....Will my J.D. 3020 diesel operate a 348 baler?


Most of the time those recommendations are for ideal conditions on mirror flat ground from my experience. You start getting one of your larger loads near full and need to climb a hill is when you'll be noticing that you might need a little more HP.


----------



## OkhayBallr (Dec 18, 2009)

Get a 1839 and you'll kick rocks at the 348. He He. 600 an hour will make you see why!!


----------



## barnrope (Mar 22, 2010)

A 3020 will handle that baler really nice.


----------



## Hedge tree (Jul 18, 2008)

There is a bit of difference between the JD baler set-up and others with a front mounted fly wheel. There is a gear reduction with the side winder flywheel on the Deeres, thus, they do not require the h.p. to start the baler or sustain the momentum. The fly wheel itself is a bit larger in diameter and weighs a tad more than the direct drive mounted flywheel on a N.H. baler.

I have used a JD 3020 for 30 years on balers, both NH and JD and it will do the job very nicely. If the tractor is weighted, has fluid in the tires, or carries a loader, you will not be affected by side thrust or any other baler action on the tractor. The 3020 is rated as a 70 h.p. machine. I currently bale with a N.H. BC 5070 baler and it handles it well. The baler is rated for a minimum of 70 h.p.

You will be fine with the JD 348 and JD 3020 combo. The 3020 sits up high enough that you can see the knotter area of the 348 and catch a missed bale before it is in the chute on the way back to the wagon. Good luck.


----------



## baddog201 (Sep 18, 2010)

depends on how fast you wanna go. I run a jd348 with a hoelscher 1000 accumulator. I run a jd 7600 on it and with 2 windrows together out of a JD 946 moco i run 5 to 7 mph and the 7600 runs it no problem but i can tell when the plunger rolls over at that speed. I would buy the 348 well worth the extra money you can bale alot faster. I do alot of custom baling rounds and little squares and the 348 will do alot better. JD brought a guy up to watch my 348 bale in the field and he had just bought a new 338 and he traded the day after he saw mine baling so it would be my guess the 348 is alot better than the 338 but if you dont have the ponies to go that fast you might want the 338 either way i think you would be happy


----------



## baddog201 (Sep 18, 2010)

OkhayBallr said:


> Get a 1839 and you'll kick rocks at the 348. He He. 600 an hour will make you see why!!


I do alot of custom work and i bought the deere over the agco hesston 1839 because I could out bale it with the 348. I demoed both and bought the deere better baler


----------

