# 1000 vs. 540 pto on round balers



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

I have the 540 rpm pto on my round baler, and after five years of use I have had some problems with the tractor pto, involving significant down time when I least need it. Some of it was caused by my own ignorance, but it seems that the 540 side of the pto on the CIH Maxxums is more prone to problems than the 1000 side is.

Question is, would I be better off switching the baler gear box to 1000? Or will having the baler pto turning 1000 instead of 540 just give me a different set of problems?

I would like to hear from people who have run both.


----------



## Nitram (Apr 2, 2011)

I have changed the 605 SJ from 1000 to 540 so as to have both cutter and baler the same ...then I got a disc bine at 1000 pto. Brilliant. Lol. The a actual bale speed remains the same I believe so I don't think it will hurt plus it will be easier on the tractor. Martin


----------



## jtpfarm (Aug 19, 2011)

I have a 540 baler and a 1000 baler. I would rather bale with the 540 simply because no matter what i do on the 1000 one the pto hammers when i turn unless i slow it way down. This isnt a problem with the 540


----------



## fredro (May 12, 2012)

if u change from 540 to 1000 the gearbox has to be turned some vermeer balers alow this takes less hp for 1000 because the impliment is still turning the rated rpm also when u spin at 1000 the drive line in turning almost twice as fast therefor u joints go out twice as fast also drawbar length should change when going from 540 to 1000


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

I used to break one or two cross shafts on the 540 pto 567's each year, have not broke one on the 1000 pto 567's. When i baled with a 1155 Massey it had alot of pto noise on the 540 balers, very little on 1000 versions. I looked at a used Massey 5000 series tractor a while back, the 540 was toast but the 1000 drive was fine, I suspect that going to 1000 rpm would be easier on most tractors . Ray


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

I should clarify that the baler I have has a CV joint by the tractor, in theory eliminating vibration and the need to adjust the drawbar length. However, the big square baler I run is 1000 with a CV joint and it vibrates constantly, even after we replaced the CV. On the other hand, my stalk chopper is 1000 with a CV and never gives vibration, at least not from the pto.

The 540 is very smooth, so I don't want to go to the 1000 and get bad vibes and other problems.

I will need to change to a different gear box, but I'm sure a salvage yard would have one.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Gearclash said:


> I have the 540 rpm pto on my round baler, and after five years of use I have had some problems with the tractor pto, involving significant down time when I least need it. Some of it was caused by my own ignorance, but it seems that the 540 side of the pto on the CIH Maxxums is more prone to problems than the 1000 side is.
> 
> Question is, would I be better off switching the baler gear box to 1000? Or will having the baler pto turning 1000 instead of 540 just give me a different set of problems?
> 
> I would like to hear from people who have run both.


May I compliment you on having the dual PTO?
love the Maxxum dual PTO.....


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> May I compliment you on having the dual PTO?
> love the Maxxum dual PTO.....


You may if you wish! I have mixed thoughts on the concept. I am in the process of pulling the pto housing off my CIH MX135 for the second time in two weeks. First time was for the sliding ring and the pins that hold it to the slide tube, this time for a slide tube that has the end cracked out. In all fairness I made mistakes that caused this, but the bottom line is that this 2 speed pto that the Maxxums use is not as robust as the older dual shaft system. Also much more of a pain to work on than say an IH 1066 pto unit.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

so do you have the same one as on a 7120? Thats my dream tractor


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

I didn't know what the 7120 has so I looked at a few on tractorhouse and they appear to have two separate shafts. This would be different than the Maxxums. I do know that the 7140 has one shaft, the large 1000. The MX150/170 have a reversable stub, but is is more user friendly and looks to be a bit more resistant to abuse.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Gearclash said:


> I didn't know what the 7120 has so I looked at a few on tractorhouse and they appear to have two separate shafts. This would be different than the Maxxums. I do know that the 7140 has one shaft, the large 1000. The MX150/170 have a reversable stub, but is is more user friendly and looks to be a bit more resistant to abuse.


Ahh, OK. I thought you had a twin stub on your Maxxum. I do know the 7110/7120 both have twin stubs 540 and 1000 small. Love that feature.
Sorry to get off topic....back to regularly scheduled programming.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

I am at a point where I would very much prefer the twin stubs. Finished disassembling the MX135 pto today and found (1) the end had spun off the slide tube that the reversable stub moves, and (2) the two pins and slide gear that gave out the first time are up to the same tricks again. It seems like the reversable pto business just can't take a lot of lateral abuse without eventual damage to the gear that shifts it.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

I prefer 540 shafts myself. Slower speed usually means less vibration if they get a little wear, slower speed also guarantees they don't don't sling near as much grease.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

So why do tractors up to 1000 PTO once they get over ~125HP?
Sorry for the dumb questions, but I had to ask...


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

Agree that 540 is better if the hp requirements are lower.

The reason for 1000 is that it cuts roughly in half the torque that the pto is transmitting. Generally, torque is what breaks things, so half the torque means less weight in steel needed to make the pto shafts. I would hate to know how big and heavy a 540 pto would need to be to handle 200 pto hp!


----------



## Nitram (Apr 2, 2011)

Gearclash said:


> Agree that 540 is better if the hp requirements are lower.
> 
> The reason for 1000 is that it cuts roughly in half the torque that the pto is transmitting. Generally, torque is what breaks things, so half the torque means less weight in steel needed to make the pto shafts. I would hate to know how big and heavy a 540 pto would need to be to handle 200 pto hp!


Thank you I too wondered about this


----------



## Iowa hay guy (Jul 29, 2010)

on my 568 they just flipped the gearbox
my understanding is the 1000 is 2:1 and the 540 is 1:2 ratios so the 100 uses less tourqe and transmits less power to the components and the 540 doubles your power going into the machine but either way the machine turns the same speed with a different sprocket on the main shaft coming out of the gearbox
all of this according to a deere baler tech as he was working on my baler


----------



## gradyjohn (Jul 17, 2012)

I have 1000 rpm JD567 because my moco is 1000 and I wish my square baler was. I have 40 and 50 series tractors and you have to change out the shaft and that is messy. The JD balers flip the gearbox and change the pto shaft.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

gradyjohn said:


> I have 1000 rpm JD567 because my moco is 1000 and I wish my square baler was. I have 40 and 50 series tractors and you have to change out the shaft and that is messy. The JD balers flip the gearbox and change the pto shaft.


Grady, Shawn Larrabe was telling me that a old JD 24T square baler that I had could be operated with a 1000 instead of 540 if you operated at much lower rpms....yes, thats what he said....you could call him in NY...very knowledgeable fella...goes by Balerman.
http://www.bestbalerparts.com/John_Deere_Tractor_Pg_PGER.html

Regards, Mike


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

One other advantage to sticking with 540 pto on your lower hp equipment, depends on the tractor of course but a lot of older or smaller tractors a 1000 rpm PTO was never an option.


----------

