# Hesston Inline Balers



## cornshucker (Aug 22, 2011)

Thinking about changing to a Hesston series in line small square baler. One for sale MF 1837 near me at a good price. (man going to all round bales. Pros and cons of the inline balers. Two good MF dealers within 35 miles. I do have a high ground clearance tractor for straddling high windrows. Thanks


----------



## hayray (Feb 23, 2009)

There a few threads on here that discuss this topic in detail.


----------



## geiselbreth (Feb 21, 2010)

if u ever plug a inline lot of trouble


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

Agreed with geiselbreth which is why we traded ours for a New Holland.


----------



## Hunter Valley Lucerne (Aug 2, 2011)

I bought the original Hesston B4600 in 1981 & did on average 20,000 bales per year till 2006. Then bought a MF SB139 inline. I think over there it is called a MF1839. Ours has a lot more protective shields. As stated the big downside is getting it plugged, but you learn to be careful. It is a relatively high performance baler. I found the quality of manufacture second to none & maintenace minimal (apart from shear bolts). Incidentally I still have the Hesston in mothballs & could use it at any time if I had too. Parts here were getting hard to procure for it though if you needed them.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

There is one other thing I didn't like about the hesston/massey inline balers. When baling grass hay if there are any wet spots in the windrow these balers tend to compress those wet areas together which causes more of a chance of spoiling. The NH balers kind of mix it up with dry hay so there is less of a problems. Now these aren't a bunch of wet spots just here and there. Now they are better then New holland at baling alfalfa without shattering the leaves as bad. And if you have lots of hay bales at the end of the windrow it is easier to move around the other bales when turning around. As for quality. They are the same as NH balers in my experience. I have nothing against hesston/massey balers or equipment. In fact I just bought a 2150 3X3 Massey baler two weeks ago.


----------



## hayray (Feb 23, 2009)

I consider them the Cadillac of balers. Bale consistency and leaf retention are a big plus. More compact and easier to get around things is another. Neighbor just bought a New Holland high capacity model and what a tank that thing is. I thought the other balers were pretty hard to un-plug also.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

Never have plugged a New Holland. It's the little augers on each end of the pickup that always caused me trouble. Most of that was my fault though as I would go too fast around corners or let too much hay go on one side. That is not a worry with NH balers.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Late model New Holland balers require much more horsepower to operate than Hesston/MF balers(about double). Therefore they will cost appreciable more in fuel to operate. It is also my opinion that the Hesston/MF balers produce a more attractive consistent bale than the New Holland.

Regards, Mike


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

I was thinking about this. One other advantage of the Hesston over NH is that it takes only a bale and a half to change bale lengths. NH balers take 2-3 bales. When we used to bale with both the NH and Hesston at the same time I couldn't tell the bales apart. But that's just my opinion.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

On the plugging issue; It depends on the operator. I use a John Deere auger baler and many have complained about how hard these are to unplug. I suppose they could be if you are a operator who pays no attention to what is going on with the baler, have the radio blaring and your mind is out on the lake fishing or whatever. Whenever my JD plugs or starts to plug, I immediately stop, remove enough of the plug by hand to where I can get the baler to "take in" the remaining hay plug. Usually a 5 minute fix. If you are not paying attention and plug up and keep ramming hay into the throat, I can see where it could be a bear to "unplug". I have read where some inline users use a 30 inch rod with a hook on the end and a T handle to "reach" and pull out enough of the plug so that the baler can take in the hay. Like anything else, it all depends on the operator.









Regards, Mike


----------



## cornshucker (Aug 22, 2011)

Thanks for the information, Teslan I can see where the design of the baler won't mix the wet spots as good in that the hay don't have as far to travel to the chamber. I also can see what some of the others say about horsepower requirements. What would be a good price for the 1837 which is the middle of the three sizes, this particular baler is two years old and has approx. 8000 bales on it. Man going to all round bales. Also within 60 miles so very little in terms of transport. Have got both New Holland and MF equipment satisfied with both. One MF dealer within 6 miles. and one really great dealer within 35 minutes who also handles NH. Other NH dealer is a complete prick. Only other 2 inline balers close to me one guy has a Case that loves his, the other guy likes his but says he needs a higher clearance tractor pulls it with a Ford 5610 but has 18.4-30 tires on rear. Trying to redo our hay operation and go to mostly all small squares and plan to get a stackwagon. Will keep other small baler (I like redundancy) and probably sell our High End round baler for something a little cheaper to clean up rained on hay. This 1837 does not have hydraulic tension so I would like an opinion on the Air Baler.


----------



## hayray (Feb 23, 2009)

The wet spots thing is a new one for me and I have been using these balers since 1994. Teslan, wouldn't that be a bigger issue with your new baler? Obviously the baler is designed for dry hay conditions and the pre-pack chamber is designed to create a good dense bale. If I can make it work in Michigan it ought to work bout' anywhere.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

For the most part our hay is baled dry. The wet spots I'm speaking about are few and far between. Our grass hay is very very heavy. Sometimes more then 100 bales an acre on first cutting. But most of the time they come from where I've run over the windrow at the ends with the swather when cutting and also if we want to start baling a little sooner if rain/wind is in the forecast. One small wet spot packed tight in a bale can potentially ruin that bale and several bales around it in the stack. I'm a perfectionist when it comes to our hay. I don't like to even have one bale out of 2000 with a small wet spot. This is just what I have experienced and my cousin has experienced with his hesston as well. Now his sits and he uses just his new hollands. This isn't an issue with the new hollands and I would even suppose JD balers, newer or older, as the hay gets mixed up more on the way to the bale chamber. The Hesston does what it is supposed to. Packs it in there right away. Which in alfalfa is why you can bale without shattering leaves for the very same reasons. I would say that you most likely would be happy with the inlines. I don't have any complaints really about them besides me just being extra picky. I don't think horse power matters all that much unless you are using a minimum hp tractor for each baler. We've run 85 hp-120hp tractors for years on ours and fuel consumption between the Hesston and the NH was unnoticeable. I will also say that all the balers we've ever owned were 16X18 inches instead of 14X18 inches so maybe that makes a difference with regard to horse power.


----------



## Dill (Nov 5, 2010)

This is my first year running an inline, an 8530 CIH. I really like this baler. Its a major setup from my IH 435. But I think it will run circles around my fathers 348 deere. 
I've only had a couple plugs in a field with incredibly heavy late season reeds canary were the pickup was almost too wide and it would start to suck in 2 single windrows. But man can it take some hay, I have a kicker but was dropping them in the field at this point and the bales were almost touching when they hit the ground. 
I run mine on an older MF 265 Hi crop, but running over the windrows is no different then round baling.


----------



## CockrellHillFarms (Aug 30, 2011)

I've seen some postings on the web (including in this tread) that I dont understand. At least from my prespective. Maybe I've got it wrong with regards to baler size. I ran a JD 346 wire tire for a long time. When it was time to upgrade recently, I went with the NH BC5070 (string tie). There were a couple of reasons, one being that it is Bigger. I see guys knocking that fact on here, and thats what I dont understand. I always thought that the JDs were built too light. I think the NHs are built more like a tank but I dont see that as a bad thing. I see it as a good thing as long as you have the HP. I think it is a more heavy duty baler, better built. It also wont swing around with my accumulator on the back like that JD does. It has a wider stance, wider tires, and I find that more safe running down the road. I also like the fact that the pick up is so much wider than the others. I also dont understand why a guy would want to go to a 16x18. Again, maybe I'm lacking experience here because I've only run 14x18s. I here that they run alittle better through a stack wagon, which at some point soon I will be switching to. But the way I figure it, over the course of time, a guy is loosing money selling a bigger bale at the same cost. Which is what happens around here. Most people I'm selling to want a 65-70 lb bale. Thats easly done with a 14x18. I was slighty temped to look in depth at the inlines (hesston). I priced them out, but I wasnt impressed enough to purse it. Also..... keep in mind, depening if your running an accumulator, that thing will be way over to the side of that baler if your going down the road. I've seen where they made a swing kit so you can swing it around behind you, but that seems like a pain to me. All in all, to me, its all about the operator. If you know how to bale in different conditions, you can make a great bale with the JD or the NH. Regardless of how the bale is formed. The NH, hands down will eat hay faster than the JD. They is no doubt in my mind about that.


----------



## Josh in WNY (Sep 7, 2010)

CockrellHill,

I think that the choice between doing 14x18 or 16x18 comes down to two things. First, what does you customer want? If they are fine with either type, then this is a none issue. Second, how are you selling your hay? If you are selling by the bale (like I try and do) then the 14x18 is the way to go since you get a few more bale on each load or off of each acre. If you are selling your hay by the ton, the number of bales doesn't matter and using the 16x18 bale size reduces the number of bales you have to handle per ton of hay. I have also heard that 16x18 inch bales stack a little better in a van trailer than the 14x18 inch bales, but I don't have any experience with that myself.

As far as the type of baler to get, get what works for you. I currently run a JD 336 and have not had any problems with it that are not due to age or operator error. I do realize that it has a limited capacity compared to the newer balers out there, but for what I'm doing right now, it works. I have been keeping an eye on the various brands out there and do tend to prefer the JD over the NH, mainly due to the size difference between them and the local dealer support. I think both the JD and NH are good balers, so I wouldn't turn down either one if a sweet deal came along. I would like to try one of the hestons, but unfortunately, there are very few of them in my area and I would definately like to take one for a demo before I spent money on one.


----------



## hayray (Feb 23, 2009)

As far as plugging and capacity go the New Holland will no doubt eat more hay with out plugging. The low profile pick up is usually what plug as oppossed to the plunger. When the hay is raked perfect and rows are straight they will really eat hay.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

Yes we should being baling with a 14 X 18 inch bale to get more money per bale, but the slightly larger bales gives us an edge over our competitors. The reason why we bale with 16 X 18 inch balers is that is what my dad and uncle started with in the 70s. When it came time that the old ones wore out and it was time for a new baler the two we owned didn't wear out at the same time. So we bought a new 16 X 18 inch. If you are using a NH stack wagon you shouldn't be having to stack two sizes of bales in the same field. It just never would work out. Also the 16 X 18 inch bales do not run through a stack wagon better. In fact they do a little worse. We did trade one of our 16X18 inch balers on a 3X3 baler so now we are left with just one 16X18 baler, but it wouldn't be cost effective to trade that on a 14X18 inch baler at this time. Especially as we are moving into more the large squares. I won't knock JD balers as I've never run one, but I just can't think that huge auger in them wouldn't cause issues. Even if as stated above that if you are paying attention you can keep them from plugging or keeping them from being plugged badly. I think it was stated takes 5 minutes to clear out. That is 5 minutes I would rather be baling with a baler that will not plug up so easily when thinking about fishing. Especially for a guy with hay allergies that doesn't like to dig out the hay and end up sneezing for 10 minutes. Also 14X18 inch bales seem to stack better in trailers then the 16X18 inches. With the large bales there is always wasted space at the top of the trailer where with the smaller bales it could be used. Also for shipping on a semi I can only get about 450 of the 16X18 bales on a semi load while with a 14X18 I've heard can get 600. So I would recommend anyone going to small bales to go with a high capacity 14 X 18 baler as possible.


----------



## CockrellHillFarms (Aug 30, 2011)

Josh,

You make a good point about the 16x18. If you sell it by the ton, less hay to move/store. I get that. Around here, people dont think to buy by the ton (I would of course, cheaper that way). Its only done per bale, so the guy literialy down the road from me is selling 16x18 at 75 lbs at $4-5 a bale vs. me at 65-70 4-5 a bale with a 14x18. So I guess more of my point was, people really dont think about what they are doing, at least thats what I think. I also dont have a hesston dealer close, that was the other reason I decided between NH and JD. My advice b4 ANYTHING, is run it or one before you buy it. So you know your buying the right equipment to fit your needs. FYI--- for those of you that dont know this or maybe they dont do it in your area. You should ask about it. NH does a "HAY DAY" (I think thats what it is called) around here pretty close and you can come out and run/watch the equipment before you buy it. I think thats a pretty good deal on their part.


----------



## hay hauler (Feb 6, 2010)

I dont think a 14X18 bale stacks better in a 3 wide bale wagon. They are like stacking penuts... A 16X18 is forgiving after a 18hr day in a balewagon. Pluss when damp, they don't have the tendency to role over when making a tie tear like the 14x18 does.

Just depends on how they are sold as to which bale makes the producer more $. It is very difficult to change comsumers attitues onece they have been set.

You wont see much of a difference in speed if the two types of bailers are hooked to the same hp, and runing on the same field, with both bailers well maintained.

You should not have any back or neck issues running a inline. You have to turn furthur around to look at it, But you can get into tighter spaces with it. Guess that helps with 5 acre places, and lots of gates.

Unless hooked to a truck or something, eather one is not that hard to move down the road. Your only going 20 to 25 mph. Just slow down and pay atention if you are in question of safty. (Were not talking about moving 14ft wide 4x4 tractors down downtown at road speed).

The bigger the box the more stable it is on a open trailer. 14x18 is ok, 16x18 is better, 3 strings are easy, and 3x3, 3x4, and 4x4s are care free.


----------



## cattleranch (Dec 17, 2010)

I think I would buy an inline after experience with the big baler. I would not buy a JD because the bales out of a 348 I have handled this year in fields that we come to bale big bales were extremely light compared to what our NH 276 puts out. We only do about 100-200 little bales per year. Also we did about 7200 3x3's if that puts it in perspective.


----------



## DKFarms (Aug 11, 2008)

I bought a new MF/Hesston 1837 this spring. I watched a couple of them bale before I made my decision. It has baled 3500 bales of wheat straw and 5650 bales of bermuda. Third cutting started day before yesterday so I anticipate another 1500-2000 bales will go through it this year. I had a NH 273 and a NH 276. I used the one out of the two balers that was working when I needed one. Comparing them to the 1837, all would make a good bale as long as every circumstance was correct. What I don't have anymore with the 1837 is banana bales and a .5 mph ground speed. The 1837 will eat a properly raked windrow at 3+mph and never look back. Every bale straight as an arrow. I opted for the hydraulic tensioner and will never have another baler without it. Bale weight stays the same no matter what the material conditions are. The posts about choking the thing are valid. It's a booger to remove a plug from the front but the bale chamber access door on the back lets you attack it from both sides if it's really bad. All my chokes have been operator unfamiliarity/error. It seldom happens anymore cause I know what to watch for. It doesn't like uneven material in the windrow. If it takes a slug, you can bet that the next bale will be a little oversized. Not usually a problem but I am dumping bales into a Bale Bandit and it doesn't tolerate bales that are too long. I like the way it pulls down the road, too. Much less butt puckering when you see a line of mailboxes if you know what I mean. I feel good about the decision I made so far. My goal was to increase my bales-per-hour rate and reduce my maintenance costs. The 1837 has done that for me, although I realize that a new NH or JD would have been faster as well. Anything new will most always work better than anything old.


----------



## jd-tom (Jun 15, 2010)

I'll throw in my 2 cents worth here. I purchased a new MF 1839 before this season and I ran 8-9000 bales thru it - alfalfa, grass, a mix of these 2 as well as wheat and oats straw. I have owned JD 338's previous to this and while they are decent balers, this MF baler is my favorite now. The bales are more uniform in size and shape and I'll agree with what others have posted as to getting more of the alfalfa leaves into the bale. I pull a Kuhns accumulator behind this baler and I like having everything all in line, both in the field and going down the road. I have plugged it a few times but I don't think its any worse than plugging a JD baler. I was able to turn it backwards most of the time and push out most of the plug. Others have posted that they have had trouble plugging the short augers in the pickup but I haven't really had that problem. But one thing I did find out is that on the MF inline balers, the 1839 augers turn in the opposite direction that the ones on the 1835 & 1837 do. Maybe this makes a difference, I don't know. I have run balers with hydraulic tension for quite a while now and wouldn't want to run anymore without it.


----------

