# Bailing with Super M



## MFSuper90 (Jun 26, 2015)

Neighbor is selling his 53 super M in running condition for $900. I know back in the day these tractors ran Small square balers all the time but would it have enough ponies to run my mf 1839 inline? Wouldn't be permanent and I know it dosent have live power. I thought it would be kinda cool do use it on my highway ground for the "curb appeal"


----------



## VA Haymaker (Jul 1, 2014)

I run a JD 348 with a 50 PTO hp tractor and a wagon - no problems. Am I running it at capacity, no - but it serves our purpose.

I think the Super H would grunt if you put the baler in heavy windrows. Manageable light/thin windrows - you might be OK?

Just don't know.

However, that Super M would look GREAT with my old New Holland 68 baling hay!

Good luck,
Bill


----------



## Trillium Farm (Dec 18, 2014)

MFSuper90 said:


> Neighbor is selling his 53 super M in running condition for $900. I know back in the day these tractors ran Small square balers all the time but would it have enough ponies to run my mf 1839 inline? Wouldn't be permanent and I know it dosent have live power. I thought it would be kinda cool do use it on my highway ground for the "curb appeal"


It would pull it and bale albeit at a slower pace. The problem is that it doesn't have a 2 stage clutch and under certain conditions could allow damage to the baler.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

You can, won't be fun, I won't. I remember all to well running a baler without a live PTO.


----------



## Farmerbrown2 (Sep 25, 2018)

My uncle runs his JD 348 with Farmall 300 mows with IH 560 and NI 5209 3rd gear pulls TA if it gets to thick. He has a IH 784 but he pulls wagon with that ,says it justed works better with old tractors out in the field . He only bales 3-4000 per year but at 81 years old I'm not going to argue with him.


----------



## Coondle (Aug 28, 2013)

A Super M should have enough horsepower to run a MF 1839, the baler has a minimum requirement of 35 pto hp.

The Super M has about 50 engine hp and about 46 belt hp (apparently pto hp was not tested in those days). My understanding is that belt hp and pto hp are equivalent.

It is not always fun to run at the minimum hp requirement. NH recommend 50 pto hp for the 5070 whereas JD recommend only 35 pto hp for the 348. Theoretically the same capacity baler but in practice not IMHO and that is from someone who changed from a NH to a JD so have run both, and side-by-side for a season.

If you are prepared to wrestle with the inconvenience of a non-live Pto, and back up to start into the windrow each time you have stopped the go for it. The eye-candy of old iron baling the roadside would be great, especially for sentimental old blokes like me.

If you go with it, please post some pics and after all 900 bills is not a lot of money for a vintage tractor.


----------



## rankrank1 (Mar 30, 2009)

I only have a plain M and love it. A super m would have more hp and a better selection of gears compared to a plain letter series. Unfortunately a super M will not have live PTO. A super M-TA would have live PTO but those are very collectable and sell at a premium.

I bale with an M also without live PTO. You can do it but it takes more care when you rake your windrows. Admittingly no live PTO can be inconvenient at times but not impossible either. A super M Would not necessarily be my first pick for a purpose intended baling tractor, but for a measly $900 it would be hard to go wrong on a deal like that - especially since you know a bit of the tractors history.

A Farmall 400 would be an ideal baling tractor and very comparable to a Super M - and 400's sell reasonable compared to a Super M-TA.


----------

