TRACTOR PARTS Allis Chalmers Case & David Brown Farmall & International Ferguson Ford & New Holland John Deere Massey Ferguson Massey Harris Minneapolis Moline Oliver & Cockshutt Kubota / Yanmar

TRACTOR MANUALS

Allis Chalmers	Case	Farmall IH	Ford 8N,9N,2N	Ford
Ferguson	John Deere	Massey Ferguson	Minn. Moline	Oliver

Farmall & IHC Tractors Discussion Forum

difference between a 656 utility and 656 row crop

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register

Author

Darren McLaughl

06-24-2005 09:40:23

Report to Moderator

Hello all,

Thanks to your ealier help, I am on the hunt for a 656. I tracked one down a few hours from here, but it is a row crop rather than a utility style. What's the real difference between the two.. is it just height, or is the row crop bigger overall? Anyone know exactly how wide a row crop would be at the back tires?

It's a diesel with 8800 hours, IH 2000 loader, hydro, and 2 remotes. The guy says it is not pretty but runs well. They are asking $6500 )and are flexible).. I know you can't tell without looking at it, but does that sound fair/high/low?

Thanks,

Darren

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

ny bill

06-24-2005 19:41:57

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 09:40:23

the tractor in the picture (farmall model) would be my choice for a loader tractor, over the international model. much stronger front axle design, although the int version has a shorter turning radius. the 656 diesel requires glow plugs to fuss with when starting. just one more thing, imho. 8800 hours is a lot. has anything been rebuilt (engine, hydro)? a 656 will fit down 2 30" rows, so should narrow up to 75" +/-.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Darren McLaughlin

06-24-2005 20:15:47

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to ny bill, 06-24-2005 19:41:57

Regarding the width of the 656, you referred to 75".. I'm guessing that maybe I wasn't asking right as that seems pretty skinny. I am wondering what the width would be from the outside of the rear tires to see if I could get one on the trailer I have. Is that 75"

Thanks,

Darren

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

ny bill

06-25-2005 06:03:49

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 20:15:47

i just measured them. one farmall is 84 1/2" outside to outside, the other is 88 1/2" both have 15.5x38s. they would narrow up another 6-8" on the axles, more if the wheels were reversed. actually 74" is the center to center. not bad for a swag estimate. the high utility is 82" outside to outside. the wheels are all the way in on that one and it has 14.9x38 tires.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Harold H

06-24-2005 16:40:17

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 09:40:23

The Farmall 656 is high profile, seat high over flat platform, adjustable rear axles, single, dual, or wide front axle options, longer wheelbase than International.
The Farmall 656 high Clear has drop housings on rear axles and taller front spindles and braces on wide front axle.
The International 656 utility is low profile, seating position straddles rear end, flange type rear axles, shorter wheelbase wide front axle only.
The International 656 row crop or high clear has low profile and short wheelbase of I 656 utility but has rear axles of Farmall 656 and taller spindles on I 656 type front axle.
The International 2656 had the same seating and profile as the I 656 with a different grill and heavy duty wide front axle. Also had a number of different tire sizes and types not available on I 656. All of the Farmall and International models were available in gear drive with or without TA or with Hydrostatic drive. Forward and reverse shuttle shift was also available on the 2656 only.

Harold H

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Ernest

06-24-2005 12:19:44

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 09:40:23

OK! Their are at least 3 different 656's. I am not here to cause an argument BUT. 1.
Their is the FARMALL 656 same set up as the pic posted in this post.
2.
Their is the INTERNATIONAL 656 A.K.A. Utility.
3. Then their is an INTERNATIONAL 656 ROW CROP (utility with adjustable rear axels)

Also their is gear and hydro versions! I have only ever seen the utility version with hydro's.

IH did this with their 544's also.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

caseyc

06-24-2005 11:47:12

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 09:40:23

got one here in SD that's prettier than that but it's a gas. has a qick tach westendorf loader and a 3-point. runs out good. same kinda money and the dealer is great to work with. let me know....

casey

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Nebraska Cowman

06-24-2005 10:18:38

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656 utility and 656 row c in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 09:40:23

$6500 for a diesel Hydro with loader does not sound out of line. But watch out for expence! If you have to do Hydro or engine overhaul (real likely at 8800 hours) Plan to have a big checkbook. That being said the Hydro is a perfect transmission for loader work and realy nice in the hayfield but I would never buy one for tillage. I have a Hydro 86 (newer model) and a 656 gear drive and the Hydro is in the shed hooked to the baler and I am disking with the old 656.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Darren McLaughlin

06-24-2005 10:57:44

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656... in reply to Nebraska Cowman, 06-24-2005 10:18:38

Sheesh.. I just got some pics.. not exactly a looker, plus the thought of a hydro or engine rebuild doesn't exactly excite me... how much can you really tell from the exterior looks of a tractor like this. Does an uly tractor indicate ugly overall care, or might it have been well cared for mechanically, but just used outside a lot?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

06-24-2005 12:33:00

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656... in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 10:57:44

Works both ways. I have seen beautifully painted tractors which are mechanically lacking and ugly tractors which run like a top and have had excellent care mechanically. I have an old C which absolutely looks awful and hardly has any paint left on it but will work all day long and never miss a beat - as a matter of fact I just finished mowing about 15 acres of hay with it in the last week. Then again I know the history of it as my father bought it in the 50's. New paint can cover a multitude of sins so don't judge the proverbial book by its cover. I am really not that familiar with that particular model or the hydro though. Hopefully someone who is can shed some light on what to look for.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Ernest

06-24-2005 12:25:07

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656... in reply to Darren McLaughlin, 06-24-2005 10:57:44

That one is ugly. Usually I look at the wear points steering, seat, pedals, hitch, oil on engine, and in engine, where the cylinders attach to loader, bucket, and so on.

That one would be concidered a farmall.

Different areas different terms!

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Nat

06-24-2005 17:14:16

Report to Moderator

Re: difference between a 656... in reply to Ernest, 06-24-2005 12:25:07

Where would it NOT be considered a Farmall??? If it had all its sheet metal, the 656 emblems on the sides would say "FARMALL 656" on them.

It's a Farmall 656 Hydro, period.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

[Options] [Printer Friendly] [Posting Help] [Return to Forum] [Log in to Reply]

TRACTOR PARTS	TRACTOR MANUALS

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home | Forums

Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy