|
Len Rahilly
10-12-2007 07:23:40
|
|
Re: F-12 F-14 in reply to Mike Wielenberg, 10-11-2007 18:05:19
|
|
|
A few extra comments. The F-14 was "hopped up" to run at 1650 full-load governed speed. The F-12 was set for 1400. I guess tractor manufacturers were leery of "high-speed motors," after making the lumbering dinosaurs of the 20s and 30s that ran at 1000 to about 1250 max (and John Deere kept their old 2-cyl chuggers at 975 up into the 50s!). My father bought a new rubber-tired F-12 in 1938 (with hydraulic lift included). When the F-14 came out sometime in 1938, even the dealers would occasionally "kinda sorta wonder" if "them new engines would hold up at that speed." Well, they did, and shortly thereafter, the H came out to run at 1650 and it held up very well, thank you. I have a little Ford 1100 that runs at over 2400. Have the manufacturers learned something since 1938, are the oils better (answer to that is, "yes," for sure).
(I know, I should have got something red, but the Ford was cheap and it cuts my back 10 very nicely)
The hydraulic power-lift is driven by the left side of the shaft that drives the pulley. It was
easy to "retro-fit," as they say nowadays. My granddad bought a '33 F-12, and had the lift installed after it became available (around 1936, I think). It may have involved a different transmission cover, but I am not sure of that. Someone who writes here might be able to say. This lift had limited uses--the crank moved 180 degrees and was either up or down--no in-between controls as with a modern hydraulic lift. Also, it was not "full-time." If the clutch was out, the lift was out. If you came up close to a fence and there was no room to turn while using the lift, you had to shift to neutral, let the clutch out, raise the cultivator, shift back into gear, turn, etc. Minor nuisance, but a h...of a lot better than lifting those cultivators by hand, one side at a time. This lift did not work on the IHC mounted mower, as far as I know. The 7-foot sickle bar was a heavy beast which you had to lift by twisting around in the seat and pushing down while your elbow was up in the air behind the long lever.
I don't know what other implements this lift might have worked with, but I have now been inspired to go look through some of my old brochures to see if there is any info.
The F-12 brake levers were obviously not meant to be used "on the go," since steel-wheeled tractors would stop almost instantly once the clutch was pushed in. On rubber, the tractor would roll a bit, but these brake levers were very difficult to reach. Farmers put pieces of pipe over the levers, to get some power. This was not very good for the bushing the brake lever rode on, and I remember that our right brake lever got pretty sloppy. Naturally, with only one lever, you also wore out the right brake faster. As to the steering, the wheel on the F-12 was designed to be used with the original seat, which was on a short stalk bolted to the transmission cover (the F-14 without power lift had a longer stalk). I've driven one of the tractors without the lift, and even with the original seat, the wheel is a bit low--it sits between your knees. Designers then didn't worry too much about the comfort of the operator. When you put on the power lift, there was a different seat support--a flat spring that curled under the lift. It was probably slightly higher than the original stalk-mounted spring. One day in the 40s, I got the "brilliant" idea to convert the steering to the F-14 style, and without asking my father, I cut the steering shaft near the front, found a u-joint (from an A, I think) that did not require machining a keyway, then bored holes in each shaft and put bolt through. Then since there was never much cash available on a dairy farm in the 40s, I figured my father would not spring for an F-14 post, and I cut off the original and put a pipe in between. Crude, sloppy and ugly, but it worked.
A comment on steel versus rubber: A neighbor had a steel-wheeled F-12, and one day he asked if he could use our rubber-tired tractor for a while.
He came back "amazed" at what it could do. This shows how much power is wasted by steel wheels. Our rubber-tired F-12 would pull 2 12" plows anywhere in second gear, AND also pull the double 7-foot disk that was meant for our 10-20. The neighbor's steel-wheeled F-12 could handle only one 16" or maybe 2 10" at most. I know we overworked this poor thing, for years. I think it was in hard use for at least 15 years, and never gave any trouble that I can remember. Alas, my father replaced the F-12 with an H, then let it sit outside for the next 40 years. You can imagine the rest. Back in the 50s, nobody cared about something that was 15 years old--not tractors, not cars, not trucks. I let go his 1929 10-20, his '32 Chevy truck, the F-12, the "new" 1941 H that he bought to replace the F-12, and so on. What a joy it would be to have all of them again! Well, today, I feel the same about a car made in the 90s, and no doubt in 40 years, there will be collectors who will value these, maybe even lament that they didn't pick them up when they were plentiful--and cheap.
Well, I palaver on, but it is sometimes fun just to reminisce about the (not-always so) good old days.
|
|
|
