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

Discussion Forum

Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels?

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register

Author

Bill in NC

02-15-2008 06:32:02

Report to Moderator

I came across a factoid on an engineering calendar that said: "1932 (year) Rubber wheels result in a 25 percent improvement in fuel economy for tractors". Is that true? Would a rubber wheeled Farmall H have 25% better fuel economy than a steel wheeled H?
If so, then rubber wheels were a big improvement for our farming grand fathers back during the Depression (assuming they could scrape up the coins to convert to rubber tires during those tough times).

On a similar note, I was reading a magazine last fall that spoke of Michelin having a new rubber compound and radial combination that is showing 7 to 10% fuel mileage improvements on their test tracks. I am just flat amazed at how folks continue to make things run on less fuel.

Anyway, back to the steel versus rubber question, a 25% improvement, do you think it would be that much?

wstr

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

gmd

02-15-2008 20:20:05

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Now what would be Really Interesting is to go out around Lancaster and ask some of the Amish and Mennonites how their 1066s on Steel Run. I know its not a big deal, but it's still fascinating to see the bigger tractors on Steel. Even saw a Ditch Witch on steel up there at auction in November. Wonder what the fuel usage difference is on the bigger tractors.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Bill in NC

02-15-2008 16:41:25

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

From what all of you are saying, it sounds like the 25% fuel economy improvement figure is in the ballpark. The steel wheels punched into the ground whereas rubber tires float on the ground with the lugs coming into play when applying pulling power. I've never driven a steel wheeled tractor but could see how steel wheels could pound a man into peeing blood after plowing rough ground day-after-day.
Speaking of pounding, even with rubber tires, tractors can be a rough ride in some fields. Today's big tractors have cushy, shock-absorbing seats to provide a smooth ride. Were there ever any vintage tractors made with springs and shock absorbers? My guess is the springs would hamper getting the power to the ground as they loaded and un-loaded with changing conditions. They would also interfere with load leveling hitches. I may have answered my own question, but was there any that had springs? How about that rare MM tractor/car? It probably had springs, right?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

russ hamm

02-15-2008 16:51:05

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 16:41:25

The international 8-16 that left production in 1922 had two coil springs in the rear, and one in the front. Some other early tractor designs did too, but spring or cusion ride left the scene early and never came back after rubber tires were the norm. Good thought!

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Chuck46

02-15-2008 16:26:55

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Bill, I don't have a percentage figure, but Dad bought his 42 H on steel because of the war. He couldn't get rubber fast enough. The good thing was those heavy cast hubs are as good as a set of weights and when he welded the rims on they were 11 inchs wide. That is still one tough tractor. Good luck, Chuck

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

steelfronts

02-15-2008 13:33:30

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Almost all of my old tractors are on steel wheels.In loose or sandy soil they can barely muster the power to get themselves through much less do any work. And cultivating with steel vs. rubber- on steel it seems the tractor is always working on rubber its a cake walk. I'd agree with the 25% figure over all.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

jwal10

02-15-2008 12:27:35

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to RANDYa20, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

higgins said: (quoted from post at 12:27:14 02/15/08) The Jeep in-line 6 is actually a descendant of the Hudsons of the early '50's. They ran well in Nascar for a few years and sometime in the late 60's someone tried turbocharging them and running at Indy. Actually got one qualified one year.

I took a 1964 chevy short narrow box pickup with a 230 six and put a 3 speed overdrive in it and got 28 to 32 miles/ gallon. On the hills you never had to shift it, just push down on the throttle and it shifted down then let off and it would shift back in overdrive. It started out in second gear so only had to shift it to 3rd....James

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

James Williams

02-15-2008 09:37:45

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Very true,Try pushing a steel wheel tractor

jimmy

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Bob M

02-15-2008 07:34:45

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Fuel economy difference for rubber vs steel depends a lot on the job being performed. While 25% (and even higher) economy gains could be had under certain conditions of load and soil, 14% - 17% seems a more reasonable average improvement for typical year around farm use. (These numbers were incidentally were derived in testing done by the Univ of Nebraska, Purdue, Ohio State, etc. in the 1930's).

----

I recall my father in law describing the first tractor he switched over to rubber from steel. He was gonna do just the F20. Then if he found rubber worked as well as the tire dealer claimed, the next year he'd install rubber his second tractor, and the year after that do the last tractor.

However he was so delighted with the first tractor on rubber that within two weeks of the arrival of the first rubber tires, all 3 tractors had been "rubberized".

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

El Toro

02-15-2008 09:17:55

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bob M, 02-15-2008 07:34:45

They had to put rubber on our 10-20 since they couldn't run steel on paved roads. They should've made a road where the ground was too soft so they could've gotten to these other fields
as this would've made the hauling shorter. Hal

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

russ hamm

02-15-2008 17:01:37

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to El Toro, 02-15-2008 09:17:55

Yabbut hal. Then it would get too muddy on those soft roads for too long of a stretch sometimes. Road bands sure helped the stuation. That or driving in the ditch. LOLOL.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Hugh MacKay

02-15-2008 08:14:34

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bob M, 02-15-2008 07:34:45

Bob: This doesn't surprise me, however how much of your father in law's decission was based on smooth ride, hay and straw wraping around steel wheels and axles.

I heard my dad speak about using the Fordson on steel in the hayfield. He claimed at end day once you cut the hay out of Fordson wheels, hauling that hay from field to barn was 90% of what Fordson did. I suspect this was unique to a Fordson, based on his stories of how useless it was.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Bob M

02-15-2008 12:37:19

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Hugh MacKay, 02-15-2008 08:14:34

Yeah Hugh. My father in law raised cash crops - sweet corn, beans and chipping potatos on mostly stony soil. Said what sold him on rubber tires was how much faster they could work his old F20's and F12 - he claimed a good 20% improvement. The smoother ride on rubber was not a consideration in making the changeover - or so he claims now at least(!)

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Hugh MacKay

02-16-2008 04:38:00

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bob M, 02-15-2008 12:37:19

Bob: As i recall, some of those first rubber tires were not great either, however they were smooth. I just recently looked at a photo of my dad's W4, must have been taken around 49-50, given the size of the 3 young lads on the tractor. W4 was a 42, worked on steel until after the war. In the photo I notice the rear tires are getting rather bald. It's in vintage photos, and at that time the tires would had about 5 years use, and no asphalt.

Jump ahead 30 years and my 1066 after 9,000 hours on duals, had more tread remaining than those W4 tires in the photo. I'll almost bet the W4 had more rubber per hp on the ground than 1066.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

dhermesc

02-15-2008 07:29:26

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

25% improvement in fuel, probably so - especially under heavy pulling situations like plowing.

Now would an "H" pulling a hay rake get 25% better fuel economy with rubber over steel - probably not, but the operator would appreciate the rubber tires.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Hugh MacKay

02-15-2008 07:26:16

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Bill: Statistics are much like a bikini, revealing but do hide vital points. If I believed all the fuel savings I've heard lifetime, as a percentage, would lead one to believe a 2008 model car, pickup or tractor would actually create fuel and you'd have to drain it off once per week.

My favourite pet peeve on this subject is my full size Buick, roughly same weight as dad's 57 Chevy, both 6 cylinder. Highway driving they both gave 26 mpg Being in Canada I'm on Imperial gallons, both cars. I know my Buick is seeing a lot higher percentage of smooth paved roads than Dad's Chevy did.

Having said the above, I am rather skeptical about the 25% claim rubber over steel.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

RustyFarmall

02-15-2008 08:21:15

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Hugh MacKay, 02-15-2008 07:26:16

Hugh, kinda makes me wish that I could buy a new car today with an in line six, carburetor, and standard points and condensor ignition. Equip it with a manual shift 3 speed with overdrive and I'll bet the MPG would be on a par with anything on the road today and the emissions would meet requirements also.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Hugh MacKay

02-15-2008 08:39:04

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to RustyFarmall, 02-15-2008 08:21:15

Rusty: I'd give a lot to have one of my Binder pickups back. had a 59 and 65, both with 264? inline 6 and 4 speed. I liked the 65 styling the best. When I saw the new Dodges about 93-95, I said, "By gosh they've coppied the 1965 Binder styling, I wonder if it is as efficient." Folks around home used to laugh at us few folks that drove Binder pickups. When I saw that new Dodge, I reminded some of my bast friends, by the way, embracing the Dodge, I said, "Folks remember my Binder, I was 30 years ahead of the times."

Then who can forget the 300 cubic inch inline 6 Ford, iron clad all the way. Do you suppose, now that GM is on the ropes, could we convince them to bring back an inline 6 chevy, as you've described.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

RustyFarmall

02-15-2008 09:28:02

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Hugh MacKay, 02-15-2008 08:39:04

Actually GM did try to bring back the in-line six a few years ago, but they built it out of aluminum, loaded it down with electronic controls, put it in the Chevy Trailblazer without testing it thoroughly, and are now wondering why their customer satisfaction is way down. What they should have done is taken the tried and proven old 235 and tweaked it a bit. Why is it that all these engineers think they need to re-invent the wheel?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

rich4

02-15-2008 09:48:25

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to RustyFarmall, 02-15-2008 09:28:02

Wasn't the 4.0 six in the Jeep Cheroke a pumped up GM 235 or 230, I think it did well, though now everyone cries for a V-8. Our old 53 International PU had a 6 and got up to 20 mpg and was a workhorse all year on the farm. And lasted allmost 30 years with just minor repairs. Talk about efficientcy. I think ideally steel wheels could be close to rubber efficiency, but all the time they are tearing up the dirt, they could be moving forward and doing work.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

higgins

02-15-2008 11:27:14

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to rich4, 02-15-2008 09:48:25

The Jeep in-line 6 is actually a descendant of the Hudsons of the early '50's. They ran well in Nascar for a few years and sometime in the late 60's someone tried turbocharging them and running at Indy. Actually got one qualified one year.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

P and R Pete

02-15-2008 07:00:40

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Interesting. I wouldn't know, but doesn't seem like there would be a huge difference in weight. Maybe the radius was a good % greater?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

russ hamm

02-15-2008 06:59:43

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

Actually, it all depends on soil conditions and lug size. The steel wheels take more power to move lugs across the ground, thus more fuel for the same load. That figure is probably worse case as they were selling tires, but there is definately a difference. I run steel on practically everything, and the difference is sure there.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Michael Soldan

02-15-2008 09:43:44

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to russ hamm, 02-15-2008 06:59:43

I agree Russ, the cleats dug in no matter what job you were doing and the front wheel rib dug in too, this had to take a lot more power to move the tractor along and I'd think that there would be significant fuel savings going to rubber, just the ease of the rubber tires rotating would result in a big fuel savings. If guys are skeptical, lets get an H on steel and an H on rubber and have them push it across sod for 50'..bet they'll agree with us!

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

russ hamm

02-15-2008 10:35:36

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Michael Soldan, 02-15-2008 09:43:44

Actually, that's already been done. That M in the picture is my favorite plowing tractor, and when we go a friend has an M on rubber. We both pull 2-14's and in the same ground i will fill up more, the lugs on my tractor are actually too tall for the gumbo we get into, but they are there. My uncle told me once that steel on the little fords was kind of bad, as they didn't have enough power to pull much in our conditions. tires helped them out alot.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

the Unforgiven

02-15-2008 06:48:52

Report to Moderator

Re: Is This Factoid Correct about Rubber vs Steel Wheels? in reply to Bill in NC, 02-15-2008 06:32:02

25% seems like an awful lot, but it wouldn't surprise me.

[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