Farmall & IHC Tractors Discussion Board |
Re: Make you a deal, Hugh
[ Expand ] [ View Replies ] [ Add a Reply ] [ Return to Forum ]
Posted by chadd on May 24, 2007 at 08:25:51 from (155.92.30.119):
In Reply to: Make you a deal, Hugh posted by BOBM25 on May 24, 2007 at 05:52:45:
Look, the reason that this forum thrives is the fact that each member has had different experiences, and have different opinions. Without differing opinions, this would be a very boring site, and a very boring world. That being said, I guess I will voice my opinion. . . The Super M-TA was a great tractor, and was a big change-up in the IH universe, starting them down a path that carried them until they were purchased by Tenneco. By 1954, the letter series tractors were starting to become outdated. Strong models were coming from AC and from Oliver and Cockshutt with more power than the M had. The Super M-TA was IH's entry into the hp race, and I would say that it was successful and that it caught them back up with most of the industry temporarily. Problem is they didn't keep going, and so fell behind again in many respects until the 06's Regarding the TA itself, we have never had to replace one yet, and over the years our farm has had a 340, 460, 660, 806, and a 966. Based on the experience on our farm, is not a poor design or the tremendous weakspot in the driveline that so many people make it out to be when it is used properly and kept properly adjusted (although it will clean out your pocket book when it does fail, but so will any other modern transmission problem). However, the design was horribly outdated by the time the 86's came out. The powershift became industry standard already before that time. We use the TA all the time on our tractors, and would not buy one of those tractors without one. The TA on the 06 and 66 tractors certainly seems to add a wider range of working speeds (with the exception of 1st high and 4th low, which are almost imperceptibly different). The fast hitch was a great way to get around patent issues with the three point, and in my opinion was a great hitch. We have never had to rebuild or replace any part of one, but at the same time, we don't lift super heavy loads with one either. Heaviest I've personally lifted is a bale mover with a rock on the back. It bent the tubular steel frame of the bale mover, but the 2 pt lifted it without problems. As to the Oliver/IH debate, I can't comment on that for myself, and must rely on what I have been told. I was nowhere near born at that point in time, and Hugh has operated both, so his opinion is what he experienced, and he is obviously entitled to his opinion. Hugh is a very knowledgeable member of this board, and has worked with many different makes of tractors. That being said, my uncles and father have told me, there were 3 farms in the area that had Oliver tractors. There were 88's in among them. They pulled well to be sure, but certainly didn't walk away from Super M's. They said that they were about equal. The Super M-TA had slightly higher horsepower numbers for both belt and drawbar horsepower when compared to the Oliver 88 according to the Nebraska tractor tests I've seen, but they were within 2 or 3 horsepower, which is nothing even noticeable in the field. Also, I know enough to say that horsepower on the test track doesn't necessarily translate directly into performance in the field, so it is easily possible that the Oliver could outperform the M-TA. At the tractor pulls the 88's pull about the same as the Super M's and M-TA's. But in tractor pulling, it is just as much setup and driver as it is tractor. I for one don't necessarily see what Hugh did that was so terrible. All he did is state that he didn't think a Super M-TA was ahead of its time. This argument can go forever, and is just futile. You can't change someones opinion. Personally I like IH. That doesn't mean that I hate other makes, or that I think any IH product can beat them. It means that they have their tractor, I have mine, and a little teasing and friendly competition from both sides is welcomed and expected.
Replies:
Home
| Forums
Today's Featured Article -
Choosin, Mounting and Using a Bush Hog Type Mower - by Francis Robinson. Looking around at my new neighbors, most of whom are city raised and have recently acquired their first mini-farms of five to fifteen acres and also from reading questions ask at various discussion sites on the web it is frighteningly apparent that a great many guys (and a few gals) are learning by trial and error and mostly error how to use a very dangerous piece of farm equipment. It is also very apparent that these folks are getting a lot of very poor and often very dangerous advice fro
... [Read Article]
Latest Ad:
1997 cub cadet 7275 compact utility tractor 4wd hydro trans cracked block 3500
[More Ads]
Copyright © 1997-2024 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 HeadquartersWebsite Accessibility Policy |
|