Re: Loaders Are Hard on Tractors!

Posted by Hugh MacKay on April 11, 2005 at 18:24:32 from (209.226.106.129):

In Reply to: Re: Loaders Are Hard on Tractors! posted by Allan in NE on April 11, 2005 at 15:04:32:

Allan: My dad bought a new H in 1951 with loader, then switched the loader to a new 300 in 55. At that time he was doing the bulk of his field work with those tractors. Always cussed that loader hanging out front trying to do field work. In late 50s he got rid of Farmall loaders and bought a used Cockshutt with an industrial loader, didn't have pto or much of a transmission for feild work, but did have one good forward and reverse for loader work. We put a barrel of concrete on back and use it for nothing but loader work. It was a far better loader tractor than Farmalls of that era.

We then added the Farmall 560D no loader, which gave us 3 good Farmalls for field work. By 1970 the old Cockshutt was playing out, I bought a farm that had a IH 2000 loader in shed. Farmalls 656 and 504 came with that farm also. I decided to mount that 2000 loader on 560. It had been on the 504, and I thought it a bit heavy for that tractor. In 1971 I built a new free stall dairy barn for 100 milk cows and added a Case skid steer loader for use in that barn. I would use the 560 at other farm for feeding replacment heifers. The interesting part is within two years I added a second Case skid steer. Within 3 months the 2000 loader was once again packed away in shed for good.

In those days a new 40 hp skid steer was about half the cost of a 75 hp tractor with loader, and would do three times the loader work per hour. With the skid steer you didn't have a 3 point hitch and IPTO, worth 75% of the cost of a new skid steer, doing nothing. I had 2 Farmalls, never saw a loader and in 10,000 hours each, neither ever had a replacment clutch or replacment gear shift linkages. Loaders on gear drive Farmalls caused a lot of added repair bills, not as result of rough loader use, but rather just loader use. Skid loaders actually saved me money, but remember one of them had to go 365 days per year. Milk cow herd was on confined feeding, replacment heifers went to pasture, and that loader did field loading needed.

What always annoyed me being around the IH dealer's a bit, and I'm talking about 60s and 70s. Farmers wanted a new Farmall for loader work, then they growled about the transmission, should have power shift like Deere and the like. As a result, today gone is that old 8 and 4 transmission with TA, and with the torque of a Farmall engine, it was all we ever needed for field work. Did you ever stop to think how much less a new 966 or 1066 would cost in 2005 than what CaseIH is currently building? Those 06, 56, 66 and 86 series tractors were economical tractors for field work. My point is, in my neck of the woods at least, the smallest of farms had three tractors and one did nothing but loader work, so why not buy a loader tractor.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup Name: E-Mail: Subject: Comments: Optional Link URL: Link Title: Optional Image URL: Email Notification: If you check this box, email will be sent to you whenever someone replies to this message. Your email address must be entered above to receive notification. This notification will be cancelled automatically after 2 weeks.

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 ]