Gravely 6.6L manufactured 1966 (I am reviewing the 6.6L, rather than the 7.6L I also had because of its better torque and electric start – I used the 6.6L more).
Weight was 400+ lbs as equipped. 4 sp trans (2F, 2R (the 7.6L had 8sp 4F, 4R)). Engine: single cylinder air cooled with pressurized lubrication, automotive type oil filter and, get this, a real oil pressure gauge. It had clutchless shuttle shift for reversing, and, the shuttle shift also functioned as the “brakes”-just start to change direction and it stopped immediately or held it on a hill. The front
PTO drove many implements.
PTO speed was controlled by the transmission speed. Mine had electric start activated by a foot button at the lower rear near the starter. However, the 7.6L would start on the first pull as long as you remembered the exact setting of choke & fuel for the temperature (otherwise, it was a chore). I also had duals which made it wider, more stable on hills and gave it excellent traction. Implements were attached by 4 bolts through the implement mount into the front of the tractor. Quick attach mounts were available but I didn’t have those (wish I had).
What I liked most? The large amount of work it could do for its size and low cost (compared to a CUT) and the ease in working on it. What I liked least? The relatively small tires (4x8) – on smoother surfaces they were no problem, but it was easy to get stuck when dropping into a small gully (and it’s heavy to man handle in those conditions). There was no issue of traction though, that was great.
Some specific tasks:
Mowing: The finish mower was 40” and cut nice, was easy to mow under trees & bushes (the clutchless shuttle made it very easy). It would mow on a 30 degree slope (where I would be afraid to take a CUT). Control and maneuverability was very good to excellent (except when I was using the mowing sulky which allowed you to mow sitting down but made it much harder to turn tightly). Production? About 1 hour per acre for previously mowed areas relatively flat. The “brush” mower (30”) very heavy duty and would cut small sapplings.
Plowing: The rotary plow created a very good seed bed on previously unused ground with no need for tilling prior to planting. However, the angle of the blades had to be adjusted just right or it would pull to one side. Also, when hitting roots or similar it could jerk badly. I have been told the rear mounted BCS rotary plow is much easier to handle and has a greater working depth – but haven’t used it myself.
Tilling: The tiller works fine for weeding and similar. It is poor though in “breaking” new ground unless you till backing up, then the tines are going in reverse direction from the tractor. The working depth of the tiller (and the plow) was controlled by a separate set of metal wheels mounted to the front. While they worked great for transporting, they were sometimes a pain when reversing directions at the end of a row. Also, the working depth could be greater.
Snow Removal: I used a 48” dozer blade mounted on the front. Although I had a Farmall with blade, I preferred using the Gravely. For snow up to 4”-6” it was easier and more convenient (don’t know how it would handle an 8”-10” fall as never had one-would probably work though). Last winter I had sold the Gravelies and used the NH TC40. Preferred the Gravely. Of course, if I were plowing a 1 acre parking lot, that would be a different story.
I used them for other things, but these were the most common. The tractor has a ball hitch on the rear for attaching a riding sulky, cart, etc. Perhaps some other TBNers can relate their experience with these type of tractors, either the Gravely or some of the European brands such as BCS.
JEH