NH 315 vs 316 balers

[Brent.Roberts]

Anyone got any feedback on the capacity of the 316 baler compared to the 315.
This year our crop was real thick and even in the lowest gear on the JD4040 the baler was eating too much hay. At times I had to ride the clutch to slow it down.

I have a chance to get a 316 that's in nice condition but I'm not sure if it has much bigger capacity than the 315.

Comments would be appreciated, (before the 316 disappears.)

 

[RickB]

The 316 was possibly the most durable 14x18 baler New Holland ever built. But you won't see any capacity advantage over a 315. To increase capacity from a 315, you need a 326, 570, or 575. The 320 should be avoided, as the 103 spm plunger speed was too much for the feeder carriage to tolerate.

 

[art]

Good call Rick! Later model 320's held together better!

 

[Brent.Roberts]

Thanks for the input guys. I dropped out of the bidding at 4K and I last heard them calling for 4900, might have gone higher. It was a good one with a pretty new knotter set and had been indoors all its life.

But our windrows are too thick for the 315 even in the lowest gear on the JD 4040.

One idea I got at 2:00 AM this morning. Could I switch the PTO to 1000 rpm and then run the engine RPM lower and still get 540 on the output shaft. That would give me lower speed over the ground ... at least until I get a higher capacity baler.

 

[RickB]

If you are running the 315 at or near capacity, the 4040 won't develop sufficient HP at 1120 ERPM to run the baler. The next mistake you will make is to throttle up and overspeed the 315, destroying the feeder or something else.

 

[Brent.Roberts]

Yeh I was going to put a mechanical stop on to prevent the overspeeding.
The power issue is another matter. I would have thought it would be OK. I have very steep hills and the 4040 will haul the bailer and a big wagon up the hill with 80 to 90 bales in it and only loose about 100 or 150 rpm. A nudge on the throttle and it's back up to rpm.

The areas where I get the heavy growth that choke the 315 are pretty flat.
As long as I don't overspeed it, there's little to lose trying it. May not be till next year anyway. Second and third cuts are normally not so thick.

My local mentor is telling to forget the NH and get a Deere baler. He's got a 585 that he's going to sell soon and he is telling me to pass on it and go for the Deere. Last summer he was cutting a big field and he was in second gear and a friend with a Deere was going twice as fast.

 

[RickB]

There is no 585 New Holland. If it is a 575, there is something wrong with it. Deere doesn't make a 14x18 baler that will match the capacity of the 575. If he has a 565, it's just a glorified 316. A Deere baler can be more consistent in certain conditions, but they can't outbale a properly tuned 575.

 

[redneckford]

Rick---Bill Muth would be darn proud of that statement----he call them balers his baby!!!!

 

[Robert_in_NY]

I would look for a 575 also. I just finished my first cutting yesterday and I was still baling double windrows of heavy first cut with my 575 and only a TN65 in front of it while pulling a 9x18 kicker wagon (all on flat ground though), when I use to have my 7710 that baler was great, with the TN you have to keep slower but the baler still works good. Unless I do something stupid like drive into a windrow in high gear (don't ask) the baler will pump the bales out as fast as you want (they just don't look as nice if you go too fast).

The 326 is also a nice baler with good capacity and can be found cheaper then a 575. I almost bought one but dragged my feet and ended up with the 575 for double what the 326 would have cost me.

I have never used a Deere square baler but there are guys who swear by them. I wouldn't hesitate to own one though if the price was right and I needed a baler. Just do your research on them first and make sure you are comparing equal machines. Because my 575 will dwarf a John Deere 14T in every aspect but that doesn't mean the 14T is junk or inferior, it just means it is a smaller capacity baler.