Mike here again...I in no way meant to imply that the 1300 on E-bay was worn out, just that these smaller tractors seem to get beat pretty hard by us Americans. I spent quite a time in Korea in the mid '80s and saw how the farmers there take care of their equipment. I know too many people that think 4wd can do anything..if it can't pull that stump slow all I need is more speed and a running start,...Sure Billy go ahead, you and your friends can go play over by the swamp out back,...I use GOOD oil so I don't have to change it, just add more when it gets 2 qts low, etc. I would just feel alot better if I got one from a place that has a reputation for honesty, not someone who will never see me again. Speaking of which, LMTC, what are your views on what I would be looking at? I couldn't get it any sooner than springtime because I will be in for surgery on two herniated disks in my lower back very soon. Once again, I GREATLY appreciate all the help and input you guys are helping me with. I couldn't get this "hands on" info anywhere else. Thanks a million.....Mike
2 cyl. VS 3 cyl. engine
- Thread starter vallyfarm
- Start date
greatrandini
Gold Member
Rox $500 bucks for a working tractor? What is to think about? Sold!!!
Jagmandave
Veteran Member
I'm 5'10 and about 195, I fit on my 1602D with no problem, but it's not easy getting on and off, I have to go thru some gymnastics to clear the shiter and the loader controls. Once on, I'm fine tho............
Joe1
Platinum Member
vallyfarm:
The 2 cyl is cheaper to build due to fewer moving parts. It will probably also have a heavier flywheel to smooth out the operation due to fewer firing impulses per minute and a "rocking couple" on a side by side twin. That may result in slower throttle response both when increasing and decreasing rpm which might delay (slightly) your ability to shift gears until the rpm has dropped. In a tractor, there is probably not much of a problem with these issues.
A 3 cyl will probably run smoother as already stated, and besides since "more is better" it's a marking assist.
But hey, what do I know.
The 2 cyl is cheaper to build due to fewer moving parts. It will probably also have a heavier flywheel to smooth out the operation due to fewer firing impulses per minute and a "rocking couple" on a side by side twin. That may result in slower throttle response both when increasing and decreasing rpm which might delay (slightly) your ability to shift gears until the rpm has dropped. In a tractor, there is probably not much of a problem with these issues.
A 3 cyl will probably run smoother as already stated, and besides since "more is better" it's a marking assist.
But hey, what do I know.
roxynoodle
Platinum Member
greatrandini said:
Yeah, sold, I'm getting it. I'll be picking it up tomorrow since I have to teach my college class tonight. It does run great, no smoke (can you believe that on a 1950 tractor?), no water in oil, no cracks in engine or tranny block, oil pressure all the way up. It's an ugly beast but that's ok. What I will have to watch out for is my wanting to restore it at some point because then I'll think it's too pretty to pull the spreader and a third tractor will come here, etc. I could become like Soundguy!
greatrandini
Gold Member
Just come near my house with a working tractor for $500.00 bucks. I dare ya.......
Cord
Veteran Member
I proably have the smallest tractor on the board. I'm also pretty tall (6'-2" @ 185). While it's not easy to get on the tractor, with a little practice I can get on and off with out embarassing my self. My current technique is to step on the foot board and then throw my leg over the seat as if I was getting on a horse. Once on the station is crouded but workable. The real improvement appears on the Fx series with their flat floors. If you want a easy to mount tractor, you want a Fx.
roxynoodle
Platinum Member
Off topic, but I posted a pic of the $500 Farmall under Buying/Pricing if anyone wants to see it. I didn't figure a pic of it belonged on this forum.