Starting to do hay looking for older tractor. Hp requirements?

[conkli48]

I currently do hay with my father using a Kubota mx 5200 and a John Deere 336 baler. I致e been thinking of doing some of my own. As a little side gig. Looking to get some cheaper equipment. Will probably use a sickle bar mower and a smaller baler. I have come across a J.I. case SC , for 1200. Has new rear tires and recent paint job as well as it runs good. Looking online it says anywhere from 22 to 30 hp. But at a decent weight of 4300 lbs. I am assuming this would be decent enough, even if I am going to bale on the ground and pick up after baling. I would figure that it痴 probably got enough hp to run a smaller baler. Is this the ideal tractor probably not but for the condition and price. Hopefully a bit of haggling I can get it down a bit. I would like something in the 40 hp range but price goes up quite a bit in my area. I only currently have a Kioti ck2610 that would run the sickle bar and a rake no problem. Just the bailing I worry about. I would figure the heavier older tractor would better handle the baler far better even tho on paper the hp is the same. I am looking at doing it on my father in laws land he has a flat 3.5 acre field that would be easy to get to about 4 miles away. Where as my parents live about 17 miles away. Mainly I would bale just for my self, use about 365 bales a year for horses we have. I can bale on my property as it is 4.5 acres and half is wooded, the rest is pasture and yard. Any input would be greatly appreciated.

 

[powerscol]

You will need a minimum of 35 PTO HP. While I am running with less it is slow going. Don't skimp on the PTO HP. Also be sure you have rear remotes or can add them.

 

[conkli48]

New tractors I would agree with the 35 hp. But those old ones are a different animal I’m sure many Allis Chalmers Wds have baled countless acres with old balers. The hydraulic ports are not overly important as I plan to do a sickle bar and a 5 bar ground driven rake. I’m thinking all in I could get going for as little as 3500 from equipment I’ve found online.

 

[Streetcar]

35 how is nice in old iron, I have baled slow with mid 20 with old baler

 

[atsah]

We ran a sickle bar, a Deere side rake and a 14T baler, grimm tedder with an International 350 for 30 years, Probably in the 30hp range without issue..

 

[Tx Jim]

Yrs back I baled some small sq bales dropping bales on the ground with my JD BO(14hp) & JD 214WS baler on relatively flat ground with no problems

 

[flusher]

If you're baling on level ground, you don't need a lot of HP to run a small square baler. The video shows baling with a Farmall Super A that has about 17 HP on the PTO. The baling part is about 5 minutes 30 seconds into the video.

FARMALL Super A - YouTube

Good luck

 

[rankrank1]

Can not totally compare hp alone on when comparing hp on an older antique and a modern compact tractor. Those older antiques spin lower engine rpm so the hp is usually modest but they have gobs of torque reserve where a modern compact spins high rpm so the hp appears high but it has much less torque and a modern lawnmower spins outragous rpm so it has high hp and almost no torque. What i am saying is those old antiques can do a lot more work than their meager hp sometimes indicates. These are oversimplified generalizations of course.

Lots of hay has been baled with Farmall h, Case SC, and John Deere B, and Allis WD sized tractors. (similar competitors in size and hp of back in the day).

Case SC are a nimble tractor (I have one here I am in process of trying to fix up some myself). That said I also have a Farmall h here that I have used a lot that is very similar in hp to a Case SC. It can do everything on my piddle patch hay operation from run the 9' haybine, to rake, to even powering the PTO square baler...and has done it all out of necessity. Baling without live PTO can be a pain but none of my tractors have live PTO and I get along just fine.

Things to consider on a Case SC: If it is 1948 or older then it will not have any hydraulics and it will have a hand clutch. The hand clutch runs in oil and is virtually indestructable though. No live PTO either. Starting in 1949 they did get some hydraulics added but otherwise not significantly different. Starting around 1952 then it got a foot clutch, live PTO, and even the option of an eagle hitch (similar to a 3 pt hitch). Obviously, the latter is the most desireable but also the rarest and the most valuable.

My opinion is $1200 would usually be a tad on the high side for a common run of the mill Case SC but considering the one you are looking at has $1000 of new rear tires on it then it is likely a bargain at that price. You will likely find much more info about Case Sc's at Yesterdays Tractor forum as compared to here which is mostly modern compact tractors.

 

[Carl_NH]

We ran a sickle bar, a Deere side rake and a 14T baler, grimm tedder with an International 350 for 30 years, Probably in the 30hp range without issue..

Nearly the same experience - we ran the same baler, and sickle bar mower, a 5' combine, on a JD 420 28HP, 2 CYL and 3200 Lbs and dropped bales on the ground. The Case SC is about the same HP and 4200 Lbs so it will do it no issue.

We upgraded to a JD1020 with a 24T (thrower baler and wagons) in the late 60s.

 

[Fallon]

Can not totally compare hp alone on when comparing hp on an older antique and a modern compact tractor. Those older antiques spin lower engine rpm so the hp is usually modest but they have gobs of torque reserve where a modern compact spins high rpm so the hp appears high but it has much less torque and a modern lawnmower spins outragous rpm so it has high hp and almost no torque. What i am saying is those old antiques can do a lot more work than their meager hp sometimes indicates. These are oversimplified generalizations of course.

Lots of hay has been baled with Farmall h, Case SC, and John Deere B, and Allis WD sized tractors. (similar competitors in size and hp of back in the day).

Case SC are a nimble tractor (I have one here I am in process of trying to fix up some myself). That said I also have a Farmall h here that I have used a lot that is very similar in hp to a Case SC. It can do everything on my piddle patch hay operation from run the 9' haybine, to rake, to even powering the PTO square baler...and has done it all out of necessity. Baling without live PTO can be a pain but none of my tractors have live PTO and I get along just fine.

Things to consider on a Case SC: If it is 1948 or older then it will not have any hydraulics and it will have a hand clutch. The hand clutch runs in oil and is virtually indestructable though. No live PTO either. Starting in 1949 they did get some hydraulics added but otherwise not significantly different. Starting around 1952 then it got a foot clutch, live PTO, and even the option of an eagle hitch (similar to a 3 pt hitch). Obviously, the latter is the most desireable but also the rarest and the most valuable.

My opinion is $1200 would usually be a tad on the high side for a common run of the mill Case SC but considering the one you are looking at has $1000 of new rear tires on it then it is likely a bargain at that price. You will likely find much more info about Case Sc's at Yesterdays Tractor forum as compared to here which is mostly modern compact tractors.

(RPM * Torque) / 5252=HP

If you are comparing everything at the same 540 PTO RPM it's an apple's to apple's comparison. You can argue HP or torque curves, pulling power, but comparing PTO HP is as consistent as you can get given the fixed 540 rating of a PTO.