TYM T754 for Round Baling?

[Iowa Hillbilly]

Interesting thread. I don't run any ballast (loaded tires) in my M9 cab and I've pulled a NH 450 Roll Belt net bailer 4x5 which I've sold and now have a Kubota BV European style totally enclosed 4x5 round bailer. Never an issue with either, heck, I cannot tell the difference between a fully loaded bailer and one with no round in it. I much prefer the Kubota BV over the NH actually. Much more adjustable for density and like a Klass, it runs a soft center easy to spear bale and the computer controls are also much more advanced, plus it's light years easier to thread the net in.

Roughly how much does the tractor weigh? Do you have hills that you use it on?

 

[eagle628]

Yes this is correct. The baler the OP has requires 1000 PTO speed. It is like climbing a hill in high gear. Takes more power to maintain speed. This is why I think the T754 will struggle with this baler. If he wants to run this baler I suggest more HP.

I don't think that's true, the power demand of the baler is the same regardless of 540/1000. The 1000 driveline just transfers less torque with each revolution. The disadvantage is that the engine is probably going to be further out on the torque curve so it would lug down a little faster, but running slower than rated speed isn't the end of the world on a round baler and it's not like it's going to pull harder once it reaches the engine speed for the 540 shaft.

I think OP has the right of it that weight is the problem. Hard telling not knowing what exactly their hills look like, but just the fact that they exist in any form would make me wary of the smaller tractor. TYM's website also says that they only have 16.9R30 tires, I would want 18.4 at a minimum and ideally 34 rims.

 

[Iowa Hillbilly]

I don't think that's true, the power demand of the baler is the same regardless of 540/1000. The 1000 driveline just transfers less torque with each revolution. The disadvantage is that the engine is probably going to be further out on the torque curve so it would lug down a little faster, but running slower than rated speed isn't the end of the world on a round baler and it's not like it's going to pull harder once it reaches the engine speed for the 540 shaft.

I think OP has the right of it that weight is the problem. Hard telling not knowing what exactly their hills look like, but just the fact that they exist in any form would make me wary of the smaller tractor. TYM's website also says that they only have 16.9R30 tires, I would want 18.4 at a minimum and ideally 34 rims.

What advantage do you see with the wider and taller tires? I didn't think they'd make much difference outside of load capacity and the tread pattern.

 

[Hay Dude]

What advantage do you see with the wider and taller tires? I didn't think they'd make much difference outside of load capacity and the tread pattern.

Taller, wider tires could give you a traction advantage, but weight with 4WD will be what saves you on hills. The 4WD will give you 4 tires resisting sliding while going downhill. Duals on a 2WD are better than singles.
When I first round baled with a similar size tractor to the OP, going down a hill, you would have to be very cautious of getting the baler to track straight down the hill. Just a little bit of angle can start the tractors rear to start angling one way or the other, then the baler pushes the rear sideways.
Going up a hill not as bad, but could result in ruts if the tractor doesn’t have the weight to get proper traction.
I upsized to a larger Kubota M-126X and the problem was solved.

Again, seeing the “hills” would be a big help. Here in PA, we have small hills, but they can be very steep. Thats where I had problems.

 

[5030]

Roughly how much does the tractor weigh? Do you have hills that you use it on?

Candidly, I have no idea of the weight other than I run with the loader on and the bucket removed and both have cast centers on the back axle with R1 radials. Some hills to deal with but not mountains.

 

[eagle628]

What advantage do you see with the wider and taller tires? I didn't think they'd make much difference outside of load capacity and the tread pattern.

4WD will help you in three out of four scenarios--straight up, straight down, and angled climbing up, but if you're going down at an angle or start to turn while going down, the baler is going to want to push the rear of the tractor downhill, regardless of what your front wheels are doing. You want as much tire contact on the ground as possible to avoid losing traction and ending up jackknifed with the tractor straight across the sidehill. It's not a very fun spot to be.

 

[Hay Dude]

I would add that 90% + newer, sharper AG tires will help, a little. The extra paddle height will dig in, to a deeper depth, than worn tires.

In the OP’s sceanio, I would use the old heavy Case for the baler and the newer tractor for raking/teddering or lifting bales (if loader equipped). Maybe use new, lightweight tractor on flat ground.

That’s kind of how I got started.

 

[mo1]

Does anyone use a TYM T754 for round baling? I'm looking at picking up one for a lot of tasks, but the deal maker or breaker for me is probably round baling. I've currently got a Vermeer 604K 1000rpm baler, and TYM shows the T754 as having an optional 540/1000 pto on their website. I'm on hilly ground and I don't know if the T754 is enough tractor weight wise. If I get the tractor I would have it ballasted.

I don't really want a machine that needs DEF, and older larger pre-emissions tractors are holding a real premium on the used market. I could potentially sell the 604 baler and go to something like a 504, but I kinda want to have an idea of what I might be getting into before pulling the trigger. The T754 looks to me like a good value, if it delivers as advertised.

All opinions welcome.

75 HP is enough power to run a 4x6 baler baling dry hay. I've run that size of tractor with a loader and loaded rear tires in front of a baler that size and been fine from a power and traction standpoint on rolling hills of up to about a 15% slope. If the hills were steep, I would want a heavier tractor.

A new 75 HP tractor won't have DEF as it's not required at 75 HP and below. It will have some sort of soot control, either a DPF or EGR + catalyst. That's why there are a lot of new 75 HP tractors, it's the most power you can get without dealing with DEF.

A tractor will put out essentially the same power with a 1000 RPM PTO as it will a 540 RPM PTO. The engine RPM is usually almost identical to run at 540 vs. 1000 PTO RPM so the engine makes essentially the same power. Remember horsepower = (torque * RPM)/5252 so the lower torque at 1000 PTO RPM is exactly canceled out by the proportionally higher RPM to make the same power.

 

[5030]

4WD will help you in three out of four scenarios--straight up, straight down, and angled climbing up,

I rarely if ever use front wheel assist when bailing.

 

[Hay Dude]

Sure it’s enough power. But we are talking about stopping it going downhill without sliding or jack knifing.
Heck, I round baled with a pretty heavy silage special 4x5 baler and only 50HP for years.

Reminds me of the diesel “super truckers” around here with their tuned 1000HP diesels. They claim they can pull as much as a tractor trailer. Problem is, they can’t stop it.

 

[aczlan]

Ballasted I'm expecting the T754 to be around 8300lbs, maybe more with some cast wheel weights added. Do you think that is enough? I'm kinda thinking it would be marginal, but I don't have enough experience with that size of tractor to say with any certainty and I've never pulled a 5x4 baler to know just what that would feel like behind a tractor.

We use a old Ford 552 5x5 round baler behind our Kubota L3830, have had a lack of power, but traction hasn't been an issue.
Traction has been an issue running our NH 274 baler with a full kicker wagon in tow on the hill, but not with the round baler.
Haven't run the new MX6000 on a hill with the baler yet, but it is great on the flat field.

Aaron Z

 

[mo1]

We use a old Ford 552 5x5 round baler behind our Kubota L3830, have had a lack of power, but traction hasn't been an issue.
Traction has been an issue running our NH 274 baler with a full kicker wagon in tow on the hill, but not with the round baler.
Haven't run the new MX6000 on a hill with the baler yet, but it is great on the flat field.

Aaron Z

The round baler even with a full bale in the chamber is going to be a lot lighter than a small square baler, thrower, and a full throw wagon full of bales. I don't know how heavy a Ford 552 is but the 5x5 version of the baler I have would weigh about 6500-7000 pounds with a full bale in the chamber depending on what options the baler has. The small square baler, thrower, and throw wagon setup I use weighs about 11,000 pounds with the throw wagon full of bales. I will say that a pickup has a lot easier time pulling a round baler from field to field than it does pulling full throw wagons out of the field, the hay wagon is heavier and has zero tongue weight which isn't good for traction. The round baler has a lot of tongue weight pushing down on the rear axle which is good for traction. There is one hill the truck doesn't get enough traction to pull the hay wagon up unless it's in 4WD but it will walk right up that hill in 2WD with the baler.

 

[Texasmark]

Does anyone use a TYM T754 for round baling? I'm looking at picking up one for a lot of tasks, but the deal maker or breaker for me is probably round baling. I've currently got a Vermeer 604K 1000rpm baler, and TYM shows the T754 as having an optional 540/1000 pto on their website. I'm on hilly ground and I don't know if the T754 is enough tractor weight wise. If I get the tractor I would have it ballasted.

I don't really want a machine that needs DEF, and older larger pre-emissions tractors are holding a real premium on the used market. I could potentially sell the 604 baler and go to something like a 504, but I kinda want to have an idea of what I might be getting into before pulling the trigger. The T754 looks to me like a good value, if it delivers as advertised.

All opinions welcome.

I ran a JD 530 5x6 roller behind a JD 4230 with cab (weight), 100 PTO hp on gently sloping terrain. Coming up hills with a near full roll of sorghum-sudan hay it would start grunting...540 PTO.

 

[5030]

I would never own a 5 foot wide bailer, simply because you cannot run 5 wide bales legally on the road on a trailer. 10 foot wide (side by side, exceeds the Federal maximum width of 104") Guy down the road has a 5 wide JD and got a ticket hauling them on his goose neck on a public road. State police cited him.

 

[Torvy]

Fortunately, some states don't have those rules. Federal rules only apply to interstate use. That is less relevant out here in the west where the states are more than a couple of hours wide. In Texas, you can haul up to 12' wide loads of hay (with $10 annual permit). South Dakota has no width limit for farm machinery driven by a farmer during daylight hours (except on Interstate Highways). Nevada allows up to 120" on roads (other than Interstates). Even Michigan allows up to 108" (though that does not help much). Also, the federal limit is 102", not 104".

 

[5030]

Also, the federal limit is 102", not 104".

Actually, it's 104 for curtain side flat bed trailers where the curtain is mounted to the outside of the rub rails on a 102 wide trailer. I know as I dealt with just that before I retired from trucking.... and, there is no limit of width (here in Michigan at least) when pulling farm related implements on public highways except they have to have flashing amber warning lights and display a triangle SMV placard facing rearward and allow safe passage of motor vehicles, in other words, pull off the road and show courtesy to them.

I routinely pull implements much wider than 10 feet on public roads all the time. The one place you cannot is on a limited access highway unless that is the ONLY route to your off farm fields and then you have to have a permit issued by the Michigan State Police and display it.

I believe both Ohio and Indiana are the same. Not sure about other states as they don't impact my operation at all.

The 102 rule applies here when transporting ag related commodities (round or large square bales) on public highways, whether they are paved or gravel.

 

[Torvy]

Sounds like a lobbying opportunity by the State Ag Co-ops and such.

I love how complicated they make a relatively simple issue. Smh

 

[aczlan]

The round baler even with a full bale in the chamber is going to be a lot lighter than a small square baler, thrower, and a full throw wagon full of bales. I don't know how heavy a Ford 552 is but the 5x5 version of the baler I have would weigh about 6500-7000 pounds with a full bale in the chamber depending on what options the baler has. The small square baler, thrower, and throw wagon setup I use weighs about 11,000 pounds with the throw wagon full of bales. I will say that a pickup has a lot easier time pulling a round baler from field to field than it does pulling full throw wagons out of the field, the hay wagon is heavier and has zero tongue weight which isn't good for traction. The round baler has a lot of tongue weight pushing down on the rear axle which is good for traction. There is one hill the truck doesn't get enough traction to pull the hay wagon up unless it's in 4WD but it will walk right up that hill in 2WD with the baler.

It's not very heavy, 2000-3000# (ish), plus the bale in the chamber (3000-4000# total?), our 1/2 ton Suburban had no issues towing it home 40ish miles.
Not enclosed, can see everything it's doing, string tie, not netwrap.
As I understand it, it's a Gehl RB1500A with blue paint.

I would never own a 5 foot wide bailer, simply because you cannot run 5 wide bales legally on the road on a trailer. 10 foot wide (side by side, exceeds the Federal maximum width of 104") Guy down the road has a 5 wide JD and got a ticket hauling them on his goose neck on a public road. State police cited him.

If we had to haul them, I would agree, but we bale them and use them on the same farm, for the price we paid and for the 30-60 bales per year we make with it, it works well.

Aaron Z

 

[Hay Dude]

Never been cited, even in roadside inspection for being 10’ wide with ag crops. Also, 5’ bales could be hauled in a single line, not double rows.

 

[Hay Dude]

Fortunately, some states don't have those rules. Federal rules only apply to interstate use. That is less relevant out here in the west where the states are more than a couple of hours wide. In Texas, you can haul up to 12' wide loads of hay (with $10 annual permit). South Dakota has no width limit for farm machinery driven by a farmer during daylight hours (except on Interstate Highways). Nevada allows up to 120" on roads (other than Interstates). Even Michigan allows up to 108" (though that does not help much). Also, the federal limit is 102", not 104".

We can go 12’ with crops.