Buying Advice Best engineering/technology in a tractor? Which manufacturers?

[om21braz]

Cast aluminum just does'nt work as well as a cast iron bearing housing. In high speed/load applications something can place the shafting out of balance and over time the bearing will begin to loosen it's seat. Although, this may take some time and/or never occur - but when it does, it's bearing + housing replacement. In cast iron, typically just new bearings. Using 6061 forged aluminum works better, but still is'nt cast iron/steel.

 

[rScotty]

My first post. This is a great forum.

I see mostly CUTs here, but hopefully some of you folks can still help me out. I am in the market for a 65-75hp tractor, FEL, and cab.

So my question is.....
Which manufacturers have the finest engineering and technology in their tractors? When it comes to automobiles, I take my cars German or Japanese. I just love the engineering and technology that goes into these cars. I would like to have the same attributes in my tractor. I am an engineer by profession. Nothing gets on my nerves more than sloppy tolerances and overlooked design flaws. There are, arguably, more important traits to a tractor, I agree. But this is a priority for me, so I'd like to start here.
Thanks!

Hmm...Interesting question. I'm also an engineer as well as a tractor hobbyist and so have sympathy for your emotional problems..

Right now I have 4 tractors ranging up to a 60 hp turbo - about the bottom end of what you are looking for but I've had those too. A sub-hobby is collecting shop manuals and exploded diagrams. Tractors are such complex systems that one manufacturer will have on the best of one system and another, another. Luckily, most manufacturers stick with a long model life and update them regularly. So even a poor design with 20 years of tweaking ends up being very good. Tractors tend to empahsize reliability over all else. They are overbuilt, well lubricated, and understressed. It isn't unusual at all for tractors to need little or no repair at all for decades. I just took apart a 50 year old JD that must have had over 10,000 hours on it , maybe 20K.... - the bushings in the hourmeter were worn out! Enginwise, the valves were worn but usable, pistons & bores still in spec, and bottom end showed no measureable wear at all. The rest of the system from governor to powersteering to transmission and PTO had essentially new tolerances. Every single seal and gasket needed replacement. Many were originally leather. By the way, "CR Seals" stands for "Chicago Rawhide Seals".

Best? Well, most are good. Tractors tend to be an industrializing economy's first exports and therefore their first showpiece to the rest of the world. Judging by world wide popularity in the higher HP range you are looking at there is a strong argument in favor of the commercial JD 310, Case 580, or Cat 400 TLB series of tractors. A little higher HP, but not much...and since HP is an variable of rpm, and these TLB models all have variable speed engines (not all tractors have variable speed diesels btw)....and so they can be run happily at half or a third of the rated HP. All are available as Ag types if you prefer - although this is not widely known. They are extremely well built, quality thoughout, comfortable, and sophisticated. I just looked at a number of these and was surprised by the technology. Way ahead of Ag tractors. Their new prices came in well under the similarly equipped JDs in the 55 to 75 HP range.
good luck! rScotty

 

[rScotty]

Exactly. I am just an engineer/technician/mechanic/builder/tinkerer who wants
to know the reasons why certain choices were made. Especially when
everyone else uses steel. (Again, I am looking at a class of tractor that
the big boys all make: 3000-3500#, 30-35hp. Kubota, CNH, DaeDong,
etc. use steel. Only JD uses Al.)

I am an engineer with some experience in designing castings a few years back though I don't do that today. No, I cannot see any technical advantage to making tractor transmission and rear end case castings out aluminum. uWhat you suspect is true, accurate aluminum castings are currently less expensively produced and of course are easier to do the finish-machining on. And they ship for less. All are money reasons.

That said, it is not only possible but easy to design aluminum cases to be every bit as strong as steel ...but by the time you do that you tend to lose the initial cost advantage, still have all the other material disadvantages to deal with, and still need to add weight.
Engineers differ in the way they solve problems, but that's not the way I'd go with that design - and I don't know of any purely engineering reason to do it that way.
rScotty

 

[RoyJackson]

Lamborghini wanted some modification but was told by Ferari that his cars are good enough as they are. So Lamborghini told him to keep his cars and that he will build better sport car (Miura 1967. The red car on the picture). In fact Lamborghini was (since 1945) and still is a tractor manuafcturer. It is part of Same-Deutz-Fahr Group.
Lamborghini car company is part of Volkswagen.

I believe Lamborghini's first car was the GT350 or GT400 (1964, I think). OK looking car...but the Miura was a true breakthrough and still looks sexy as all get out.

 

[tulenutn2o]

I am in the aircraft engineering field and the things that sticks out to me is that the final product is never exactly what the engineers want.

By the time Procurement and the bean counters get their say, and they have a lot of say, cheaper methods and parts are replacing more expensive but more robust designs.

Another thing I have noticed is the intended design life of a part. If the part is supposed to last 10 years, but testing shows it will last 20 years, then that is said to be over designed and too expensive. They will take cost out by making the design less robust. Even if it only cost a very small percentage to make it last 20 years. Then some guy gets a raise and a promotion because he can show he saved the company X dollars.

Happens all the time and I wouldn't be surprised if car, tractors and even boats are the same way.

Exactly! That's why I hate the term "engineered". With computer technology today, everything is built to a life cycle or "planned obsolescence". I'd probably always take a chance on a thicker casting for the unknown, then the engineered item, I know will fail in say-10 years.

 

[civesnedfield]

I am an engineer with some experience in designing castings a few years back though I don't do that today. No, I cannot see any technical advantage to making tractor transmission and rear end case castings out aluminum. uWhat you suspect is true, accurate aluminum castings are currently less expensively produced and of course are easier to do the finish-machining on. And they ship for less. All are money reasons.

That said, it is not only possible but easy to design aluminum cases to be every bit as strong as steel ...but by the time you do that you tend to lose the initial cost advantage, still have all the other material disadvantages to deal with, and still need to add weight.
Engineers differ in the way they solve problems, but that's not the way I'd go with that design - and I don't know of any purely engineering reason to do it that way.
rScotty

I think you have hit the mark right dead center. CHEAPER TO PRODUCE AND SHIP. Do you think you will ever see a cost savings to the consumer, no. It is all about increasing the profit margin, and I don't care what color the paint is. As far as still needing to add weight--well that too just increased the profit margin. If the tractor weighed in heavier you wouldn't have to add as much weight as the lighter tractor. Now who do you think profits from you having to buy more weights???

 

[sweettractors]

God, the Great Creator made (Engineered us and all that we see) and we only have a limited life span. I guess that is where the mechanical engineers and cost watchers got their idea. You think? Ken Sweet

 

[RobertN]

Not to go off-topic, but

The story I heard was Ferrari was having transmission problems; too much HP for the exist design in the early '60's. Lamborghini brought them a tranny, but Enzo said something to the effect " no tractor tranny in my cars!".

Ferrari eventually designed a stronger/modified tranny, and Lamborghini made a car to compete with them.

Lamborghini got his start building oil burners. Enzo Ferrari pissed him off somehow (back in the early 1960's) and he was determined to build his own sportscars. The rest is history...

 

[skyoung]

Porsche

 

[skyoung]

Porsche

forgot to mention items of interest on this Porsche tractor.

air colled Diesel four cylinder Master
52 horse
6 speed
hydraulic torque transmission
1959
one of 400 this model
3 point
multiple pto's
differential lock
adjustable track
pendulant front axle
widest speed range 0.8 to 16 mph

,Porsche imported around 1000 tractors to the USA in the late 50's 300 of which went to Canada,

Importer was Porsche Diesel North america in Easton Pennsylvania.

Manufacture of these tractors ceased in 1962 @ the Mannesman manufacturing site in Friedkshaffen Germany @ the old Zepplin factory

Four models were produced
1 cylinder Junior
2 cylinder Standard
3 cylinder Super
4 cylinder Master

I curently own one of each model

Carnation, Washington