HP to pull disk

[em69783]

Need some advice... I have a john deere 1020 gas 40 hp tractor. It has wheel weights, calcium, and r1 tires. I pull an 8 ft 3 point disk now in 5th gear with no problems.I farm about 30 acres and all the land is flat. I am looking to buy a pull type disk however i am not sure if 10 ft would be too much.Finding an 8 ft pull type disk around my way is extremely hard. A guy has one for sale around me which it light weight and not off set. My question is would it be too much? Can I not sink it all the way down? Thanks for the help!

 

[jagyzf]

The diameter of the disk and the angle of the gangs can also affect the pull of the disk. Just from the few sets I have seen, the weight of a pull type disk is much greater than a 3 pt. When you say pull type I assume you mean a transport disk.

I have used disks before where I was able to adjust them so the front gang would hit the ground after the back gang. Then not let it all the way down, just so the front gang was cutiing a little and the back gang full. This allowed me to pull a larger disk than the tractor normally would. I only did this when the regular tractor was tied up.

With the other factors I have had trouble pulling a 12' disk that the same tractor pulled a lighter 14' with no problem.

 

[wolc123]

Assuming equal weight per disc, a pull-type will pull significantly easier than a 3-point. If you handle the 8 ft, 3-point without any trouble, then you will certainly have no issues with the 10 ft pull-type. I use an 8-foot pull-type behind my 43 hp, 4wd tractor and it doesn't even know it is back there. The 6-foot, 3-point I had previously, pulled significantly harder. I like my equipment on the small side for my available power because it lets me get the job done before soil conditions are perfect. I personally cant stand 3-point discs, but there are many folks who dont know no better so you should have no problems selling yours. You will also notice significantly less fuel usage with a pull-type disc compared to a 3-point. The fuel is saved because less "work" is done with the pull-type, but the ground gets ready to plant sooner because all areas are worked to a uniform depth rather than some places not touched at all and others worked extra deep as occurs with the more ridgid 3-point disc. Pull-type discs are always adjustable on the angle so you can simply set it less aggressive if you are concerned with power. I can use my 8-footer at the most aggressive angle behind my 43 hp, 4wd in any field conditions, but I have to set it up at less angle behind my 20 hp 2wd. After the ground is worked a couple passes after plowing, even that 20 hp 2wd will handle the 8-footer at the steepest angle. I have yet to see a 3-point disc that I thought was worth more than its weight in scrap metal.

 

[MMagis]

Assuming equal weight per disc, a pull-type will pull significantly easier than a 3-point. If you handle the 8 ft, 3-point without any trouble, then you will certainly have no issues with the 10 ft pull-type. I use an 8-foot pull-type behind my 43 hp, 4wd tractor and it doesn't even know it is back there. The 6-foot, 3-point I had previously, pulled significantly harder. I like my equipment on the small side for my available power because it lets me get the job done before soil conditions are perfect. I personally cant stand 3-point discs, but there are many folks who dont know no better so you should have no problems selling yours. You will also notice significantly less fuel usage with a pull-type disc compared to a 3-point. The fuel is saved because less "work" is done with the pull-type, but the ground gets ready to plant sooner because all areas are worked to a uniform depth rather than some places not touched at all and others worked extra deep as occurs with the more ridgid 3-point disc. Pull-type discs are always adjustable on the angle so you can simply set it less aggressive if you are concerned with power. I can use my 8-footer at the most aggressive angle behind my 43 hp, 4wd in any field conditions, but I have to set it up at less angle behind my 20 hp 2wd. After the ground is worked a couple passes after plowing, even that 20 hp 2wd will handle the 8-footer at the steepest angle. I have yet to see a 3-point disc that I thought was worth more than its weight in scrap metal.

Please stop telling people this garbage. Someone may think you know what you're talking about. It's been established that you don't.

 

[Egon]

Please stop telling people this garbage. Someone may think you know what you're talking about. It's been established that you don't.

The fellow may just know what he's talking about.:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Wnc3]

Please stop telling people this garbage. Someone may think you know what you're talking about. It's been established that you don't.

That's funny.

Fwiw...I don't like my 3 point, but I've never owned a well built one.

 

[AGGIE00]

I don't know if the three point is harder to pull, but I wouldn't have one. As far as hp required it all depends on the size of plates, weight of disk, and angle of cut. i have a 12' Krause with 18" plates and could pull it with the 4600. We also have a 8 ft rome disk with 32" plates that takes over 200hp to pull. I pulled a 8ft athens offset with 22" plates upened up and it took all of the 83hp my tractor had in slightly wet conditions.

 

[AGGIE00]

That's funny.

Fwiw...I don't like my 3 point, but I've never owned a well built one.

Where in Grimes county are you from?

 

[284 International]

...After the ground is worked a couple passes after plowing, even that 20 hp 2wd will handle the 8-footer at the steepest angle...

I don't understand what you're doing differently. For me, my disks pull harder when the soil is soft or broken up compared to trying to pull them across hard pack. My light little Yanmar 20 hp 2 wheel drive tractor will pull my heaviest disk across hard pack, but my 5 1/2 foot wheel disk will stop my big IH 464 if the ground is soft and it is cutting deeply. I know your Allis C will far outstrip my Yanmar, but my 46 hp IH DEFINITELY knows there is a lot of load, even with my relatively small disk: it will get stuck if I'm not careful. There is no way I could handle an 8, let alone a 10 foot disk, especially in plowed ground.

 

[AGGIE00]

I don't understand what you're doing differently. For me, my disks pull harder when the soil is soft or broken up compared to trying to pull them across hard pack. My light little Yanmar 20 hp 2 wheel drive tractor will pull my heaviest disk across hard pack, but my 5 1/2 foot wheel disk will stop my big IH 464 if the ground is soft and it is cutting deeply. I know your Allis C will far outstrip my Yanmar, but my 46 hp IH DEFINITELY knows there is a lot of load, even with my relatively small disk: it will get stuck if I'm not careful. There is no way I could handle an 8, let alone a 10 foot disk, especially in plowed ground.

Yeah, it's like the difference between driving on flat or aired up tires. When the disk goes to the hub the tractor is grunting.

 

[284 International]

Flat vs full tires is a good way to describe it. I'm interested mostly because of the differences I hear in how people describe their equipment handling things. My 5 1/2 foot disk will stop my IH 464, but I hear people describing comparable machines handling much larger implements. Comparing my 4 foot offset disk to this 5 1/2 foot, the 8 footer would be an immovable beast.

Others pull disks much larger than mine without trouble, so I'm not sure where the difference lies.

 

[pjbci]

Others pull disks much larger than mine without trouble, so I'm not sure where the difference lies.

I think a lot of the times the difference lie in mans inability to accept that their tool (tractor) isnt big enough for the task at hand! Ha. By the way I would really like to see that 20 hp yanmar mentioned earlier bury that 8ft disk to the hubs with no problems.

 

[284 International]

I think a lot of the times the difference lie in mans inability to accept that their tool (tractor) isnt big enough for the task at hand! Ha. By the way I would really like to see that 20 hp yanmar mentioned earlier bury that 8ft disk to the hubs with no problems.

I guess I was unclear: I don't have an 8 foot disk, and my Yanmar struggles with a heavy 4 foot disk cutting deeply. My IH 464 isn't a massive machine, but it's well over 6500 lbs, and 45 PTO horsepower, so should, by most recommendations, be more than ample for a 5 1/2 foot disk. Mine is sufficient, but in some conditions the disk's load is still too heavy without easing the wheels down to decrease the pull.

 

[pjbci]

No no. Somebody else earlier claimed that their yanmar would bury an 8footer with maximum angle set to the blades. I think it was the 3rd post. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[284 International]

I'm the only guy who mentioned a Yanmar. I meant that the Yanmar can pull my (relatively) heavy disk across very dry, hard soil, because it isn't actually cutting anything. In soft conditions, the full cutting weight of the same disk will stop my 464 dead in its tracks, even though it is 4 times as heavy and has over twice the horsepower.

I believe wolc123's 20 horsepower machine is an Allis Chalmers C, a much different machine vs my 20 horse Yanmar.

 

[MMagis]

Please stop telling people this garbage. Someone may think you know what you're talking about. It's been established that you don't.

The fellow may just know what he's talking about.:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

No, he doesn't. High school physics proves that.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Assuming equal weight per disc, a pull-type will pull significantly easier than a 3-point. If you handle the 8 ft, 3-point without any trouble, then you will certainly have no issues with the 10 ft pull-type. I use an 8-foot pull-type behind my 43 hp, 4wd tractor and it doesn't even know it is back there. The 6-foot, 3-point I had previously, pulled significantly harder. I like my equipment on the small side for my available power because it lets me get the job done before soil conditions are perfect. I personally cant stand 3-point discs, but there are many folks who dont know no better so you should have no problems selling yours. You will also notice significantly less fuel usage with a pull-type disc compared to a 3-point. The fuel is saved because less "work" is done with the pull-type, but the ground gets ready to plant sooner because all areas are worked to a uniform depth rather than some places not touched at all and others worked extra deep as occurs with the more ridgid 3-point disc. Pull-type discs are always adjustable on the angle so you can simply set it less aggressive if you are concerned with power. I can use my 8-footer at the most aggressive angle behind my 43 hp, 4wd in any field conditions, but I have to set it up at less angle behind my 20 hp 2wd. After the ground is worked a couple passes after plowing, even that 20 hp 2wd will handle the 8-footer at the steepest angle. I have yet to see a 3-point disc that I thought was worth more than its weight in scrap metal.

Still spouting that delusional nonsense? And it's nonsense at it's WORST.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

No, he doesn't. High school physics proves that.

High school physics proves he has no clue what he's talking about

Years of experience proves proves he has no clue what he's talking about.

MILLIONS of hours of research/use by farmers AND manufacturers prove he has no clue what he's talking about.

Common sense proves he has no clue what he's talking about.

.......The moon is made of green cheese, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus are real, the earth is flat, "Im from the government and I'm here to help you", and outdated, obsolete drag disc's are the answer to the worlds energy problems..................All concepts with one thing in common......No one in their right mind would believe any of them for a second.


There's a perfectly good explaination why equipment manufacturers quit building drag disc's over 50 years ago, and all but a few ended up rusting away in fencerows decades ago.

It's sort of a pet peeve of mine....people posting ridiculous, unfounded nonsense on the internet where others are looking for accurate information. As mentioned, someone might actually listen to what he's posting (over and over) .

 

[Egon]

Assuming equal weight per disc, a pull-type will pull significantly easier than a 3-point. If you handle the 8 ft, 3-point without any trouble, then you will certainly have no issues with the 10 ft pull-type. I use an 8-foot pull-type behind my 43 hp, 4wd tractor and it doesn't even know it is back there. The 6-foot, 3-point I had previously, pulled significantly harder. I like my equipment on the small side for my available power because it lets me get the job done before soil conditions are perfect. I personally cant stand 3-point discs, but there are many folks who dont know no better so you should have no problems selling yours. You will also notice significantly less fuel usage with a pull-type disc compared to a 3-point. The fuel is saved because less "work" is done with the pull-type, but the ground gets ready to plant sooner because all areas are worked to a uniform depth rather than some places not touched at all and others worked extra deep as occurs with the more ridgid 3-point disc. Pull-type discs are always adjustable on the angle so you can simply set it less aggressive if you are concerned with power. I can use my 8-footer at the most aggressive angle behind my 43 hp, 4wd in any field conditions, but I have to set it up at less angle behind my 20 hp 2wd. After the ground is worked a couple passes after plowing, even that 20 hp 2wd will handle the 8-footer at the steepest angle. I have yet to see a 3-point disc that I thought was worth more than its weight in scrap metal.


Think they still make Pull Type Disc's.:thumbsup:

Pull-type Disc Harrow

http://www.kello-bilt.com/images/stories/kello225dow.jpg

 

[MHarryE]

Disk weight, blade size, gang angle - all make a huge difference. I have a 7 1/2 foot 3 point 18" blade disk that is way too small for my tractor but is handle for some small jobs. I have a 13' tandem wheel type disk with 4 - 3" x 3" x 1/4" angles added to stiffen the frame and 2 large sections of railroad rails added for weight. It had 20" blades to start with but are worn down to nearly 18". It digs much more deeply than the 3 point ever could. If I put as much weight per blade on the 3 point I would need to fill the bucket of my loader with concrete to hold the front end down. But if the tandem ever gets too tough to pull I can lower the wheels a bit to reduce the cut. I have seen disks at auction where the farmer had pulled one or two end blades off each gang, apparently for easier pull. That is always an option if you find a good deal on a disk larger than what you feel you really need and then find you have trouble pulling it.