Is it time for a gasoline engine tractor?

[buickanddeere]

Back in the 60's and 70's we would do all our plowing and work with gassers. Mostly D17 Allis Chalmers. You could easily run through through 2 tanks of gas in a day. That is 34 gallons. My 4610 SU Ford is the same horsepower and will burn about half that amount. No comparison. Those power crater engines were built industrial with wet sleeves and were tough as nails but they were really thirsty. They did crank easily.

Was thinking of light and medium duty Tier IV engines now in 2016 and Tier V engines in 2019.

 

[buickanddeere]

And what's that suposed to mean?

If someone rolled out a brand new clone of a ford 861 gasser ( with a rops and seatbelt ), but otherwise the same basic tractor... I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

I recall cub cadet with a gas powered tractor ( large scut/small cut sized ) in the late 90's

A carburated low compression leaded gasser engine from 1966 is much different engine vs a direct injected , high compression unleaded gasser in 2016.
Just as 1966 diesel is a much different engine than a 2016 Tier IV diesel engine today.

 

[Soundguy]

ONLY because the diesels of those same time periods were rather hard starting and messy compared to the gas engines...

Then, there's the fact that the buyers of them TODAY, aren't farming with them! They mostly are only using them more for "nostalgia" than anything else...

I live in a big farming community... The only time you see gas tractors in use is, parades, tractor shows or a farmer who has his gran kids pulling a wagon around, while the diesels do all the real work!

SR

A 1955 ford trike pulls my mower weekly here in florida. It's never been in a parade, at least since I owned it.. and doubt it saw many before as I bought it off a muck farm where it sat sank to the axles running a water pump for decades..

I have a 1955 ford 850 with utility loader that I move hay rounds with... it's not parade ready either... you do however need an updated tetanus shot to operate it..

no nostalgia here...

 

[Soundguy]

A friend says that once in motion, a rig doesn't use much fuel. So it's not the weight that figures into it so much at that point as wind and tire resistance. Just look at a train.

Lets be real.. fuel usage is based on load and efficiency... there's no magic involved.

 

[vsteel]

yeah right!!! For decades they said they were making the engines as fuel efficient as possible but they only got 10 mpg with a best in class of around 20 mpg. Now after feds mandated better fuel economy for decades, we now have 300+HP engines with 31MPG claims (Dodge Charger/Challenger) so the laws of physics change over time especially when government steps up and demands it. I can still remember the automakers claims that it was not possible to make car engines to meet the requirement but they did when faced with possibility of heavy fines and/or not being allowed to sell their products. So far they continue to make the engines more efficient and also with more HP.
I think they can do the same with the diesel engines if they have too. Right now they are just scabbing on whatever they can come up with to barely meet the environmental requirements and we all know they can do something better than Urea injection. A double turbocharger comes to mind to prevent the carbon from forming in the first place. Maybe even an electric motor driven one like I see proposed on a new model car to reduce the turbo lag.
Lot of things they could do, but the price goes up. Right now they are just getting the minimums with minimal effort but causing the public a PIA with the operation and maintenance of these new Tier IV engines.

By your way of thinking they could have made smartphones like we have now in the 70s we just needed the government to say, make it so.

Your statement is also untrue because back a long time ago GM talked about getting much better mileage out of cars but the emissions standards cut into that because they had to lower compression. It took years before they smoothed that out. You might not have been around and worked on the cars that were in the 70s and early 80s but they were a horrible mess and ran like dogs.

The reason they are getting better is new materials, better machining and better computer controls keep coming out. Though the more technology we put into an engine we are going to be running into diminishing returns, there is a real limit on how much energy we can get out of one gallon of fuel.

Tier 4 also required a 90% reduction in emissions. This isn't an incremental step it is huge, that is why until just a few years ago most manufactures were having terrible emission related issues. Even today they are not all smoothed out but it has got better.

People look at gas engines and think it is fine why all the fuss, they forget the mess gas engines were for many years until they got it all figured out.

One other fact you left out is in the diesel world the equipment being used gets used a lot. Tractors and truckers along with those who run other heavy equipment really care about fuel efficiency. Fuel is a huge cost for large engines that run 8+ hours a day. If a manufacturer can make a claim they are 10% more efficient that is a huge deal.

 

[vsteel]

And what's that suposed to mean?

If someone rolled out a brand new clone of a ford 861 gasser ( with a rops and seatbelt ), but otherwise the same basic tractor... I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

I recall cub cadet with a gas powered tractor ( large scut/small cut sized ) in the late 90's

He is meaning the rules that applied then don't apply now. If we were to have a gasoline tractor come out it would need to be high compression, direct injection with a cat. A modern copy of an old tractor wouldn't fly because of the emission regulations. It might be a great copy of a great machine but it wouldn't pass regulations.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

A 1955 ford trike pulls my mower weekly here in florida. It's never been in a parade, at least since I owned it.. and doubt it saw many before as I bought it off a muck farm where it sat sank to the axles running a water pump for decades..

I have a 1955 ford 850 with utility loader that I move hay rounds with... it's not parade ready either... you do however need an updated tetanus shot to operate it..

no nostalgia here...

I've got more than a barn full of old tractors, none on them been in a parade either... BUT, it's my diesel tractors that do the work around here!

When I put the first diesel tractor on this place, my dad didn't want nothing to do with gas tractors from that day on!

SR

 

[RaydaKub]

When I put the first diesel tractor on this place, my dad didn't want nothing to do with gas tractors from that day on!
SR

Back in the early 60's my cousin and my uncle went out to plow the cornfield one day. My cousin got the diesel and my uncle the gasser, both Case 400's. During the day, the gasser would pull better. At supper my cousin complained about being on the diesel and getting lapped, so they swapped. In the cooler evening air, the diesel started lapping the gasser. :laughing:

 

[Gary Fowler]

Back in the early 60's my cousin and my uncle went out to plow the cornfield one day. My cousin got the diesel and my uncle the gasser, both Case 400's. During the day, the gasser would pull better. At supper my cousin complained about being on the diesel and getting lapped, so they swapped. In the cooler evening air, the diesel started lapping the gasser. :laughing:

That is why on the larger diesel engine tractors they put intercoolers on them to cool the incoming air for more power.
I have worked on the farm with tractors burning gas, LP gas and diesel and diesel if by far the most efficient regardless of the EPA equipment on them. The old iron of the 50-80s did a lot of smoking when loaded up which I don't see on my new tractors even under a load. I used to drive a 120 HP diesel and on half mile long rows, I could still see the diesel smoke trail behind me all the way to the end when I turned around.

 

[Gary Fowler]

By your way of thinking they could have made smartphones like we have now in the 70s we just needed the government to say, make it so.

Your statement is also untrue because back a long time ago GM talked about getting much better mileage out of cars but the emissions standards cut into that because they had to lower compression. It took years before they smoothed that out. You might not have been around and worked on the cars that were in the 70s and early 80s but they were a horrible mess and ran like dogs.

The reason they are getting better is new materials, better machining and better computer controls keep coming out. Though the more technology we put into an engine we are going to be running into diminishing returns, there is a real limit on how much energy we can get out of one gallon of fuel.


People look at gas engines and think it is fine why all the fuss, they forget the mess gas engines were for many years until they got it all figured out.

.

Oh, I was around and owned cars of 65s vintage on up. I worked on them to get the best performance possible. Sure computers control everything on an engine now which makes them run their fullest potential.
I am not saying that technology didn't help improve engines, I am saying that until the FEDs made them start looking for improvements, for 70 years or so, they did basically nothing to improve efficiency / power of automobiles but make them with bigger displacement engines. They were still carbureted with the same ignitions systems as the 1930s cars.
If the FEDS hadn't stepped up and insisted on better mileage (this due mostly to an oil shortage which I still believe was created by the big oil companies) we might still be driving cars with the same technology as the original internal combustion engines used.

If you have never heard of "Necessity is the Mother of all Inventions" then just keep your head in the sand and keep on thinking that manufacturers will keep on making improvements without an push from government or consumers to do better.