rototiller vs. plow

[gemini5362]

Yep.. them tractors with creeper gears really like those rototillers.

soundguy

Soundguy you talk about creaper gears. I have a kubota b6100 with a high low range and 3 forward gears. The low range 1st gear on it is fairly slow. I have a montana 4940 with high, low and creaper 4 gears in each range. When you put it in creaper 1st gear you almost have to strain to notice the tires move.

What are you defining as creaper gears ?

 

[Soundguy]

Anything that gets you less than 1mph at pto speed is pretty good... can't do that on a ford 4spd.. they are geared too high.. no hard and fast definition of creeper.. other than.. just creeping along..

soundguy

 

[ChuckinNH]

well, I am another one who has been enlightened by this thread. I somehow thought that turning plows would leave less hard pan than a tiller too........ and I had heard the term "plow pan" when I was young. My walk behind Troy Built will turn cover crops under, but it takes more patience than the advertisments show, and often some time spent cutting wound up vegetation from the tines. I doubt that it actually tills as deeply as it seems either since much of the "depth" is the fluffed up material on the top. I do really like the tiller though ( had it 20 years). I'm sure that no tilling is better for the soil in many cases, but I haven't figured out how to have cover crops, and add organic material without tilling.

 

[Soundguy]

You can only turn so deep.. etc.

soundguy

 

[Rara Avis]

well, I am another one who has been enlightened by this thread. I somehow thought that turning plows would leave less hard pan than a tiller too........ and I had heard the term "plow pan" when I was young. My walk behind Troy Built will turn cover crops under, but it takes more patience than the advertisments show, and often some time spent cutting wound up vegetation from the tines. I doubt that it actually tills as deeply as it seems either since much of the "depth" is the fluffed up material on the top. I do really like the tiller though ( had it 20 years). I'm sure that no tilling is better for the soil in many cases, but I haven't figured out how to have cover crops, and add organic material without tilling.

Video: Vegetable Farmers and their Sustainable Tillage Practices

 

[Farmwithjunk]

well, I am another one who has been enlightened by this thread. I somehow thought that turning plows would leave less hard pan than a tiller too........ and I had heard the term "plow pan" when I was young. My walk behind Troy Built will turn cover crops under, but it takes more patience than the advertisments show, and often some time spent cutting wound up vegetation from the tines. I doubt that it actually tills as deeply as it seems either since much of the "depth" is the fluffed up material on the top. I do really like the tiller though ( had it 20 years). I'm sure that no tilling is better for the soil in many cases, but I haven't figured out how to have cover crops, and add organic material without tilling.

The first documented studies on no till farming were done at the University of Kentucky starting in the 1950's, finally being completed in the mid 60's. They found that ANY form of tillage resulted in soils finally being MORE compacted than they were before the tillage. Some had immediate effects. Moldboard plowing and discing being the worst immediate offenders. Since the 2 were almost always used in conjunction with each other, the tried and true method of farming was on its way to obselescence.

Chisel plows followed by field cultivators offered BETTER results, but they had to be pulled by heavy high horsepower tractors. That undid what advantages the improved techniques had to offer.

The final development in tillage was the mulch tiller or disc chisel. They were essentially a single pass tillage system that combined several implements. They required big hp input relative to width. With the advent of high horsepower tractors in the 70's and beyond, these implements found great popularity in big scale farming.

Tillers are generally limited in operating depth. They also suffer hp-to-width limitations (resulting in high cost per acre/slow seedbed prep per hour) prevented the tiller from catching on for large scale cropping.

No till works BEST when used in areas where there is a good freeze/thaw cycle. Ground "heaves" naturally in freezing weather. Combine that with other naturally occuring phenomenon, and soils "un-compact" themselves in time. By limiting the number of times a tractor needs to be used on a given parcel of land during no till farming, that source of compaction is REDUCED. (spray and plant, as opposed to plow, disc 2 or 3 times, plant, spray) The worst compaction offender still in the plan is when harvest time comes along. Giant heavy combines and big tractors pulling heavy grain carts cause issues. Recent use of GPS farming has enabled yields to be accurately monitored in areas where the grain carts run along field edges and headlands to show where yields are reduced dramatically in these compacted tracks.

No tilling has had a difficult time catching on in northern climates. Cold soil responds well to being turned to warm and dry it in spring time planting conditions. No tilling takes a few years to allow soil structures to modify on their own. Some farmers want that immediate gratification. They give up on no till in a season or two when yields don't immediately top what they had with old techniques. When I was still farming, it took 4 years before my no till yields matched those when I practiced conventional tillage. After those 4 seasons, yields began to climb. In a total of 7 years, my yields were averaging nearly 40% better than the last few years of conventional tillage.

In recent years a new method has began to emerge. Strip tillage. Row crops are grown in a narrow strip of tilled soil that is worked to extreme depths. Areas in between the crop rows are left untilled.

Bottom line is, there is NO prefect way. Do ANYTHING with soil/land, and you disturb nature. The goal is to MINIMIZE that disturbance in the best way possible with the conditions at hand. Pick your poison. Then dedicate your efforts to making THAT work to the best of its potential.

 

[GCLnIndiana]

And all the people said...."Amen."

 

[Charlesaf3]

on the 3pt vs walk behind tiller question, I have both. Even for flowerbeds I use the 3pt - the walk behind gets very little use. In many situations I'd take a 3 pt tiller over a walk behind every day. Much better traction, much easier to have the tractor fight the tiller rather than me.

 

[White Shark]

When subsoiling, you want to pull the implement in Fall when the soil is the driest. You don't want to pull it through wet soil, you want to shatter the soil and displace it as much as possible, thereby breaking the plow pan. You should subsoil at 2-3 mph and you'll experience about 80% efficiency on your machine when correctly sized as indicated later in this post. Increase or decrease your speed and efficiency will suffer.

Now that you have the basics, you'll want to get your hands on a subsoiler/ripper. These are implements that take a lot of horsepower to pull effectively. You are essentially dragging an anchor through a resistant medium.

Here's how to calculate the amount of HP you need to pull a subsoiler/ripper:

What is your drawbar horsepower?

This formula is subsoiler/ripper specific.


DBHP = (NS)(UDS)(DO)(S)÷375

Where:
DBHP = Drawbar Horsepower (same as if you were to mount on a 3 point hitch)
NS = Number of subsoiler shanks
UDS = Unit draft per shank per foot of operating depth (lbs per foot of depth)(refer to UDS chart below)
DO = Depth of operation of the subsoiler
S = Speed


UDS Chart (Units of draft per foot / resistance per foot of shank in ground)

Light Soil - 840 lbs. per shank per foot of depth
Medium Soil - 1200 lbs. per shank per foot of depth
Heavy Soil - 1920 lbs. per shank per foot of depth


Let's say that you are pulling a single 2 foot shank in light soil at 2.5 mph.

That would be:
DBHP = (NS)(UDS)(DO)(S)÷375
or
DBHP = (1)(840)(2)(2.5)÷375
or
DBHP = 11.2

How about a heavy soil?
DBHP = (1)(1920)(2)(2.5)÷375
or
DBHP = 25.6


The formula is pretty accurate. It's hard to see that with a single ripper on a really low horsepower machine (<35 hp), but when you use a 3 shank subsoiler on the back of a CAT Challenger 45, you can see that the numbers are really solid. This formula will allow you to size your machine correctly while maintaining optimal performance in large scale field operations. That will save money on the small jobs too. It's important to not come in underpowered, or to use a machine that has too much power...unless you don't mind burning a lot of expensive diesel... Calculating the numbers out to begin with, will help you before you ever get in the seat.




..