The Car-ification of tractors

[daTeacha]

When my FIL (who really has raised a family of 4 farming and really did get up and running with an 8N and a WD-45) quit workin' the dirt, he was running Fords - a 4000, a 5000, and a 9700. I got his WD back up and running for father's day a few years ago after it had sat in my soon-to-be wifes barn without moving for about 10 years. He was very happy to see it working again, drove it around for 1/2 hour or so, and kind of relished in the fact that the old warhorse was still capable of doing an honest day's work.

All that aside, he has sold the 5000 and the 9700, keeping the 4000 with bush hog attached to maintain the aisles in his tree farm. He is not real enthusiastic about owning/operating any other tractor. He mows with a Dixon ZTR and hires someone to clear his driveway of snow. He has an artificial knee, a beat up right arm and shoulder, and probably more aches than anyone other than he knows about. I bush hogged 8 acres of rolling pasture with the WD and a 6' hog, and would not like to do it on a regular basis. It was fun for about the first 2 hours, but on the slightly hilly land, the narrow front, poor ergonomics, noise level, and so on make a modern tractor, even my old B7100 seem a marvel by comparison. My legs, hips, and back were singing a symphony to me for a day or two afterwards, and I was in my mid-fifties at the time.

The old iron is nice, nostalgic, and able to do some serious work, but most people today are in too big a hurry to have the time to depend totally on an old machine when work needs to be done in a small time window.

The modern tractors will continue to change and evolve, decreasing down time and increasing reliability in exchange for higher costs and greater inconvenience when they do break. It boils down to more frequent small repairs you can do yourself coupled with missing some perfect weather for working with the tractor because you're working on it versus the rarer, larger, more expensive repairs or maintainence work that takes the tractor out of service for several days or weeks at a time on a modern tractor with a full complement of electronic wonders.

Unless a modern farmer (not hobby farmer, a professional grade farmer) has spare tractors or can get a loaner from a dealer, reliability is paramount. I think the guys using a CUT for their sole tractor are trending in that direction, too. My seat time, like most of you here, is not as much as I'd like it to be, but that's because of my schedule and lifestyle demands, not the reliability of the tractor. Personally, I think I prefer a machine that I think I can fix if it breaks without having to own a multi-thousand dollar diagnostic machine. I'm willing to put up with something needing attention now and then, but also like a pretty high level of reliability. Having personally been my dad's TV remote when I was a kid (Rick, change it to channel 5), and BTDT as computers grew their way into my profession of education, I still don't have a lot faith in electronics. I hate the fact that I can't open them up, see the relationship between the working parts, and make a new piece if I need to. Despite the fact that they make my job much easier and my life more interesting, the things have a nasty habit of not working at crucial times, such as when grades are due at school and we have only an electronic grade book to work with. There is no going back, but that doesn't mean I want to involve electronics in all phases of my life. In my tractorin', I think I'll opt out as long as I can.

 

[andrewj]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( <font color="blue"> At the same time, autos have slowly declined in quality. </font>

How do you figure ??? Cars and trucks are better made than they were 30 years ago. They do not rust out like they use too,you can get a lot more mileage out of the engine. IE: Growing up a 283 engine you would probably have to put new rings in the engine at about 75,000 to a 100,000 miles etc....I have seen S 10 pick ups with 200,000 miles on the engine and no major repairs on the engine,you get better gas mileage for the most part. Quality has declined ?? I don't think so. )</font>

I'd say not better made as far as durability, but perhaps made to be safer, which is by definition better in my opinion. With respect to rust, you don't see rusty cars because we are a trade it in society. How many 1996 cars are on the road? Not a lot, and a corelarry to that is the news report yesterday that we are the generation with the least amount of savings since the Great Depression in the 30s. ( I specify this one since there have arguably been several depressions since then but they did not have such an impact.)

As to the engine, I agree engines may produe more mileage. I am not sure I want to compare car engines to tractor engines, since they have different lifespans and usages.

now this is important: I say quality in cars has declined: you say it hasn't. Replacing a metal screw with a plastic screw (yes, I'm serious) in my wife's Suburban is a decline in quality. Now you may argue that it is the best **** plastic screw, and it is of world class plastic screw quality....but I think it is a decline to go from metal to plastic.

 

[Jstpssng]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( With respect to rust, you don't see rusty cars because we are a trade it in society. How many 1996 cars are on the road? )</font> On the same note, how many 10YO cars did you see on the road 20 or 30 years ago? I can't say for sure, but I suspect the percentage was a lot fewer.

In 1980 100K miles was a big deal; if you can't reach that without major repairs in a modern car you're doing something wrong. In 1976 my father purchased a 1973 Ford Torino for my sister...everyone commented on what good shape the body was in. Today a 2003 is nearly new... if it showed any rust the s*** would hit the fan.
Getting back to tractors, I'm really not up on the new stuff; but I agree that simple is better. Then agan if my 1984 'Bota dies I'll be tractorless for a long, long time; /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif so I prefer that it's easy to work on.

 

[andrewj]

</font><font color="blueclass=small">( But the current cars have more modern plastics and electronics, that must mean that they have declined in quality and cannot possibly last long.... /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif )</font>

skypup, again, your oversimplifying my point here. The greater argument I am making is manufacturer behavior is to create new ways to encourage replacement of the tractor, rather than repair of a major system or componant on the tractor.

Making things out of plastic (think the hood on certain green and blue tractors) allows them to save money and not pass on the savings to us. It also allows them to stop making the part to facilitate obselescence, encourage new purchases.

Example, my tractor has a side screen panel for incoming air for the engine. I dented it. No problem, I'll just buy a new one. My research at the dealer revealed that for the past several years the manufacturer has been charging 35 bucks for the screen, and selling A LOT of them. The manufacturer then made a decison to prevent you from buying just the screen - now you have to buy the WHOLE PANEL ASSEMBLY! What went from 35 bucks is now around 200 bucks.

Was the question "how can we make more money on these screens?" maybe. But more likely the decision was part of a series of price changes designed to make tractor replacement cheaper than repair of a major componant or group of components.

Also, do you think the manufacturer saves money by stamping out a plastic hood? Of course. Much cheaper than the metal hood. Do they pass the savings on to you? No. They charge more (inflation and all...) It is the same systemic rationale for the oil companies complaining about shortages, raising gas prices until it hurts, then announcing the highest profits of any US company in US history. I like Capitalism. I really do, but I don't want to see people duped, and I sure don't want to be duped myself.

 

[HGM]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">( <font color="blue"> At the same time, autos have slowly declined in quality. </font>

How do you figure ??? Cars and trucks are better made than they were 30 years ago. They do not rust out like they use too,you can get a lot more mileage out of the engine. IE: Growing up a 283 engine you would probably have to put new rings in the engine at about 75,000 to a 100,000 miles etc....I have seen S 10 pick ups with 200,000 miles on the engine and no major repairs on the engine,you get better gas mileage for the most part. Quality has declined ?? I don't think so. )</font>

I'd say not better made as far as durability, but perhaps made to be safer, which is by definition better in my opinion. With respect to rust, you don't see rusty cars because we are a trade it in society. How many 1996 cars are on the road? Not a lot, and a corelarry to that is the news report yesterday that we are the generation with the least amount of savings since the Great Depression in the 30s. ( I specify this one since there have arguably been several depressions since then but they did not have such an impact.)

As to the engine, I agree engines may produe more mileage. I am not sure I want to compare car engines to tractor engines, since they have different lifespans and usages.

now this is important: I say quality in cars has declined: you say it hasn't. Replacing a metal screw with a plastic screw (yes, I'm serious) in my wife's Suburban is a decline in quality. Now you may argue that it is the best **** plastic screw, and it is of world class plastic screw quality....but I think it is a decline to go from metal to plastic. )</font>

Come on man....... What year is your Suburban? Since, I would venture to say '96, there are very few vehicles that wouldnt make at least 100k mi without major work, heck even a tune up... Now think about any, yes I said ANY vehicle in your sweetspot for age/all metal/no electronics and tell me straight faced that you can say the same thing about quality..... I have said this before and admit, for nastalgic reasons we would like to have some old vehicles. But to rely on a 1960 anything to drive across country,even in brand new condition with original equipment, is something I dont care to do... Maybe on a bet with all the tools I need with me.. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Todays vehicles are not only more reliable due to plastics and electronics, they are also more comfortable to drive. HAve you ever driven a 1965 Mustang? Its like steering a boat(no responce) It handled like a sack of potatoes, and wouldnt stop any faster than the Queen Mary...I didnt even mention the drivability quirks of the distributer and carb...

BTW, I have a '94,'95 and a 2000 with over 160k on each.. I would drive any of them to California and back without a doubt in my mind about making it. I would recomend that you drive a couple of new vehicles before making blanket statements like that. Maybe your particular Suburban has flaws that make it apear to have a lesser quality...??...

 

[Bird]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Todays vehicles are not only more reliable due to plastics and electronics, they are also more comfortable to drive )</font>

They sure are. I grew up and learned to drive in the days of no power steering, no automatic transmissions, no power seats, windows, mirrors, steering, or brakes, no air-conditioning, and if you had an AM radio and heater, you had a "fully loaded" car. People used to change oil every 1,000 miles (and grease a dozen or so grease fittings), new spark plugs 12,000 miles, brake shoes about every 30,000 miles, and if you got 30,000 miles on a tire, you were exceptional. Even the police sedans when I started had none of those power accessories and had drum and shoe brakes on all 4 wheels. How many remember those days, when it was wet weather and you'd better be sure you had a good hold on the steering wheel when the brakes got wet, because when you hit the brake, the car was going to pull one direction or the other; you just didn't know which direction it would pull until it happened. And cars came with no side view mirrors at all; some people added aftermarket mirrors. I drove school busses that only had one outside mirror (on the left side) /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif. And I don't remember any cars with 100k plus miles that were worth more than $100 at most, and usually a lot less. My first car was 10 years old when I got it, I think it was 96k miles, nothing really wrong with it, and it cost $75.

With more modern vehicles, I replaced the front brake pads on our '93 Escort at just over 80k miles, discovered it really didn't need them yet, but since I had a wheel off, I went ahead and put new ones on. And because the manual recommended an earlier change, I had the timing belt replaced 80k miles and had the mechanic go ahead and replace plugs and wires at the same time. It still drove like new when my wife rolled and totalled it with 121k on the odometer. One of my brothers is driving a '96 Chevy S-10 and just had the manual transmission replaced (he had replaced the clutch a little earlier) with 175k miles on it. He has no intention of getting rid of it in the near future.

I'll take the modern vehicles anytime; whether car, pickup, or tractor. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[cowboydoc]

I think Bird and Gary are 100% right. Vehicles and tractors are made to go alot more hours with less maintenance, less repairs, a terrific amount more power, more fuel efficient, 1000 times more comfortable and ergonomically correct, and 10,000 times safer than older equipment.

To think there is a conspiracy to get people to throw away tractors is ridiculous. My opinion the 4020 was one of the most reliable and best tractors ever made. Yet between 5 and 10k hours you needed major repairs. Usually top end, bottom end, or complete overhaul. The predecessor of the hydro, reversers, etc. was the powershift. Nice transmission but needed work after a few thousand hours. Maintenance around every 50-100 hours, etc. The newer tractors will go this long or longer with less repairs and far less mainenance.
Go take a look around the tractor junkyards. There are literally thousands of tractors there with only a couple thousand hours that are 30-40 years old. Why? Because it was cheaper even back then alot of times to just replace a tractor rather than fix it.

As far as the parts situation it just comes down to economics. You put ten different parts into one and you just have to carry one part. Yes it's more expensive for the customer but it saves the dealer and mfg. money. Sucks for the customer but we do want our cheap prices and availability.

 

[andrewj]

</font><font color="blueclass=small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">( Todays vehicles are not only more reliable due to plastics and electronics, they are also more comfortable to drive )</font>

They sure are. I grew up and learned to drive in the days of no power steering, no automatic transmissions, no power seats, windows, mirrors, steering, or brakes, no air-conditioning, and if you had an AM radio and heater, you had a "fully loaded" car. People used to change oil every 1,000 miles (and grease a dozen or so grease fittings), new spark plugs 12,000 miles, brake shoes about every 30,000 miles, and if you got 30,000 miles on a tire, you were exceptional. Even the police sedans when I started had none of those power accessories and had drum and shoe brakes on all 4 wheels. How many remember those days, when it was wet weather and you'd better be sure you had a good hold on the steering wheel when the brakes got wet, because when you hit the brake, the car was going to pull one direction or the other; you just didn't know which direction it would pull until it happened. And cars came with no side view mirrors at all; some people added aftermarket mirrors. I drove school busses that only had one outside mirror (on the left side) /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif. And I don't remember any cars with 100k plus miles that were worth more than $100 at most, and usually a lot less. My first car was 10 years old when I got it, I think it was 96k miles, nothing really wrong with it, and it cost $75.

With more modern vehicles, I replaced the front brake pads on our '93 Escort at just over 80k miles, discovered it really didn't need them yet, but since I had a wheel off, I went ahead and put new ones on. And because the manual recommended an earlier change, I had the timing belt replaced 80k miles and had the mechanic go ahead and replace plugs and wires at the same time. It still drove like new when my wife rolled and totalled it with 121k on the odometer. One of my brothers is driving a '96 Chevy S-10 and just had the manual transmission replaced (he had replaced the clutch a little earlier) with 175k miles on it. He has no intention of getting rid of it in the near future.

I'll take the modern vehicles anytime; whether car, pickup, or tractor. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif )</font>

I think we have wandered far afield of my original intent! We all like modern cars! But we are not talking about a new 06 jeep with a PTO and hydraulic lift! We are talking about a tractor. <font color="black"> </font>

 

[HGM]

[quoteI think we have wandered far afield of my original intent! We all like modern cars! But we are not talking about a new 06 jeep with a PTO and hydraulic lift! We are talking about a tractor. <font color="black"> </font> )</font>


No doubt.... But you specificly opened that can by making the satatement that the quality of cars had declined over the years.....

 

[tposts]

<font color="blue"> With respect to rust, you don't see rusty cars because we are a trade it in society. How many 1996 cars are on the road? Not a lot, </font> /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Get real.....there are lots of 1996 and older out there and they run good and look good. Back in the 70's I remember 3 year old pickups rusting out.