Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo Auction Link (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Farmall & IHC Tractors Discussion Forum
:

A Few Questions

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Mark

02-25-2006 09:12:46




Report to Moderator

First, I want to ask what is the best reference book on the market for Farmalls...something that covers most of the models, gives a general run down on each of them..something like a coffee table book. I can't go out and build an entire unlimited library on Farmalls...don't even want to..but something that makes for good reading and supplies information as well as glossy pictures.

Next, I would like to kow what the intended purpose was for the Farmall B. I think it is about the ugliest small tractor I ever looked at! I look at it and think...why was it ever made? It just seems that the C/Super C is a more logical choice beyond the A models.

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
Cedric

02-26-2006 01:36:43




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
The Avery was far uglier than the B.
To me, the letter series tractors were the best looking tractors ever produced, there was something about the design of the grill that set them apart. But, as someone has already said, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Sid.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
banjo

02-26-2006 00:21:05




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
Mark, I have the farmall letter seris tractors by Guy Fay and Andy Kraushaar. It has lots of nice glossy pics and some interesting reasing about the tractors.

Now to add my comments on super a and belly mower. Mine is a 59 in and rear discharge so i can see the right side and usually overlap the cut area a little.
Don't know anything about the B.

I live in hilly country so the narrow front are not particulary safe( for my taste). So i stick to the wide fronts. Yep some are prettier than others, but they are all history.And i am glad folks are aout there trying to save them or rescue them whichever the case may be.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Glenn FitzGerald

02-25-2006 18:12:30




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
I grew up with flambeau rd CASE tractors and for many years thought anything else was junk or ugly. While they are still my favorite the closer I get to 50 years old I can truly say I think ALL the old iron is cool, and only wish we could rewind the tape 40 years or so. Glenn F.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CNKS

02-25-2006 17:11:29




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
Regardless of the comments, IH sold sold over 75000 B's in the roughly 9 year period they were produced, ranging from only 5 in 1943 (because of the war) to over 20000 the last full year of production. That doesn't sound like much of a mistake to me. The C sold only about 15000 it's first year, 1948 (there were 1921 B's produced in 1948, also). Yearly production of the C after that did exceed that of the B, but the tractor boom was in full swing by then. Each of the three tractors, A,B,C had it's purpose, nothing wrong with a company trying to improve on a product. Hindsight is 20-20. There is no reason for criticism of the tractors or others responding in this post. Everyone has their opinion, which in a couple of instances could be presented a little more politely. No one owning a B or C is going to die -- unless they paint it with hardened paint using a charcoal mask.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Farmallgray

02-25-2006 16:47:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
I guess ugly is a matter of opinion. To my eye, a B isn't that much different than a C other than the rear tire size. I'm just curious what makes it ugly to you? Apparently Mr Bender took what you said as an attack against a tractor that he likes.

I own a BN and use it with a 6' woods belly mower and I wouldn't trade it for anything else. I always felt the A and B had a better balance of power vs. traction, while the Cs I have run seemed a little under powered for its traction.

My only complaint with the BN/woods combination is that it's hard to see the line between the mowed and unmowed grass. Either the seat should be on the left, or the mower should be offset to the left and discharge to the right so you can use the 'cultivision'.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CNKS

02-25-2006 19:31:36




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Farmallgray, 02-25-2006 16:47:34  
I usually pretend I have a plow and line the right side up with the cut grass. This is on a Super A, my Woods discharges to both sides, I realize your wheels are set wider than mine. The only Woods belly mount I have seen is the one on my tractor -- I'm surprised that yours discharges only to the left, I wonder if you have the mower designed for your tractor, or if maybe someone used another and got the correct brackets? Mine is centered even with the wheels.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Farmallgray

02-26-2006 07:25:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to CNKS, 02-25-2006 19:31:36  
My mower is an L306. the "L" means LH discharge.
It does discharge out both sides but since the blades rotate counterclockwise, most of it goes to the left. On most lawn mowers the blades rotate clockwise and they discharge to the right.
This mower runs off the pto so the blades have to rotate counterclockwise. The L306 is made to fit many different brands/models of tractors. Mine was originally on a farmall H. My dad works for a woods dealer and I have the manual for it and it is set up the way it is supposed to be. The mower is not as wide as the rear wheels, so they offset it to the right. with LH discharge, you mow in a circle clockwise. that way the left rear tire that sticks out beyond the mower is running on what is already mowed rather than flattening what hasn't been mowed. The idler pulley brackets are angled so it has to be offset to the right. It is just an unfortunate combination. Since you sit on the right, and the cut line is on the left, the radiator/hood/muffler block your view of the cut line. I could mow counter clockwise, but then I would be running over unmowed grass with the left tire and blowing most of the clippings on to what hasn't been mowed. But yes, it is the right mower/brackets/tractor combination that woods designed. It worked fine on the H since you sit in the middle. But the H is a low SN '39 and I want to restore it. The BN is easier steering, more manuverable and easier to reach the shifter.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
gene bender

02-25-2006 13:28:39




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
You have just exposed your lack of knowlege about farming when they were new. What tractor could you unhook a wagon without getting off the seat. Fuel economy was super. There was never a better cultivating tractor in its day. Quick turning made it a jewel for mowing hay. Then raking when hay was ready. Hauling water,harrowing ,grinding feed,pulling picked corn from picker running elevators for unloading grain,middlebusting,pulling four-row corn planter just a small bunch of things that were just right for the B. Have you ever seen an easier tractor to get on and off. The B on the hood stood for the best little tractor ever built qouted to me from a fellow from KANSAS. Maybe you would have liked the FORD with your foot burning from the muffler under your left foot and setting down in the dust and trying not to plow out the corn with the cult behind you. Dont knock one till you have used one. Still the most popular model for a WOODS BELLEY MOWER according to WOODS salesman.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Guy Fay

02-25-2006 15:24:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to gene bender, 02-25-2006 13:28:39  
Actually, IH considered the Farmall B to be a mistake almost as soon as they left the door, if not a little earlier. The problem with the B was more in economics and flexibility. The B was a two row tractor for small farms. The fixed wheel width (adjustable with the dished wheels) meant that farms with wide and narrow rows, or narrow rows, were out of luck, or had to get another tractor- the BN. The F-12 of course had the wide axles that the wheels slid in and out on, the B while giving greater crop clearence with smaller tires was a step back. The main reason for the B layout was using the Farmall A parts as much as possible, and to keep prices low with small pneumatic tires.

IH also ended up with three different implement systems based on the width of the mounting on the drop housings- A, B, and BN, which was totally crazy. H and M implements were interchangeable, even though different sized tractors, but A, B and BN implements were only close cousins, which is poor manufacturing strategy.

IH started engineering the C in late 1939/1940, and had prototypes operational at least by 1942. Production was of course delayed by WWII.

The C was of course not easy to get on or off (except mine which has a nifty step added by my grandfather). As far as quality of cultivating and manouverability, it was a great tractor. Ergonomics left something to be desired, you ended up with a neckache if cultivating all day- the Allis B/C was superior in that regard, but that's the only superiority I would give the Allis, and I've used both the Allis and Farmall C extensively for cultivating back in the farming days. I've only driven a B a few minutes, getting on and off is easier than the other small Farmalls, but haven't cultivated with an A or B- I've pulled wagons quite a bit with Super As in tobacco, not a bad tractor for the purpose.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
IHC Red

02-25-2006 21:10:30




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Guy Fay, 02-25-2006 15:24:34  

Guy,

Have you seen any pictures of the "Prototype C" ?

It would be interesting to know the evolution of the features eventually incorporated into the production C.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Guy Fay

02-26-2006 08:30:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to IHC Red, 02-25-2006 21:10:30  
The only photographs I have seen are the 1945 preproduction tractors looking very similar to production tractors.

The early experimentals were known as Farmall Es, and although I don't know of photos, it is known from some other records that they had live PTOs.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
IHC Red

02-26-2006 16:59:06




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Guy Fay, 02-26-2006 08:30:11  

Interesting.

Live PTO... wouldn't that have made them a dream. I'm sure cost came into the equation once again.

Thanks for the reply.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mark

02-25-2006 15:17:02




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to gene bender, 02-25-2006 13:28:39  
Bender,

Your sure got your drawers wrapped around the PTO didn't you! If it was so great, why aren't they still making it? Anything with all those attributes and superiorities could never lose it's popularity...your description is of the Holy Grail, not an obsolete tractor nobody misses...but you. I started a discussion here and didn't ask to be denigrated with your implications that I am stupid, unlearned and terribly uniformed. Your efforts to expound your wisdom is laced with the grace of a near sighted boor.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
sammy the RED

02-25-2006 11:11:19




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
The best book is C.H. Wendel's "150 Years Of International Harvester". It covers most everything that IH ever made.

And I agree, the "B" is butt ugly.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CNKS

02-25-2006 12:34:44




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to sammy the RED, 02-25-2006 11:11:19  
Depends on what you are used to looking at. Although I have a Super A, and not a B, to me the B is a better looking tractor -- because that is what I remember on the farm where I grew up. I have never actually liked the appearance of the A, although I don't call it ugly, I do accept it. In modern yuppie times the Super A is more useful than either because of the hydraulics.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Erik in WI

02-25-2006 10:20:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
The book I have is by Guy Fay and Andy Kraushaar. It is titled Farmall Letter Series Tractors, from the Originality Guide series. It covers restoration, paint, decals and charts for decal placement, tin work, interior and exterior upgrades, serial numbers and build dates, factory archives and at least 2 color photos on each page. 160 pages total and a hard cover. covers A,A-1,B,C,Cub,H and 4 series,M and 6 series,9 series and all the supers and T/As. A very nice book. Hope this helps!
Erik in WI

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CNKS

02-25-2006 10:00:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
I don't consider it ugly, my dad had two of them for cultivating vegetables when I was a kid. I only got to drive them for one summer when I was 12, then the bank repocessed them and he had to start over (in spite of all the talk about farmers going broke, it is nothing new). The B was classed as a two row cultivating tractor, the A/Super A was a one row. It was good for it's intended purpose. The C replaced it, because of the WWII it was replaced a little later than intended. Some people say it should have not been manufactured, perhaps the C and A should have been manufactured, not the B. This is my speculation, but IH at that time was leaning toward smaller tractors, perhaps they thought a C like tractor appeared too big, although the engine is the same. The tractor market at that time was a little confusing. As to my dad's B's, for what he used them for, an A would have probably done the same thing. He bought the first B sold in my home county, probably because the dealer had a B and not an A. The B will turn shorter than the A, an advantage in our small fields. He liked it and bought a second one 4-5 years later. He never owned a C but did have two H's. In those days there was no mounted implement shared between tractors. If you had an A and B, you needed implements for both -- the C did not change that. In more modern times -- I own a 460 Hi Utility, I don't understand why it was made -- likely higher clearance for tobacco, etc. But there is a 460 row crop, with the same or more clearance, particularly with a NF. If you didn't want to cuiltivate, etc, there was the low profile 460 utility. Only advantage I can imagine is that the wfe on the 460 Hi Utility allows it to be shorter and have a shorter turning radius than the row crop WFE, but not the NF. There were simply too many models, likley one of many reasons IH is no longer with us.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mark

02-25-2006 10:12:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to CNKS, 02-25-2006 10:00:11  
CNKS,

When I was a teenager, I knew a man who had a B and it was rough back then..30+ years ago. he had an old Ford of some description (like some people, they all look the same to me) and I think he may have pulled a wagon with the B but don't think he had an equipment for it at all. I wouldn't be surprised if he still has both. There tons of C's and Super C's in this area and many H's and I think every farm had a Cub or A/SA to cultivate tobacco with. The B was a rare bird to see. By far the old Ford's were most common..in fact I think they were hatched out on these small farms around here. I have ran a few old 8N's and 600's..thank god most have been converted into hubcaps by now..hehehe!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CNKS

02-25-2006 12:28:03




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 10:12:54  
A direct comparison of the B and A, not Super A, indicates that there were about 75000 B's produced vs 117000 A's or about 1.6 times more A's. That's still a lot of B's. I don't think I ever saw an A in the area I grew up in (South Texas), but I'm sure they were there. I have a word for the 8N (I drove one for several summers) Compared to about any Farmall it (can't finish the sentence on this forum).

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
El Toro

02-25-2006 09:52:46




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
The B was used for culivating, but it could be used for raking hay or straw. They were a very handy tractor you could mount a sickle bar mower
since they had a pto. Our neighbor used his for grinding feed. The first B came out in 1939 and the Super C came out in 1951. I have picture of my mother-in-law driving a B pulling a manure spreader. The best part you didn't need to hook up a team of horses and listen to them fart all day. Hal

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
R-cubed

02-25-2006 09:29:32




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:12:46  
Not as ugly as an Edsel.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
El Toro

02-25-2006 09:54:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to R-cubed, 02-25-2006 09:29:32  
I would like to have one of those Edsel's. Hal



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mark

02-25-2006 09:32:35




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to R-cubed, 02-25-2006 09:29:32  
Darn close!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
steveormary

02-25-2006 09:46:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to Mark , 02-25-2006 09:32:35  
Edsels werent ugly.

steveormary



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Broomstacker

02-25-2006 13:48:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: A Few Questions in reply to steveormary, 02-25-2006 09:46:34  
For tractors, as with all other items, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My wife is a firm believer in form over function. For me, the beauty is in the usefulness!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy