Farmall M/SM or W-6 Super W-6 Why one over the other????

mike1972chev · Mar 6, 2012

Hey guys,

NOT trying to "pick a fight" here!! lol But back in the day you could buy either a W-6 or M and then a Super W-6 or Super M. I know from my geographic location and my family's background The Farmall M is ALL I ever saw as a kid/young adult around here!!!! I believe the M is way more versatile than the W series.After all,the M is a Farm ALL!! it could do everything in my mind.

That being said,why would one ever have bought a W series tractor for???? I have nothing against them,but they are limited in what they will do.

Are their cases where the W is a BETTER tractor??? (As usuall,looking for "gritty" details. LOL

CNKS · Mar 6, 2012

In areas where all there is wheat and other small grains all that was needed was a tractor that would pull an implement. No need for cultivation. IH and other manufacturers tried to please all the farmers, thus different types of tractors. They did not need a tractor that would do everything. Some did, that is why the Farmall was developed. The W series is a modern version of the first tractors that were manufactured, all they did was pull implements, or belt work. Old habits die hard. The wheatland tractors did not completely disappear until the 80's, they were fazed out slowly.

Janicholson · Mar 6, 2012

W series were primarily setup for open fields in Wheat country. Tillage and heavy belt work on 500 acres didn't require spin on one tire turns, or high operator point of view. They were also traditional in that they had a rear (behind the axle) seating that mimicked the position on all early tractors and steam engines. The purchase was made based on those prejudices and intentions. Rumely and Hart Parr et.al. Were setup like them. No one ever used a trailer plow or disk harrow and the wheel brakes to turn on one wheel mark(successfully)!
They also fit into machine sheds far easier than the tall H and M tractors.
Though tall row crop tractors were stable, it takes no great stretch to believe they are tippy compared to the W series.
Jim

Janicholson · Mar 6, 2012

Identical thoughts, I was wordy.
Jim

mike1972chev · Mar 6, 2012

I could see in low orchards where the W or (O series) would be MORE beneficial than the M. Basically the orchard tractors were just W series with a little more "window dresing",correct?

rustyfarmall · Mar 6, 2012

(quoted from post at 07:16:24 03/06/12) I could see in low orchards where the W or (O series) would be MORE beneficial than the M. Basically the orchard tractors were just W series with a little more "window dresing",correct?

Correct.

glennster · Mar 6, 2012

gritty detail!!! fall plowing was a lot warmer on a w series than row crop. you sat low behind the axle with more of a windbreak than tall in the saddle on an m. seemed safer too if there was lightning when doing the old.....one more round before the thunderstorm hits. least it felt safer anyway.

mkirsch · Mar 6, 2012

Not to mention the dust...

mike1972chev · Mar 6, 2012

LOVE this reply Glennster !!!!

I guess this is the reason they had to make "heat housers" for Ms ?????? lol

LarryM · Mar 6, 2012

Nice discussion and you all make some fine points. Did it occur to anyone to compare tire foot print? I an uncertain of original tires sizes by year however what if you compare a Farmall M with a 13.6 x 38" tires to a McCormick W6 with a 16.9 x 30" tires? According to the charts I am looking at the 13.6 x 38" tire has 77% of the footprint of a 16.9 x 30" tire. So I can see at lease two reasons a W6 would be prefered. 1.More Traction 2.A sore back.

Farmall M/SM or W-6 Super W-6 Why one over the other????

mike1972chev

Well-known Member

CNKS

Well-known Member

Janicholson

Well-known Member

Janicholson

Well-known Member

mike1972chev

Well-known Member

rustyfarmall

Well-known Member

glennster

Well-known Member

mkirsch

Well-known Member

mike1972chev

Well-known Member

LarryM

Member

Similar threads