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

Tractor Pulling Discussion Forum

Here's an idea...

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
G/MAN

08-22-2005 13:54:53




Report to Moderator

Since we're spitballing about all these challenges for engine-builders, pullers, etc. Let's level the playing field. Throw out the high-dollar, high-performance b.s. Any engine builder worth his wrenches knows that building for a peak horsepower number is hogwash, pure and simple. The big boys all build for good AVERAGE numbers, namely torque and horsepower across a curve covering an RPM range, not peak horsepower. It's maximum area UNDER THE CURVES that they look for. Any big-time horsepower challenge you want to name or look into bases the scores on a total of AVERAGES under the curve. One engine may make more peak horsepower, but if its average horsepower is lower, it isn't going to win over an engine with a slightly lower peak but a nice flat curve. 500 horsepower at X rpm don't do squat if the engine doesn't have enough low-end grunt to get to that speed. And a good tractor engine has to perform well from a low starting speed, up to it's maximum speed, and then continue to develop good torque as it's pulled down. So how about you boys build some stock tractors? As stock as stock can be within the lmites of parts availability - i.e. maybe the "factory" spark plugs are no longer available. Stock part number heads, stock specs throughout, no porting, no polishing, nothing but a good tuneup. Stock tire sizes, stock wheel equipment, stock tranny gears, no cut or "roadworn" tires, etc. Tires must be similar in tread-style to original equipment, once again within the limits of parts availability. Pick one builder to build one of each brand, staying to similar horsepower levels, tractor age and fuel-type. Then you bring your stocker to a neutral location. All tractors are pulled 3 times on the dyno, running on gas out of the same pump. 87-octane ought to work just fine to keep out anyone trying to cheat with a higher than stock compression ratio. 10% allowance on Nebraska Test maximum PTO horsepower numbers. Each driver gets a half-hour of dyno time to tweak his horsepower, showing his tuning skills. After all tractors are verified to be stock, the fun begins - on the pulling track. All tractors start stripped, and the drivers then weight to say, two classes - 5500 and 6500. Each driver gets three hooks, and the total distance is added together. Highest cumulative wins. You could even vary the track conditions. Start on bone-dry for one class, add some water and work it up good for the second, etc. You end up with someone having to be able to tune, set up their tractor, and drive it well enough to win. Anybody with a big enough checkbook could pay someone to build them an engine for an engine-only "horsepower" challenge. I'll even volunteer to host this deal. I'm about as centrally-located in the upper 48 as you can get, I have access to a brand-new 600-hp AW PTO dyno, and have a good friend with a self-propelled sledd that inspected and certified yearly for competition up to and including the big-boy Outlaw pullers. And here in Nebraska we can find about any kind of dirt you want to pull on, from sand to black dirt to gumbo clay. Any takers?

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
Goldsburg

08-24-2005 09:25:12




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-22-2005 13:54:53  
G/Man -

I totally disagree with your premise of how engine builder's design their power/torque curves. In a limited RPM arena (like antique tractor pulling), a wide power / torque curve is not ideal. How many times do you see a puller idle as far down the track as possible and THEN throttle up just before it dies...almost NEVER!!! The only time you MIGHT see that is if someone is trying to sandbag in a speed limit class.

After reading your premise of how "professionals" design and build their power curves, I stopped reading...

Regards,
Goldsburg

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 10:39:58




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Goldsburg, 08-24-2005 09:25:12  
It's plain fact. Sure the RPM range of a tractor engine is much more limited, but good performance within that RPM range is just as important as it is on any engine with a big RPM range. If good power across the RPM range isn't important, how often do you see a pulling tractor MAINTAIN it's high engine speed all the way down the track...almost NEVER!! That good mid-range torque probably helps as the engine is slowing down as well as it does when it's speeding up, wouldn't you say??? It's entirely possible to build a high-horsepower engine that doesn't have the guts to pull itself below its max-hp speed. You're entitled to your opinion, and I think about as much of it as you do of mine.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 09:40:58




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Goldsburg, 08-24-2005 09:25:12  
That's what happens when a very heavy reader of HotRod, Car Craft, and Super Chevy magazines decides that he knows all there is to know about pulling. He is the only one that claims to be a professional, but has never built a tractor engine strickly for tractor pulling.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Rusted G

08-25-2005 05:33:55




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 09:40:58  
Casepower,

Id have to agree with you on that. It has been proved many times that theories just keep rolling out, without any hard evidence to support it. I always thought a professional would be too busy actually working and using thier "knowledge" and "plain facts", rather than sitting at a computer rambling on. One minute g/man is all about building engines, and telling people how to do it, and in the next sentence he says he would'nt waste time building one. But anyways, a true professional doesnt brag and dare people, they just go do it. I know he will reply and BS somemore after this, but thats usual for him. Remember it all rolls downhill.

Rusted G

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 07:42:06




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Rusted G, 08-25-2005 05:33:55  
Hallelujah!! Hallelujah!! Can I be in the chorus, too? You guys sure waste a lot of time yourselves, complaining about someone you apparently don't have any use for...



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 10:43:31




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 09:40:58  
I wouldn't waste my time building an engine strictly for pulling. That's about as narrow-minded of a purpose as someone can have, and pretty unimportant in the overall scheme of things. I've put more engines in the field growing the food that's on your table than you'll ever put on a pulling track. And yes, I'm a professional in THAT field. What's funny is seeing all these "pulling-engine" builders that think they're doing some magic outside the realm of anything ever done before, when you're not applying any technology that hasn't been around forever - increase displacement, improve breathing, etc. Espcecially when a solid 75% of them can't define the relationship between torque and horsepower, and think they have to build for one or the other.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 12:41:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 10:43:31  
Trust me, you have never done anything to help put food on my table. You say 75% of puller engine builders can't define between torque and HP?? You smoking crack?? From your thinking nothing has changed since the internal combustion engine. Do you think they were running O2 sensors, knock sensors, or variable timing controls 20 years ago on pulling tractors? I have never seen jealously consume a man as it does you. If it is so easy to build a pulling engine and win, build one. If it runs as good as your lips, you may have something.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 13:38:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 12:41:01  
Oh, I'll bet I have. We don't do much besides grow food out here in Nebraska. Ever ate anything from Farmland? Big plant in Crete - 40 miles from here. We sold hogs there for years and years. I know you claim you've never ate any beef that wasn't off a local farm, but we know that's bull. We raise quite a bit of that here, too, and I've worked at feedlots and on ranches. So yes, I've helped put food on your table. Deal with it.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 16:07:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 13:38:18  
You haven't done no such thing! I eat Thomas beef and that is it. So if you ever ate Tyson, KFC, or Goldkist chicken, I put food on your table. OOWW what's the chances of that!!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 16:20:31




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 16:07:22  
So you either don't ever eat out or at someone else's place, and drag along your own meat if you do??? I'd love to see that. CP carrying his little Igloo cooler so he can bring his own steak. ROFLMAO. Sorry once again, but I've been involved in agriculture to one degree or another my entire life. And yes, if you were involved with producing chicken for those places, it's entirely possible that you helped put food on my table. And I'm not dumb enough to argue the fact.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Yeoman

08-24-2005 11:28:53




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 10:43:31  
G/MAN:

Thank you; good points, as per usual. Any engine that is built unlimited max X max is just a bomb with the fuse lit every time it is run. Eventually the fuse is gone.... A fine running piece of machinery that goes a million miles or ten thousand hours or more; now that is the good stuff. best, Phil



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 12:30:56




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Yeoman, 08-24-2005 11:28:53  
Thats not true. An engine that is built right can run for many years on end. Welded rods, over advanced timing, thin cyl. walls, small rod journals, extreme compression, small radiators, and people taking chances is what makes an engine a bomb. A maxxed out engine does not make a bomb.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Yeoman

08-25-2005 09:13:51




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 12:30:56  
Casepower:

Take a deep breath, there that is better. PLEASE, realize that you are essentially arguing that an N14 at eight hundred horse will do the same time, and miles, as one set at four hundred horse. PLEASE!! If you were at all correct, then why does Caterpiller rate engine lives in gallons of fuel consumed?? best, Phil



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 10:41:20




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Yeoman, 08-25-2005 09:13:51  
Don't get down on him too hard. He has next to no experience with anything to do with tractors other than pulling, and building "super" pullers. He's never put a full day in doing field work, or probably even a full hour at one time. Durability and longevity outside of 10 minutes at a time are foreign concepts.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
WILDMAN

08-30-2005 04:40:43




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 10:41:20  
IS THIS A PULLING BOARD OR A FARMING BOARB?AFTER READING YOUR POST DAY IN AND DAY OUT I HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT YOU ARE A NAROW MINDED IDOIT.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 12:22:47




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 10:41:20  
I haven't put as much time in the field plowing as you, but I have put some in. While you were doing that, I was working on tractors. I am stateing that a tractor that is built right will last. Just because you are building a big engine, it doesn't mean it is a time bomb.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 13:39:29




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 12:22:47  
Lasting on the track for an hour a week at most and lasting in the field for 10 hours a day for days on end are two entirely different things. I put a minimum of 45-50 hours per week in working on tractors, and THEN go run them in the field in my "free time". And of course I do some other tractor-related playing, too. And I've probably spent less time plowing than anything else in the field.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 13:32:03




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 12:30:56  
So bring one of your super pullers to the field and let's hook it to a plow. Say 95 degrees pulling at rated rpm for a couple of hours??? How many hours do all these super engine you're building have on them, anyway? And how come you're not arguing with Goldsburg, instead of agreeing with him? I said that area under the curves is important. You said you build your engines to optimize that and torque across the board. He says I'm full of it. You agree. How is all that possible? Seems like you two super engine builders are at odds with your theories to me.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 16:02:29




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 13:32:03  
I agree with Goldsburg. When building a tractor that runs stock rpm's, you don't run 12 to 1 compression. When pulling super, it depends a lot on what sled you pull. A light sled that allows the rpm's to stay up will handle a little higher compression. There you see, I am building for the sled, not the torque curve. You talk like we are pulling at 6000 RPM's and lugging to 500 RPM's. Goldsburg builds pulling engines, so his opinion is worth much more than yours!!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 16:11:40




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 16:02:29  
To you, perhaps. Sorry, but I've never taken it for granted that someone's occupation makes them an expert on everything involved with it. And neither have you. You've certainly questioned me and doubted on many occasions about Deere-specific issues, and Deere is MY business. So now your story is that you build a tractor for a specific sled? Must be rough being that limited. Oh sorry, I can't pull there, my tractor isn't built for that sled. I'm rolling on the floor laughing about that one... But since I have the ear of a legendary engine builder or two here, how about answering a question. What sort of camshaft lift, lobe-separation and duration would you recommend for say a 300-cube 6-cylinder tractor engine running 10:1 compression at 1500 rpm in order to achieve 90 horsepower???

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 17:11:29




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 16:11:40  
I was trying to get you to understand why there were builders that vary in beliefs, but it went way over your head. If you build for rpm's at max RPM"S and don't do anything to crazy with the compression, put the right grind on the cam and you will have all the low end torque you need. I will not give you specs for the cam. I didn't put the specs of the cam for the project M in the magazine, but ask anyone how it pulls at low RPM's. The owner likes to back it back to idle, then get back in it at the end of the pull. It brings the rpm's right back up and has never give out of power. Let me give you another piece of advice, when you go asking for cam gind info, you better have more then the little bit of info you posted.. You also have to work with what you have when it comes to stock cam specs. You can't make chicken salad from chicken CRAP. Unless you are planning to have it welded or machine a billet cam..

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 07:47:17




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 17:11:29  
Make sure you let Goldsburg know how that guy pulls. What with getting back into it at the end. He seems to think nobody pulls that way. You guys should really work toward getting a cohesive argument going. So far all you've done is agree to disagree with me while disagreeing with each other. And I think it's funny as can be...



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 09:22:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 07:47:17  
It don't matter what we think. It's the fact that you don't build pulling engines, yet think you are the best out there. What makes you think that you know what it takes, yet haven't built a puller? The local crack head thought he could fly, but smashed his head when he jumped of the R/R bridge.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 10:37:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 09:22:22  
Sorry to hear about your buddy's accident. And here we go with this "building pulling engines" crap again. Flip the record over, because this side is scratched and skipping. You're a legend in your own mind, I'll give you that. Like I said, you sure spend a lot of time defending yourself against the comments of a know-nothing like myself. Indignation is a stinky cologne, CP...



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 12:32:58




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 10:37:22  
You are the one that started this to begin with. It seems to bother you that an engine that was built in the magazine was a success. Get over it. You wanted to jump in about a contest that you wouldn't have the balls to join, if you had the intelligent's to perform. Go build a tractor and tell us how it does on the track, if you win, I will be impressed. Until then you have no experience to defend.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 13:41:47




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 12:32:58  
I already offered my entry. You were too chicken to respond, apparently. I quote "Put me down for a 3-53 Detroit, if it's horsepower per cubic inch". I'll match the 100 horses of that "M" engine with less than half the cubes, and do it for half the money, if not less. Still want to have the contest???



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 20:52:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 13:41:47  
You wouldn't have even thought of a detroit if I hadn't mentioned it.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-26-2005 07:42:03




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 20:52:42  
Uh, when exactly did you "mention it"? This was back on Monday, if I remember correctly. You didn't mention anything about a Detroit. Someone asked about a diesel, and you said OK if it's non-turboed. Sorry, but there's more non-turboed diesels out there than Detroits. So when's the contest???



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 07:44:43




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 17:11:29  
What weight classes does he pull and in what gear???



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 09:31:49




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 07:44:43  
Up to 8500 in 3rd gear on most tracks and I believe 2nd on others. He just went to Tenn. and bought more IH weights so he can get in heavier classes. He posts on YT, why don't you ask him? He won't lie! Like I said, ask anyone that has seen it pull. His name is R. Wright. I am not bragging about the tractor, but I can see you have doubts. I have seen it pull past many 2cyl. long after they powered out on hard tracks and the 2cyl's was running about half the speed. He has pulled 4 different sleds that I know of and can win on them all. I know driving and weight placement has a lot to do with winning, but between the Project M engine and the owner, it is a great combo.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 10:38:48




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 09:31:49  
8500 in third gear on most tracks? With only 100 horsepower? I'd have to see that to believe it. Why don't you get some video...



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
WILDMAN

08-30-2005 04:53:08




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 10:38:48  
I HAVE SEEN IT ,GET A LIFE.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 12:41:56




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 10:38:48  
The sentence ran together. Up to 8500. In 3rd gear on most tracks and I believe 2nd on others. He has pulled 3rd. in 7200 with no problem. It has torque. Why ask me, why not go straight to the owner. He posts as R. Wright on YT pulling board. I would also like to add that it makes me laugh my a$$ off to see you say "With only 100 horsepower?" Totally opposite of the posts you have put before. So, torque is not a factor?

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 13:37:33




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 12:41:56  
We gotta go over this again? Horsepower = (torqe x rpm)/5252. Let me rephrase that so you can grasp it. With only 363 lb.-ft. of torque???



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-25-2005 17:17:15




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 13:37:33  
Torque can be multipied and HP can't.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-26-2005 05:30:49




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-25-2005 17:17:15  
You're finally starting to get it.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Yeoman

08-23-2005 17:52:49




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-22-2005 13:54:53  
G/MAN:

This is not "an idea", it is a great idea! As a po' boy from NY it is out of my ball park, geographically and thus economically. However, you have made this a lot like DIV I, with success contingent upon builder and operator skill instead of an issue of how much money one can throw into a tractor. Good luck with it. It will be interesting to see if the world's greatest tractor puller, and "inventor" of the magic miracle monster governor spring wants to play; I did not notice his acceptance to your invitation. Thanks. best, Phil
PS: Enjoy your posts; very thoughtful and informative.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 13:44:20




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Yeoman, 08-23-2005 17:52:49  
Thank you. I'm far from an expert on anything, but have spent enough time reading, in school, and turning wrenches to know that the very same principles that get a car down the highway or a NASCAR car around the track fast come into play in these old tractor. There aren't ANY basic performance enhancements that ANY performance engine builders do on their specific engine application that couldn't be used in another arena. Engines are nothing but air pumps, and increasing the efficiency, the size and the effects of the "bang" improve power. There seem to be some guys that are of the opinion that if everyone doesn't run out and bore, stroke, port, polish and whatever else their tractor engines so they can pull 4 mph instead of 2.5 mph, the hobby will die. I tend to disagree. For every big, bad super puller, there are 20 stock and near-stock tractors pulling, and at just about every pull I've ever been to, it always seems like a stock tractor that's set up well and driven well manages to eek out a win or two. THAT'S what will keep the hobby going - the idea that grandpa's old relic out of the barn might just have a chance. Some go on to bigger and badder tractors, most are completely content to optimize what they have.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Too Far Gone

08-22-2005 16:54:05




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-22-2005 13:54:53  
G Man,I would also like to see true out of the field tractors as they were supposed to be,A true out of the field,right off of the hay rake tractor,but why no roadworn tires?Heck,Most of my tractors have road worn tires,because I USE them.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-23-2005 07:40:28




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Too Far Gone, 08-22-2005 16:54:05  
I used the term "road-worn" tongue-in-cheek. There must be some roads out there that are paved with 4-inch grinder disks, from what I've heard about some of the tires that show up in "no-cut" classes.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Too Far Gone

08-23-2005 17:56:48




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-23-2005 07:40:28  
G Man,I know what you mean."Road Worn my #$&%!,AND Tractors pulling in the farm stock class with no PTO,or hydraulics.You know Ive done a lot of farming,and if I had a tractor like that I definitely wouldnt call it FARM STOCK,but Ive pulled my old tractor a couple of times against those guys,and beat several of them.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bryce

08-24-2005 19:18:07




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Too Far Gone, 08-23-2005 17:56:48  
Sooooo a 1936 MM J (that does not have a pto or hydraulics) used for plowing and raking hay on my little spot in the midwest does not qualify as farm stock even though it has the stock pistons still in it???



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Too Far Gone

08-25-2005 08:09:38




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Bryce, 08-24-2005 19:18:07  
If it wasnt equipped as a new tractor sure,but if it was equipped,and has been stripped,then NO



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bryce

08-25-2005 18:14:19




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Too Far Gone, 08-25-2005 08:09:38  
I could agree with that.Have a good day.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Too Far Gone

08-26-2005 17:21:16




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Bryce, 08-25-2005 18:14:19  
You have a good one too.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
MikeF

08-22-2005 18:13:58




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Too Far Gone, 08-22-2005 16:54:05  
I'll go along with that. We went to a pull about a month ago and I was pulling my Farmall M. Fresh out of the field, still had cow poo on the tires from pulling the hay wagon in the pasture to fill the feeder. any ways we went to register them and the ladie said cut tires or stock. I thought cut tires? I'd just like to have matching tires. in the end I pulled in the 5000 and 5500 (200 lb light cause we didn't have enough weight)and I got 5th and 3rd. My farm tractor beat strictly pullers, like a Farmall 460 and numerous Olivers. Now I'm only 18 and only pulled a half dozen times so I don't have much skill so you know the tractor did most of the work. And I just love it when beaten up farm tractors out pull 5 and 6 thousand $ tracors. Their alway serious and we always have fun

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-22-2005 14:44:41




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-22-2005 13:54:53  
First, at the rpm's that antique tractors run, we are all building under the curves, no matter if it is stock or highly modified. I know what you are getting at because some have the belief that high compression is the way to go, only to loose on the bottom end HP. Some go with a lower compression keeping the low end torque and sacrificing the high HP numbers at max RPM. Second, you are describing every tractor pull held in the USA. We can carry stock tractors anywhere if we want to pull against other stock tractors. Engine building and guessing tractor balance are worlds apart. Is this a way to get a 2 cyl. Deere in the tractor challenge? If you move the challenge a little further East, I am game for just about anything.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-22-2005 15:36:12




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-22-2005 14:44:41  
It doesn't have a thing to do with getting a Deere in the challenge. If I was hosting it, I sure wouldn't be competing. It's about seeing who can do the most with what the manufacturer gave them. Pretty much the same deal as optimizing in-field performance, and since the whole tractor-pulling hobby started with WORKING tractors, not purpose-built toys, my contest idea would be much more grass-roots than any of the other ideas I've seen so far. And contrary to your comment about being able to go anywhere and pull stock tractor against stock tractor, you'll never find a pull that is populated with pure-stock tractors. Your contest outline pretty much eliminates getting a Deere in the challenge, though. Sure it's difficult to get big HORSEPOWER numbers out of a Deere, because of the engine speed limitations. To get big HORSEPOWER out of a Deere, you're doing nothing more than reverse-engineering everything that was built into the tractors to begin with. They were made to produce loads of torque at low rpm, in order to produce horsepower levels on par with other tractor makes, but at slower engine speeds, much slower in most cases. And in any case, building big horsepower numbers also means building more torque, at least if you're going to stay within a reasonable RPM range. Anyone can make horsepower with higher speeds. Since you've been building to produce "under the curve", could you please post some average torque and horsepower numbers for your last two or three engines, or did you take the time to graph them as you pulled the engine down toward a horsepower peak???

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
supermpuller

08-22-2005 16:49:26




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-22-2005 15:36:12  
Casepower and LW's project M turned right at 100 hp at 540 rpm's they are running 18.4 tires at 3.5 mph 6000 to 8500 lbs that takes a hell of a lot torque.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-23-2005 07:36:40




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to supermpuller, 08-22-2005 16:49:26  
That's 100 horsepower at how many engine rpms? You should be able to figure out how much torque it takes by now. 360 ft.lbs.? Like that mythical SM???



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-23-2005 12:30:37




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-23-2005 07:36:40  
At stock engine RPM's. The difference is the fact that it still has its bottom end torque. It is a low compression, well designed engine.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN - By comparison...

08-23-2005 13:41:50




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-23-2005 12:30:37  
A JD two-banger making 100-hp at ITS rated speed of 975 would have 538 lb.-ft. of torque. An 830 makes 330+ stock, out of the box.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-23-2005 16:12:27




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN - By comparison..., 08-23-2005 13:41:50  
So what are we comparing? A 830 to a Farmall M? How many cubic inches does it take to make a A or how about a G, to put out 100 hp? Why don't you just tell me what you are trying to get at??



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G./MAN

08-24-2005 10:48:09




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-23-2005 16:12:27  
It's pretty simple. You guys bend over backward to build the torque that the Deeres had inherently built into them. When's this big, bad "B" going to be built? I'm sure there will be no end of crowing about THAT when it is...



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 12:24:27




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G./MAN, 08-24-2005 10:48:09  
We haven't boasted about the Project M, just stated facts.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 13:35:05




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 12:24:27  
So when's the work starting on the "B"? I've got a fence-row derelict of a styled "B" that I picked up for $70. Maybe you guys can show me how to build it. There's already one pretty hot "B" that's pulling with the guys I pull with. Still in the sorting-out stage, but it seems to be a running SOB. At least in so much that an obsolete old two-cylinder can be a running SOB. I think he may have the A-C boys a little nervous in the light classes.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CASEPOWER

08-24-2005 16:15:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 13:35:05  
It's on the list. How many 1922 Fordson model F tractors have you seen pull that are bored, stroked, pressure feed oil system, timing belt driven distributor, rack and pinion steering, and with more machine work then you can imagine? Don't tell me I'm not doing something that hasn't been done. I would have loved to see you drill the 6" x 3/16" inch holes to join the main journals to the rod journals.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 16:32:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-24-2005 16:15:13  
Uh, the question is whether I CARE about that Fordson and how much work you've put into it and are going to. The answer is a resounding NO. Knock yourself out on that deal, but I've never bought into the whole theory of doing something 99% of other people wouldn't think of just to be "different" or to "prove something". It'll still be a Fordson "F" when you're done, won't it?? And are you talking about using the drill press to drill holes? Nope, never would have occurred to me to use a drill press to drill holes. I wonder if that's how crankshaft makers do it... But stay on the project. Myself and some friends get a lot of good laughs out of that one. When it's done, are you going to sell it for $5000 and brag about making money building pulling tractors???

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-23-2005 13:34:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to CASEPOWER, 08-23-2005 12:30:37  
Stock engine rpm for an "M" at 1450? Takes 362 lb.-ft. to make 100 horsepower at 1450 rpm. I thought the PTO was breaking before you guys hit that 100-hp mark.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charles McNelly III

08-23-2005 16:59:49




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-23-2005 13:34:18  
Question, If you were to compare cubic inches of the motor verses number of cylinders of the engine verses weight of the tractor, who do you think built the best bang for the buck? Answer, Farmall of course. Just my opinion, we run both at the farm.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 10:46:36




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Charles McNelly III, 08-23-2005 16:59:49  
It gets a lot more complicated than that. Fuel-efficiency rapidly enters the equations, and the Deere two-cylinder diesels dominated that arena. Cost per acre was also importance, and many models of Deere dominated THAT category with the ability of the all-fuel tractors to burn the cheapeast and heaviest fuels efficiently, when many other makes required higher-price gasoline. Not to mention the fact that the engine is about 1/4 of the overall package. Give me choice between an OK engine in a great tractor and a great engine in an OK tractor, and I'll take the first one every time.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charles McNelly III

08-24-2005 16:14:53




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 10:46:36  
Years back when my Grandfather was a little boy growing up in Synder, TX He told me a story about when the Farmall H came to the county fair, He had said the cotton farmers his family included ran JD"s. After Watching that tractor, everybody went to Farmall. He had said it was alot easier to plow with. I don"t remember he talking about fuel. Clutch, starting, keeping the carb adjusted, you know what I"m talking about.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-24-2005 16:27:50




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Charles McNelly III, 08-24-2005 16:14:53  
You mean a clutch that requires a tractor to be split for replacement? 30-minute job on a Deere at the most. Carburetor adjustments? Never heard that one before. Deere used Marvel-Schebler carbs, along with a bunch of other tractor builders. The difference being that adjusting the carb on a Deere requires not even a screwdriver. Two detented thumbscrews. Pretty difficult. Starting? Well, I suppose if you were comparing an electric-start "H" to a hand-start Deere, that would make sense. Good think Deere also built electric-start tractors, and kits to convert the hand-start units. Got a news flash for you - the "M" and "H" were IH's answer to the Deere "A" and "B" that came out in '34 and '35 respectively, because the Deeres consistently beat the pants off the IH "F" tractors from day one. I don't see where an "H" would be that much easier to plow on. I grew up on an "H" and an "M", and they're not even close to a Deere in comfort or features available at the time. No rockshaft, inferior hydraulics, the platforms are much harder to stand up and operate the tractor on, etc. The "H" and "M" were attractive, powerful tractors that IH sold the heck out of. There were far from industry-leaders in terms of capability and features. It's not rocket science that they sold well. Which would YOU rather run, an old F-30 or an "M"?

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charles McNelly III

08-24-2005 16:41:23




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-24-2005 16:27:50  
No argument here, you know the answer to that one. Have you ever seen a SM with a C-281 engine in it. My Dad bought the SM from a government auction in the early 70's. There is no comparision between it and his other SM. It came with no tag on it. Doesnt even have the holes drilled in it for the plate.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-25-2005 07:50:14




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Charles McNelly III, 08-24-2005 16:41:23  
I've never been around an SM to any great degree. The one I grew up on was just a plain old "M". Grandpa also has an "H", and was pure red for 50 or so of the 72 years he's been around. But they've gone steadily green since the mid-80s. Still have the "M", the "H", a 766, 2 1086s and various items of red machinery at the farm, to go along with a Deere 7210 MFWD w/740 loader, 7410 MFWD w/741 loader, a 4560 2wd, 8450 4wd, 9500 combine, 4995 SP swather, etc.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charles McNelly III

08-25-2005 16:52:00




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-25-2005 07:50:14  
Sounds like fun :)



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
G/MAN

08-26-2005 07:47:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to Charles McNelly III, 08-25-2005 16:52:00  
It definitely pays for them to have a JD tech (me) in the family. I went through the 9500 top to bottom and front to back two years ago this winter. She ('94 model with 2000 separator and 2700 engine hours at the time) was getting tired, but hadn't given any real trouble. But we brought in to the dealership where I work, inspected it and went right down the list. It's been over 2000 acres of corn, beans and wheat since with only one minor breakdown, so it was worth it. Combines aren't normally my thing, as I work on tractors the majority of the time, but I made an exception. It's nice to be able to fix something and then take it to the field and watch it perform. I nearly all of the 500 acres of wheat since the overhaul, and shelled a decent share of the corn last fall. I drive 120 miles one way most weekends to go down home, help on the farm and see friends.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
CAPT.HOOK

08-30-2005 21:03:03




Report to Moderator
 Re: Here's an idea... in reply to G/MAN, 08-26-2005 07:47:22  
cant we all just get along thank you.



[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