AC D-19 turbo diesel versus JD 4010 diesel
Printed From: Unofficial Allis
Category: Allis Chalmers
Forum Name: Farm Equipment
Forum Description: everything about Allis-Chalmers farm equipment
URL: https://www.allischalmers.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=145301
Printed Date: 23 Jun 2024 at 2:56pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: AC D-19 turbo diesel versus JD 4010 diesel
Posted By: DrAllis
Subject: AC D-19 turbo diesel versus JD 4010 diesel
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 6:45pm
|
September of 1960 the new JD 4010 was tested at Nebraska. The AC D-19 turbo diesel wasn't tested until April of 1962. The 4010 had a direct injection design engine with an oil bath air cleaner. The 4010 had a "live" and fully independent 540/1000 RPM PTO. It also had a "live" 18 GPM hydraulic pump, hydraulic "wet" brakes, an 8-speed partial synchronized helical gear transmission, fingertip hydrostatic power steering and a high platform with an easily adjusted super nice seat. The 4010 tractor was equipped with a 3-point hitch. The D-19 had a turbocharged energy-cell designed engine with a dry-type air cleaner. The manually engaged 540 RPM only PTO required use of the Power-Director clutch to be considered "live". The 5 GPM non-live hydraulic pump plus an 8 GPM power assisted mechanical steering pump yielded a 13 GPM total hydraulic system. The brakes were mechanical. The oil cooled Power-Director hand clutch allowed on-the-go shifting and ground speed control for PTO work. Transmission was a constant mesh non-synchronized helical gear design with a total of 8-speeds. The operator sat very low and the seat was just OK. The Traction Booster system was coupled to the snap-coupler style hitch, which performed well with mounted and semi-mounted implements. |
Replies:
Posted By: exSW
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 6:48pm
| Still rather havea D19. 4010 was just a test mule for the 4020. |
Posted By: HD6GTOM
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 7:38pm
| I was in the farm fuel business from 1973 to the mid 1980's. I saw a few D19's being used. I saw quite a few 4010's. When the company I was leased to bought my fleet of trucks in the mid 80's I still saw most of the D19's being used but most of the 4010's were long since traded off. |
Posted By: Mikez
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 8:22pm
|
Thanks Drallis for that. What prompted you to share with us, Only D-19 story I have is I heard how my grandfather had one new on the lot and my great uncle used it a lot on the farm and wanted to trade his D-17 in on it but back then diesels weren't real popular around here and gramp leaned him away instead of to it |
Posted By: 1terrygladys
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 9:31pm
|
How did they compare in horsepower and fuel efficiency? Terry ------------- WD-45, WD, 35 Unstyled WC, 36 Unstyled WC, SC Disk, JD 4430D, JD 4010D, JD B, Iowa pastor & disciple of Jesus Christ |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 10:01pm
| Deere at 84 max HP uses 5.6 GPH and 15.67 HPhrs per gal. A-C at 67 max HP uses 5.2 GPH and 13.35 HPhrs per gal. At PTO speeds Deere at 77 HP uses 4.9 GPH and A-C is 65 HP and uses 4.8 GPH. Deere wins in efficiency hands down with the direct injection engine. |
Posted By: PeteMN
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 11:38pm
| Don't know anything about the JD engine, but the Allis engine (like quite a few other brands of diesel engines of that time) lacked enough cooling capacity in the block. It was great on fuel, but if it wasn't properly warmed up before working it hard and cooled down after working it hard, then the engine would develop problems. |
Posted By: JayIN
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 7:34am
|
What I have learned from actual personal experience is that the owner of the 4010 was probably a arrogant a-hole. Especially more prevelant in todays modern times. ------------- sometimes I walk out to my shop and look around and think "Who's the idiot that owns this place?" |
Posted By: NEVER green
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 8:34am
I concur!!!!!! We got a saying round here.... green and greedy. ------------- 2-8050 1-7080 6080 D-19 modelE & A 7040 R50 |
JayIN wrote:Posted By: PaulB
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 9:02am
|
If someone was going to give me my choice of either, I'd have to say I'd take the 4010. After having run both for more hours than I care to recall, I find the 4010 to be much more comfortable for me than a D19 . The 4010 is a far superior tractor to be in the seat of all day on and has truly modern features. Now if you ask me weather I'd take a 410 over a 190XT diesel, now that will have a completely different answer, I'd take the 190XT without even blinking. ------------- If it was fun to pull in LOW gear, I could have a John Deere. If you can't make it GO... make it SHINY |
Posted By: tomstractorsandtoys
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 9:23am
|
Spend a long day on both tractors and the 4010 wins. Much better seat,steering and a nicer operaters platform. 60 years latter you can buy 2 D19's for less than one 4010 and in my area there are still lots of 4010's in use and rarely a D19. My grandfather had a new D19 for one year before trading it on a 190XT. He almost bought a 4020 but the Deere dealer was not excited about trading the D19. Dad thought sure he was going to get a 4020 and was not happy when the XT came home. He went and bought a new 4020 and a week later bought a second used one. On my grandfathers 19 they could never get the draft control to work right. He had a four bottom semi-mount plow and when he lowered it the front would go to deep before the draft control would take over. Dealer tried working on it and changed a good many parts but it never was right. My grandfather really liked the XT. He bought it with a six bottom AC hyd reset plow. The plow did not work very good in the limestone rock he farmed and AC sent engineers to his farm three different falls to make improvements to it. They ended up adding a second hyd. accumilater to it so if all six bottoms tripped the oil could flow fast enough without breaking something. They went to alot of tractor pulls and Dad's 4020 always beat the XT but in the field the 4020 could not pull the six bottom plow without running hot. Sorry about getting off topic. Tom |
Posted By: SteveM C/IL
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 9:55am
| neighbors bought a new D19 gas and traded it a year later on 190 diesel.Don't know the year.Dad said the 19 was a gas hog. I always thought it was a case of 190's not yet released when they bought the D19,but don't have dates and time lines. |
Posted By: bigal121892
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 10:21am
Really? My dad had a 4010, and you don’t even know him. Biggest A-hole in our community was the guy that had all AC’s, constantly trying to rent everyone’s ground. |
Posted By: SteveMaskey(MO)
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 10:41am
| I am a true AC fan grew up on them and still have and use them, but the Dr's statement is right on. JD was way ahead of AC and my opinion is that they never caught up till the 8000 series by then it was to late. I have 2 180’s with loaders that I like real well and always wished they would have made one with a FWA |
Posted By: Arcs and Sparks
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 12:13pm
My uncle bought a new D-19 diesel from a local dealer who had given him a sunshine enema on the performance it would deliver. My uncle had a custom silo filling business and put the D-19 on a 2 row Gehl harvester. It simply was unequal to the task and it had repetitive head gasket failures ( 3 that I remember and I was quite young at the time ). It was a disappointment considering that it was a brand new machine. It did not stay in the role it was bought for very long. It was replaced by a Cockshutt 1655 which was married to the harvester for 20 years. I wish I had his D-19 now to restore. The 1655 went to my cousin when my uncle died 10 years ago. He drove it home and it has never moved since. He also passed and his wife is content to let it sit there and rot. There should be a law against that 
|
Posted By: victoryallis
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 12:37pm
|
4020 has to be the most overrated tractor in history. I helped someone with hay when I was in high school and college I HATED that tractor with a passion. Same person is amaized what my 6080's will do compared to his 4020. ------------- 8030 and 8050MFWD, 7580, 3 6080's, 160, 7060, 175, heirloom D17, Deere 8760 |
Posted By: CrestonM
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 12:45pm
One of my grandpas was that way with his 4020. The other grandpa has a 4020 as well, but is so nice, you'd think he was an Allis guy! (Well, he is...kinda) I for one really do like the late model 4020s. 4010s and early 4020s are alright, but the later 4020s have some nice improvements with the PTO shift linkage, and console hydraulic controls. Only thing I'd change about it is maybe include a tilt steering wheel, but they're fine like they are. I get a chill every time I hear grandpa rev his 1972 4020 diesel. LOTS of priceless memories made with him on that tractor. He bought the tractor new in '72, and the only problem he ever had with it was it overheated really bad the first couple years he had it. He didn't know what the problem was, and neither did the dealer. They replaced water pumps, radiators, even rebuilt the engine 2 times! Nothing fixed anything right away, but eventually it just quit overheating and has ran perfectly ever since. No one knows how/why.
|
Posted By: AC7060IL
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 12:47pm
|
Some growth issues should be expected as both the AC D19 turboed diesel & the JD 4010's 6 cylinder designs were new features for each company. I operated an AC D19 gas & was disappointed in its lack of power & it's high gasoline usage. I never operated its diesel version, but was always under the impression that AC's engineers pushed the turbo in an 11th hour resolve to boost HP... So it probably lacked testing? JD's newer 4 & 6 cylinder engine designs had issues too. Until JD learned how to remove casting sand from its large cylinder engine blocks, they were replacing every tractor's water pump in the first year of production. |
Posted By: AC7060IL
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 1:00pm
| I have owned a 1961 JD3010 diesel for 18 years & accumulated some 4000+ hours on it. It starts better at colder temps, is very fuel efficient, & is handy for most smaller jobs. Over the years, I've replaced clutch, hydraulic pump, fuel pump, Trans top shaft, Trans synchronizers, 3pt load shaft, tires, & paint. |
Posted By: Ed (Ont)
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 1:02pm
Too bad to spoil a good informative thread with this kind of thoughtless comment. Hopefully we can judge our members or others on something other than tractor color!!!!!!!!!! I'm sure this was not the intent of the thread. |
Posted By: Gerald J.
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 1:23pm
|
In the JD 4010 and 4020 there were so many changes between the first one in 1960 to the last one in 1974 that there should have been at least half a dozen model numbers used. The 4010 and pre side console 4020 ('64 to '68) are similar enough they share parts book and shop manual. There at least three versions of the pre side console 4020 operators manual because of changes in the electrical controls and wiring harnesses. And they had a hydraulic system that had a common mode of failure as the check valve at the charge pump in the transmission failed and then drained the up top and front cooler/reservoir that the main hydraulic pump depended on if the transmission wasn't turning. With steering and brakes all by hydraulics that was a serious problem. I have a web page about fixing it. http://www.geraldj.networkiowa.com/4020si.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.geraldj.networkiowa.com/4020si.htm They changed so much in the hydraulics of the side console tractor that it doesn't have that problem and doesn't share parts, parts book, or operator's manuals. The side console tractor engine is significantly different in all details too. My '68 gas 4020 is considered a gas hog. According to Nebraska tractor tests it is not fuel efficient but there was a similar vintage IH 686 gas hydrostat that was worse. The 4010 and early 4020 gas used either a Zenith carb or an odd Marvel-Shebler that used a vacuum diaphragm for the accelerator pump. I think the gas AC of that era and size used the same two carbs. The MS was so hard to tune and work on that a JD service bulletin I have says "If you can't tune it, install the Zenith." The first year I had my 4020 it used 4 times the gas that my MF-135 took doing the same acres. It smoked like and IH diesel. I found a bunch of problems like the choke not opening because the cable sheath wasn't anchored near the carburetor and I got it down to only twice the MF135 fuel but it did the tillage in a lot less time with bigger implements. As for the 6 cylinder engines, Oliver had gone that route long before the 4010 or AC. The 4020 synchro range transmission shifter is very odd and takes learning to get along with it. It is not logical at all. The Power Shift was more logical and less fuel efficient. Gerald J. |
Posted By: exSW
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 1:47pm
| Amen. Huge difference between 4010 and late 4020PS. 4010 was just a good idea not well implemented. Late 4020's are still great tractors. |
Posted By: randy
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 4:18pm
|
Ed, I could have not put it any better! I agree 100% ------------- CA WD WD45 D17 D17 Diesel 7060 8050 8070 |
Posted By: CrestonM
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 5:25pm
Wait, the Power Shift is less fuel efficient? But yes, the synchro-range is pretty funny. When my "good" grandpa bought his 4020 in 1972, his father-in-law (my great-grandpa) liked the tractor, but never would drive it because he couldn't figure out the shift pattern. (He was 72 at the time) He never did figure out the pattern, and he died in 1995. Instead, he stuck to the 930 Case they had. He liked it because he could pop it in gear and go. (The only guy on the farm who liked the 930). When I was growing up, I was completely mind boggled by that shift pattern, and for most of my childhood I couldn't shift it either. Then one day it finally clicked! I've since memorized the shift pattern, which was kinda necessary. My "bad" grandpa had a early model 4020 LPG, and it was a piece of trash (kinda like him, but that's another story) Sat outside its whole life, almost nothing worked right, etc. The shift pattern decal was completely gone off the dash, so when I'd run it, I'd have to shut my eyes and envision the pattern decal off my other grandpa's 4020. Once I got it down, it was actually kinda fun. Especially in school when kids brag about knowing "how to drive a stick shift car" and "memorizing the pattern". I'd usually shut them up by showing them a photo of a 4020 shift pattern. Lol |
Posted By: 180Puller
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 5:30pm
|
I like D-19's but they never had a great reputation in my area..The few that were sold new were all traded off in just a few years for other colors.. In late 1961 a farmer from 35 miles away that farmed 600 acres there bought 520 acres beside us..He hauled over (2) WD-45's and a D-17 diesel to farm the 520 acres in 1962...In late 1962 he traded a WD-45 for a new D-19 gas....He soon found out that the D-17 diesel would way out work it so after owning it less than one year he traded it for a new 4010 JD diesel...He liked the 4010 so good that when the 4020 JD's came out that he traded the D-17 for a new 4020 JD.. He disliked the D-19 because it drank so much fuel and the D-17 would pass it when both were pulling a 4 bottom plow..He had 5 bottom plows on both the 4010 and 4020 and in our soil they pulled them nicely..Dad did lots of plowing for him with the 4010.. About 15 years ago a neighbor 4 miles to the south had a sale and his dandy D-19 diesel only sold for $1300...I sure do wish that I had bought it..
|
Posted By: DiyDave
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 6:03pm
|
My grandfather had a brand new D-19, many folks came to see it, when he bought it. Problems we mainly had with it were mainly camshaft related, in the motor. May have been his excessive use of ether, as cold start aid, too. I remember once, when grinding corn, fer over a half day, he shut it down, and about 5 minutes after we heard this huge BOOM! Went out to look, lower hose had blown like a tire, do there may be some merit in the cooling theory. It also liked to blow head gaskets (maybe ether, again). Had a Hyd cam follower grenade in the hyd compartment, once, don't know the cause, but the effect was me, on my back, under the old shade tree, with a roll of emory cloth, while someone else cranked the starter, to smooth out the hyd cam lobe, that got tore up, when the follower blew up. All in all it was a reasonably good tractor, not like the souped up 6000 ford, a neighbor had. The 4 bottom SC 16" plow that came with it, was another story. It was really too big for most of the rolling terrain, we have on the farm. Seems to me, Correct TB adjustment was an elusive goal, that was never met. In the bottoms, it always dug in deep, and got you stuck, on ridgetops, or knobs, front or back allus seemed to be in the air! We bought a used 3 bottom JD trailer type plow, that I later found out the D-15II pulls easily.
|
Posted By: Gerald J.
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 6:52pm
|
The 4010 never had the Power Shift transmission, only the Synchro Range but it had 3 reverse gears where the 4020 SR had only 2 reverse gears. The third one JD considered to be too fast to be safe. Its not hard to modify the shift linkage to get that third speedy reverse gear. Side console 4020 still bring a higher price on the used tractor market than early 4020 or 4010. During the side console 4020 era, JD brought out a 4000 that was to be a 4020 with lighter drive train and cheaper cost, but did offer it with the expensive Power Shift transmission. I saw one at a JD gathering for sale a gas 4000 with PS for over $14,000 asking price and it was grubby. There weren't many of those made, only 9. Gerald J. |
Posted By: DougG
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 6:52pm
| Only had 1 D19 around here in my early days, the Mebeur boys did some heavy duty tractor pulling with it, always done good too; a 4010 is a nice tractor, the shifter is a good idea and isn't that hard to figure out , very simple actually,, |
Posted By: darrel in ND
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 7:27pm
| My very first Allis Chalmers tractor was a D19 gas (not new, obviously, until I got done restoring it). I loved that tractor, and still do, enough that it turned me into a die hard allis man. And that, after in my growing up days, being told daily that John Deeres were the holy grail of tractors. Darrel |
Posted By: SteveM C/IL
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2017 at 9:34pm
| don't know when or what models you could get diff lok,but that was one thing JD had that sold a lot of tractors in the black dirt up north that got fall plowed,or so a mechanic told me from that color and era. |
Posted By: Lonn
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2017 at 5:36am
|
I liked my D19 gas. It was the first tractor I bought myself. Bought from a CaseIH dealer in 1987 on Case Credit. It was smooth power and for me it pulled fine and easily out pulled Dad's D17 but we had a pull-type plow. The hydraulics on them leave more than a little to be desired though. The hydraulics never worked right and forget mounted euipment if you needed traction booster. It worked good with a rear mounted 4 row cultivator though and it was our go to tractor for that task. Also did a lot of haying with it. But clearly a 4010 out classes it in most respects although the AC dealership I worked at, the older mechanics told me a D19 gas or diesel would consistently out plow a 4010 in the field demos the dealers used to have back then. I guess a new D19 with knowledgeable operators, like they were, could make em go. ------------- -- --- .... .- -- -- .- -.. / .-- .- ... / .- / -- ..- .-. -.. . .-. .. -. --. / -.-. .... .. .-.. -.. / .-. .- .--. .. ... - Wink I am a Russian Bot |
Posted By: Tbone95
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2017 at 7:38am
|
Wow. I must be low on coffee....I can't believe some of the things I'm reading!!! Hahaha JD shift pattern: My brother in law grew up on IH's. We had some old JD's , and he helped us in the hay and building fence one summer. So we had some typical banter, and then one day he said, "I just never figured out how to shift, 1st gear here, and 2nd way over there and so on." AHA! I said....They have them numbered by speed, but grouped by range, it was never intended to count up in perfect sequence, so the right hand side had 3, 5, and 6, the left hand had 1,2,4, and R. Just stay over to the left in the field, and when you're going to pull out on the road, 3 if you're loaded, 5 if you're empty, then 6. Synchro range is like that, synchronized within a small group of gears, then no synchronized for changing the actual range. Then a quad shift is just a synchro range with a hi lo splitter in conjunction. For me, the Allis 7045 is my first Allis. Having to be at a dead stop to change gears was a huge adjustment for me, then if you're pulling something, like chopping corn and have a full wagon to unhook, you're on a slight incline and rolling a bit and if you don't get it out of gear before the trans break kicks in, everything is all bound up. This isn't a complaint, it's got it's benefits, and it all takes time to get used to depending on where you began.
|
Posted By: Gerald J.
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2017 at 12:52pm
|
My '68 gas SR 4020 and my '68 MF-135 both have differential lock. Most useful when disking plowed ground and can be used plowing too. The 4020 differential lock (hydraulically actuated) unhitches when a brake is touched, the 135 takes manual disengagement for turning. Gerald J. |
Posted By: 45 turboa-
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2017 at 4:21pm
|
IF YOU GET THOSE J-Ds ON AN INCLINE IN PARK HAVE FUN TRYING TO PULL IT OUT. IF YOU FINAGILE ENOUGH AND GET IT IN REVERSE IT UNLOCKS. I ALWAYS CALLED THAT SYSTEM WONDER SHIFT ! ------------- turbocharged |
Posted By: allisbred
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2017 at 7:43pm
| I have to say our D19 turbo was the worst AC we ever had-- low torque,lots of down time, hard starting, poor hydraulics, and clumsy for a 65hp tractor. I would compare to the 3010 and still give the thumbs up to the JD. I always enjoyed the sound of the D19 once it was warmed up though and was easy on fuel in my mind. |
Posted By: Tbone95
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 8:18am
Which JD's? Have a 2640 that's spring loaded to go into park, if on an incline, and doesn't go in right away, let it roll and it slips right in. No issue whatsoever getting it out. That one is actually the best park system I've ever operated. Had a 1520. That was pretty stiff in park, but if you pulled it out of first first, it wasn't that bad. No worse than the Allis binding up on an incline, just little different problem, little different way to deal with it. Those were both TSS transmissions. Maybe the synchro range was worse. Never owned one of those, but have operated one.
|
Posted By: Lonn
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 9:00am
------------- -- --- .... .- -- -- .- -.. / .-- .- ... / .- / -- ..- .-. -.. . .-. .. -. --. / -.-. .... .. .-.. -.. / .-. .- .--. .. ... - Wink I am a Russian Bot |
Posted By: HudCo
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 9:37am
| i have never been on a d19 but i think it could only be compared to a4010 or a early 4020, because the late 4020 is a very differant tractor the late one is 10x the tractor this post caught my eye because i just stareted on an inframe on a late 4020 this guy has an eary one also |
Posted By: Tbone95
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 9:53am
Wow, take it easy  . Yes, I paid attention, just sort of asking for clarification. A lot has been talked about since the title post. Was a 190 XT in the title post? How about a MF 135? Did you jump on that guy?BTW, we have owned and used hard our 2640 for over 30 years, and it's really never given us any trouble. There's wear and tear and we do our maintenance. I guess I'm "lucky".
|
Posted By: Allis dave
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 11:05am
| I'm just imagining Dr. Allis sitting back and laughing at all of you after reading the mess he started! LOL |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 11:53am
| The 2-cylinder tractor was obsolete. It took from 1953 to 1960 for John Deere to develop the New Generation 3010/4010 tractors. Where was the rest of the tractor builders during this time?? Here's what should have happened. A-C should have released the D-19 in 1958 and the diesel engine should have been a bored block at 290 cubes. The hydraulics should have been "live". The mighty One-Ninety should have been released in 1961 with a truly independent PTO. The "XT" should have been thoroughly tested before it was sold to the HP hungry Customers in 1963, instead of 1965. |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 11:55am
| 4010/4020 didn't have any "park" issues. That was quad-range 4430's and the like. History is pretty clear sometimes. Deere replaced the long obsolete two-banger series with a 7 year adventure of developing the 3010/4010 tractors. These new tractors forced everyone else to scramble and come up with something new too. Look at the MF 1100 tractor: closed center hydraulic pump driven off of the crankshaft, hydrostatic power steering, planetary final drives and wet brakes, etc, etc. The MF1100 was clearly a 4010/20 wannabe. IH had to release the 706/806 in 1963. A-C finally came with the mighty One-Ninety in mid/late 1964 just AFTER Deere released the 4020 !! The One-Ninety set some new highs in the operator comfort zone that took Deere another decade to match. Large, flat, high deck platform. Suspended clutch and brake pedals. Console control !! (which soon became an industry standard for others). Tilt steering wheel. sloping tapered hood design. 48 gallon rear mount fuel tank. To this day, operating a 190/200 tractor is still about as good as it gets for the operator. BUT, the lack of a real independent PTO haunted this tractor when trying to convert a brand X customer over to A-C. Also, the fact that 77 HP never matched a 4010's 84 HP and now the 4020's 94 HP didn't help either. So, some genius engineer (or salesman) decided to install a turbo-charger on the One-Ninety XT to compete with the 4020, which it did, until the transmission or ring and pinion ate their pigs. I started this post earlier this morning, so it is a little out of synch........ |
Posted By: CrestonM
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 11:57am
|
Dave, I'm actually surprised everyone is kinda voicing in favor of the Deere 4010/20. I love a good late model 4020, but I'm surprised....it seems a lot of other guys do, too. As far as the 2640...my late grandpa had one, and it was a nice tractor. I always thought the 2010 was the worst Deere ever made (almost bought one once), but maybe we shouldn't elaborate on that. That said....maybe I like the 4020 because I've never ran a One-Ninety? That's on my bucket list of things to do someday...
|
Posted By: Lonn
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 12:10pm
 BTW I think you took my tone a lot harsher than I figured. Almost every model tractor built by anyone gets a bad review from somebody but if you search a "2640 worst tractor" there will be more hits on that model than usual. Don't ask me what the problems are, I don't remember all what I read. A friend of mine had a 26 or 2840 and he did have a lot of nickel and dime issues. Now he has a New Holland.------------- -- --- .... .- -- -- .- -.. / .-- .- ... / .- / -- ..- .-. -.. . .-. .. -. --. / -.-. .... .. .-.. -.. / .-. .- .--. .. ... - Wink I am a Russian Bot |
Posted By: Tbone95
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 1:00pm
|
Drawn to me? Naw! Say it ain't so! LOL And imagine that, the park issue didn't apply to the tractors from the title of the post! hahahaha Only "issue" with my 2640 I'd say is cooling capacity, you have to watch it when using it hard. But it truly has been a phenomenal tractor for reliability. It was actually pretty funny, 4 years ago in crop season, I had 2 other tractors down including my Allis, and another too small to be much help. The 2640 literally did every task that spring, including pulling my field cultivator.......wings up though!
 |
Posted By: wekracer
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 1:54pm
| Every brand of tractor has their hero’s and zeros. I think we are comparing one of each. What always strikes me as funny is that you never hear a bad thing about a D17 but just turn the corner and you find someone who doesn’t like a D19. And they’re not that different. The other thing I find funny as that the duds are now the most collectible. D19 turbo diesel, WD45 Diesel. Both have a reputation of having engine problems. Just thinking out loud. |
Posted By: SteveMaskey(MO)
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 3:30pm
| Dad bought a D17 when I was in high school. I am now 65 and the D17 is still used every day feeding. It went through 3 teenagers and It is wore out from one end to the other but still going. We pulled 4 14” plow with it back in the day when we moldboard plowed everything. There are 3 D19’s out there plus others but in my experience the D17 is about as bullet proof as it gets |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 3:47pm
| I always said a series 4 D-17 gas was my "4020". Every part of the tractor was built just rugged enough to last a long time without any problems. Every S4 gas I ever overhauled (and there were many) never needed the crankshaft reground. That was a far cry from the first D-17's that had some crank/oil pressure issues. My Dad's S4 to this day has never had anything done to the transmission, differential or anything in the torque housing except hand clutch ramps and rollers one time. Tractor has 10,000+ hrs on it and the diamonds on the clutch and brake pedals are pretty much smooooth..... |
Posted By: JayIN
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 3:50pm
|
When I farmed 80-96 I had a 3020gas 4020D a 190XT III a D15II 2 WD and 1 WD45 and a 880 Oliver. When I was on the platform of that 190XTD I felt like I was the King of The World. It is a FEELING. We all have these feelings.Like Ford-Chev-CPD. Something sucked about each one of them.Only one remains today-WD45.Dad bought it in 1968. Long live ALLIS CHALMERS! ------------- sometimes I walk out to my shop and look around and think "Who's the idiot that owns this place?" |
Posted By: Ky.Allis
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 4:06pm
| Pre 1964 there were several tractors ahead of AC. Basically any tractor with a GOOD diesel engine,Good LIVE hydraulics and a 3 Pt. Hitch. |
Posted By: DiyDave
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 5:51pm
|
RE the jd "new generation" tractors, jd wouldn't have them, if they didn't have cat design them, in exchange for that, jd was supposed to stay out of the construction/industrial market... We all know how that turned out...
|
Posted By: DougG
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 5:57pm
| Dang was that the. Cat JD relationship? Always heard of something, |
Posted By: CrestonM
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 5:57pm
|
Wow, Dave! Is that really how it worked? Sounds like a great piece of information to know.. Talking about Cat designing the New Generations to keep Deere out of the industrial sector... I've heard that Steiger built a prototype 2wd tractor (the Jaguar) and planted it on a farm in the Moline, Ill area as a warning to Deere to stay out of the 4wd market, or Steiger would invade the 2wd market. We see how that worked, as well.
|
Posted By: AC7060IL
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 6:25pm
Thanks DrAllis for sharing that era's highlights. I was a kid during the late 1960s & remember seeing all those models in our farm community. I never ran a MF1100, but put some hours on IH 706 & 806s, AC 190xt diesel, & JD4020 diesels. One farm had the bigger Ford 7000,9000- can't remember which?? Mostly though, the local elevator wagon lines during harvest were outnumbered with many older AC WDs & WD45s pulling loaded flare box wagons (with feed sacks covering inside of tailgates) on David Bradley gears. Great memories! |
Posted By: Brian Jasper co. Ia
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 6:34pm
|
When Deere finally went 6 cyl in 1960, Oliver had an ad that was "6 for a quarter" meaning they had been building 6 cyl engines for 25 years. ------------- "Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian." Henry Ford |
Posted By: FREEDGUY
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:11pm
| wekracer,you stated that a D-17/D-19 were "NOT THAT DIFFERENT". We ran a series II D 17 for years and Dad (he admits it) FOOLISHLY traded it on a D-19. IMO, the Only thing "not that different" Was the PERSIAN #2 paint. Perhaps the series III '17 was a closer match?? |
Posted By: tomstractorsandtoys
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:27pm
|
Posted By: HudCo
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:41pm
| i totaly agree with Dr. Allis , what should have happened |
Posted By: darrel in ND
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:49pm
| Out there somewhere is an Allis Chalmers ad for the 7000 series when it came out. It emphasizes everything that it had that Deere and the other brands didn't. I Think that nobody had anything on Allis then. And I certainly don't understand all of the D19 bashing. I love mine. Darrel |
Posted By: wekracer
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:52pm
To be honest I don’t think I have ever run a D19. We have 3 series 4 D17s and I must agree with doc regarding their ruggedness. I’ve really not had much experience with pre s4 17s either. We did have a D15 II so I’m familiar with the hydraulic drawbacks. But from what I’ve seen a 19 is just a pre series 4 D17 with six cylinder engine and maybe different final drives. The hydraulics were a big drawback which is why dad said he never wanted one. Heck. The only difference between a 180 and s4 17 is the 301, power director and sheet metal. From what I’ve heard all the D series gas tractors were reliable. All the diesels has bad reputations. But I admit I don’t have much experience with some of them. Correct me if I’m wrong. |
Posted By: Daehler
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:55pm
|
Im going to be the outcast here. Grandpa bought a D19 gas in 63, its been on the farm ever since. Only complaint ever said about it was liked the gas. It did everything it was ever asked to do,and then some. Ill a 19 anyday of the week over anything else made at the time. It doesnt have some of the conveniences of other brands but gets the job done. Ive been on early and late style 4020s and dislike them with a passion. I dont really see why 19s get such a bad rap, they did their job when used correctly with little problems. I think the biggest deal is that in 1962 or 63 most farmers didnt think they needed a 60+ horsepower tractor. We know the problems of a 19 diesel now and how to operate them to get more longevity out of them that could make it compete so with a 4010. Its still will be at a disadvantage in horsepower rating, but a 4010 is and always will be a hunk of green scrap metal like the 4020s. ------------- 8070FWA,7080 BlackBelly, 7045,2 200s,D19,D17,G, WD,45,UC,7 AC mowers and lots more! "IT TAKES 3 JD's TO OUT DO AN ALLIS, 2 TO MATCH IT IN THE FIELD AND 1 FOR PARTS!" |
Posted By: ALLISMAN32
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 7:56pm
| I'm an Allis guy through and through but given a choice of it id take the 4010 any day. I never spent hours on end driving a d19 but I have operated several and worked on several gassers and 1 diesel In my career. Dad talked about one diesel in particular they sold and the customer consistently had problems with the bottom end of the engine, now Bob had Allis tractors before and after the d19 and never had engine problems with any of the other tractors. They just feel too bulky for the power they produced, never cared for the feeling of sitting down between the fenders and below the hood line on the 19's. A good Xt or 200 with 38" rubber on the back are superior to any 4010 or 4020 out there in my opinion. Don't even get me started on the gaw gaw gaw noise of the hydraulic pump on those Deere tractors, I doubt most Deere owners could honestly tell you what a 6 Cylinder is actually supposed to sound like after listening to the hyd noise all day!!!! |
Posted By: FREEDGUY
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 8:24pm
| To me, it was just HEAVY bull-in-a-china shop, and THIRSTY. It just pulled a 4/16 plow easier than the '17,took a 5 acre field to turn, would sink in the same ground without the tool in it that the '17 could WITH tool in ground, that HORRIBLE hydraulic lever location(that engineer hopefully got sent back to school at the very least), like a previous poster mentioned, TB never worked reliably, did I mention thirsty? Was a Very happy day when that TANK went down the drive and the XT 190 came up it! We also now run a 180 gasser that replaced a D-15. IMO, the 180 is 10X the machine that the '19 was and not quite as hard on gas;key word-QUITE, btw,the 180 is a '69 so should still be same vintage as a D-19?? |
Posted By: allischalmerguy
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 9:13pm
|
My Dad bought a used JD 3020 LP. We got it probably about 1971 or 72 I would guess. I had grown up driving a JD720 LP. The thing that still sticks out from when we got the JD 3020 LP was the super smooth power steering. And you sat on it nice. That power steering was really good though, we had the JD 720 and it had power assist steering I would call it. We did not have a D17 or D19 on the farm when I grew up. I have a series 1 D17 now and I like it alot. But I wish it had that same feel of the JD 3020 power steering. ------------- It is great being a disciple of Jesus! 1950 WD, 1957 D17...retired in Iowa, |
Posted By: Dave in il
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 9:28pm
|
I grew up with a WD45 a Massey44 and a D17 diesel. Later the D17 diesel was replaced with a series IV gas with factory 3pt. Then the Massey left and a new 65 XT diesel replaced it, that was replaced by a new Series III XT. In 1973 dad had an order for a 7030 and a 4430 but a customer backed out on a new Ford 8600 so Dad bought it. Then Dad traded the XT for a 7060. I put a lot of hours on all those tractors. The XT would out plow the neighbors with the same (5-16 Deere) plow. When I started farming I bought a 7060 and since I farmed about 30 miles from home I needed something to mow roads and do odd jobs without hauling the D17 back and forth. I found a D19 diesel on the local Deere dealers lot. It was cheap and since it was a diesel it meant it I didn't need a gas tank on that farm, so I bought it. The main use for all these years has been running a 7' woods mower. To say it hasn't been the most reliable tractor is an understatement. The engine is the weakest point and is a real money pit, but when it's running right it's sweet. Hydraulics are slow and weak and the traction booster never worked right. The steering isn't great either. It's a very pretty tractor and now that it's retired it's still here (along with the WD45 and the series IV D17) all painted up ready for show. LOL I believe the D19 was only a stop gap until the 190 came out. ------------- AGCO My Allis Gleaner Company |
Posted By: JC-WI
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 1:19am
|
Well here are just a few rememberances from over the years and some thoughts on this thread... Been reading this thread and thinking about the many things of the old machines... Was raised on a WD, WC, another WD and then WD45 and an early D17. After that one we got a D17 diesel in 1970 and had it overhauled and boy was that a workin beast and efficient on fuel. D17 gas pulling 3-14 would burn tank of fuel to the diesel pulling 4-14 at the same speed and still have a quarter tank or so left. Then we got a used 170 in 1974 and then in 1977 got an 190XT followed by another 190 XT just before the series III, then an Oliver 1855 with a rebuilt engine. we got a a massy 44 diesel mixed in and a MD, which we used several years for hauling wagons down the road. Another 190 gas then an Oliver 77... and a ford 9000 and a 4520 and mix of others. The WD was converted to propane in 1960 and it sits under a 33 picker just waiting to go pick corn. No powersteering on it but it was a good tractor. I keep thinking I need to get it out from under that picker after 45 years or so and have some fun with her, but she's kind of slow compared to all the others. The 1937 WC is just sitting under a Farmhand loader when the chloride ate the rims out . The other WD has starter ring gear problems and can't start it when hot with the Zenith carb on it. It had a 7' Kosh bellie mount mower put on back in 1967 and hasn't been off since.. Used it for weed control under fences after we got the haybine in 1970. It sure could have used PS on it too, but steers easier than running a scythe. LOL The WD45 started to have some problems and got parked waiting for some TLC. It sure had more power than the second WD. The first XT is still on the job with two injector pump rebuilds, a turbo replacement, a foot clutch replacement and now needs 2spd and pto clutches reworked and a going through in the transmission for it is starting to jump out of 4th gear... 40 years on the job... I still love that tractor, only job it does now is baling round bales. Been shifted thousands and thousands of times. Power steering is much faster than the John deere's and the platform as mentioned is much better and the console controls at your right hand as well as the throttle and two spd/clutch. When hell is happening at the end of the pto, I can step the clutch in and step on the brakes and everything is stopping, not grabbing for some dinkasc lever placed somewhere out of a simple hands reach and hydraulic controlled that slams in on startup. and the hydraulic pump is live and simple compared to the closed system. Yes, I like the feel of sitting up on the XT much better than on the johndeere. The XT won't over heat if you keep the radiators clean but the 4520, push it to hard, you can watch the gauge start moving up as the hydraulics get hotter too. Somebody mentioned that hydraulic noise on the JD and I hate that noise too. Would say the old 1855 was really nice, despite the pump system was also a closed loop and the pump cost north of 1300 back 30 years ago. It had 3 spds shift on the go and power brakes and independant pto with that little lever to the back if the console... and had 2spd pto too. But the rebuilt Waukesha engine was not assembled right and after many years, it dropped a sleeve. Back to the XT. The later XT dragged both a 4 bottom and the oliver 5-16 bottom plow. just as good as that 1855 did. The ford 9000 got a hole in the block, end of story on that. The MM705 was a clumsy ox an no live pto or 3pt on most of them. One thing I didn't like about Oliver was to get an honest 540 rpm out of the pto, you had to wind them up wide open, where as the AC didn't need to be wound wide open. Better part of the XT's were they were very fuel efficient compared to some of the others... neighbors 966 was burning near 7 gallons an hour and wasn't getting a whole lot more done than we were. The 170 had the hand clutch and foot clutch replaced back in the early 80's and then I yanked the head off and replaced the exhaust valves and ground the seats and intakes back in '07 and was planning on dropping the pan to put new rings in but ran out of time. Had to get it back together to feed cows with it... Now it really needs an out of frame overhaul, but still on the job. TOUGH tractor, wish all the others were as tough... Funnier part is , I feel I could do more with that 170 and loader than I could do with the 190 and loader. As for the D19, Allis should have done more in building the parts heavier in the D19, heavier axels, heavier bull gears and bearings, pinion/ ring gear/ differential/ along with a better transmission. Then put in a 85 hp engine like a D-344 in instead of dropping a turbo on a light weight Lanova design Buda engine. You know, make it more bullet proof. Just a few years later, the M&W industry started selling Turbochargers for Case, Oliver, MM, Ford, IH, JD and others. and then those tractors started self destructing. ... Should remember, when Allis bought out Buda, they took the industrial engine that was a time proven engine in the industrial and derated the 230 diesel from 2700rpm no load /2460 load at 72 hp and made it struggle at 1625 at 45 pto hp.. or maybe 50 bhp... Then they redesigned it for the D17 and beefed it up and then redesigned it for the later D19 and also another redesign for the Series IV D17... squezzin hp out of old design when they should have been getting the 2800 out with direct injection for the 19 and the 4 cylinder version for the 17.... like AC's little 433 that went into the 6060/6080's . Could have been years ahead of their time. Seen a D19 at an auction that had the series IV/170 torque tube and pump and a rear end from a 190 with heavy axels at an auction, should have bought it... 2 spd pto, 3 pt., hand clutch, and the unreliable 262 turboed diesel that sounded real good... but I guess couple others wanted it worse than me, went over three grand. In reality, it really comes down to who owns what... some fellas can buy a new tractor and have it looking and running like hell in just a few years while others can have their tractors and machinery looking and running like almost new 20 years later... ... And any tractor that works and runs like it should is Okay with me... but wish I had a new 170 and a new XT. Just another tidbit of info on the JD PShift, Harold Brock, the designer of Ford's Select-o-Speed made the prototype and it was working pretty good, but not great in his opinion and told Ford to wait while he worked the bugs out of it and they did not listen. So, he left them and went to deere and told them he would design them a better powershift that would out perform Ford's design, he knew all the faults of that system so, he designed a new system and got the prototype out and was put into production. He did it out of spite against Ford. Heard it from a man that worked on Ford select-o-speeds for a living, then did it in his retirement... and was friends with the Harold. LOL. Found a link to the man. http://www.farmanddairy.com/columns/21291/21291.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.farmanddairy.com/columns/21291/21291.html ------------- He who says there is no evil has already deceived himself The truth is the truth, sugar coated or not. Trawler II says, "Remember that." |
Posted By: Allis dave
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 7:10am
| IMO the D19 was just behind the JD times a little. Featurewise, you'd be better to compare it to a JD 720. Even though they were released at the same time, it's just hard to compare a D19 to a 4010 |
Posted By: Lonn
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 9:35am
BTW I never had much trouble with my D19 in all the years I've owned it. Since 1987. It was for a time the most used tractor on Dad's farm. I bought it myself and planned on taking over Dad's dairy farm at one time. That never happened but it got used a lot. And I rented 80 acres besides on my own. Add that to Dad's 300 acres that he ran. It saw plenty of field time and the D17 was demoted to a loader tractor and other duties when the D19 was otherwise tied up. Although the D17 was probably Dad's best tractor he ever owned and it still got ran virtually every day. That's another subject. Loader work was no worse than the D17 and the D17 was a good loader tractor. In fact the D19 could do more with the loader compared to the 17. As far as mechanical problems, I put in a new governor shaft and seal because it was so worn and leaked oil all the time. I rebuilt the carb a few times, the brakes once, a lever down on the hydraulic pump broke once for an unknown reason, that was a pain to take out without a shop to work in -20˚ January weather, or a good way to hold that heavy pump up while you bolt it back in place, ..............and the hydraulic valves, towards the end of it being a main tractor on the farm, the hydraulics were needing work in the valve area as it would sometimes not operate a remote cylinder without playing with the hydraulic lever and the lift arms would hold a load anymore. Never really had any engine trouble but had to keep the radiator real clean or it would run hot. It still runs good but the clutch is stuck from sitting too long. I never minded sitting down between the fenders. I was kept warmer on cold days. The best thing I ever did with it was rip that Full Vision cab off it. It was a real pain to get in with that on. Yes because of sitting down between those fenders. My only real problem with it besides hydraulics was it should have had hydrostatic power steering and the optional hydraulic pump mounted behind the grill screen should have been standard equipment. Oh and in our wet clay soil that we ran which wasn't tiled at the time, the D19 just couldn't get stuck. I mean, it would at times get stuck but if you dug down to the drawbar pin and unhooked the disk the D19 would crawl right out. I got good at doing that and kept a couple chains handy so I could drag the disk out from firmer ground. ------------- -- --- .... .- -- -- .- -.. / .-- .- ... / .- / -- ..- .-. -.. . .-. .. -. --. / -.-. .... .. .-.. -.. / .-. .- .--. .. ... - Wink I am a Russian Bot |
Posted By: Gerald J.
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 10:01am
|
The M&W turbo kit for the 4020 included a finned oil pan for better oil and engine cooling. Along with the side console 4020 and 4000, JD introduced the turbo charged 4320, 4520, and 4620 in the early 70s. The 4620 included a cooler between the turbo and the intake manifold, the 4320 didn't. 4520 after SN 303519 also had the intercooler. All the diesels used a 404 cubic inch engine. The turbo tractors used a lot more oil in the transmissions than the 4020. Harold Brock stayed with Deere at the Waterloo works the rest of his working life. As i remember when he refused to sign off on the badly designed SOS at Ford he was fired. And that SOS took years to be redesigned to be reliable. Early SOS are essentially piles of junk but in a few years Ford worked out the bugs and then the SOS was a reliable transmission. Gerald J. |
Posted By: darrel in ND
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 12:25pm
| From some accounts that I've read, allis got set back farther during WWII, then other manufacturers by building more war equipment, and then set back farther by a communist lead strike. If they could have gotten those years back, they would have been ahead of the pack. And in one of the books I've read, they had the D series already developed 10 years prior to its release, but due to financial crunch, couldn't get tooled up to mass produce it. So, instead, they worked with what they had, and released the WD. I think allis did all right, all things considered, and the final nail in their coffin was NOT due to an inferior product in the ag sector. Darrel |
Posted By: DMiller
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 12:51pm
| Allis had WAY too many irons in the fire that ALL took a hit in the 70's. Heavy electrical components, a unique and only of its kind nuclear reactor plant, the construction machines were not selling, the truck engine line was stumbling against Cat Cummins and Detroit plus the markets were all fouled up with the oil embargo as well all the 'New' emissions crap coming out. |
Posted By: CrestonM
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 12:55pm
| Not to mention the millions invested in a new method of extracting oil from shale |
Posted By: Lonn
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 2:15pm
|
And the lost investment due to the government cancelling the new engines for the Navy that AC designed and had already built a few. Yes I know there was some kind of payment but from what I understand it didn't cover the development costs. ------------- -- --- .... .- -- -- .- -.. / .-- .- ... / .- / -- ..- .-. -.. . .-. .. -. --. / -.-. .... .. .-.. -.. / .-. .- .--. .. ... - Wink I am a Russian Bot |
Posted By: Too Tall
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 4:14pm
| I don't think anybody on this thread has compared the breaks on this vintage of tractors.. I am an AC man, but no comparison in the breaks. I had a 4020 gas power shift that must of had over 10,000 hours on the breaks with no problems.. The deere of coarse had a park on it that was sure better than trying to set the breaks if you had any on a 19. The 4020 made more trips to the gas barrel than the AC. 8+ gal. per hour no matter what you were doing. |
Posted By: CrestonM
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 4:37pm
|
Grandpa's 4020 does real good on diesel running a generator in the winter, sometimes 24/7 for a week or more. And yes, you are right. Even though I hate the creaking/groaning noise they make, the Deere brakes are something to marvel at. Although, I don't know how easy they are to work on.
|
Posted By: Gerald J.
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 6:07pm
|
4020 brakes are in the rear axle inside the planetary reduction gears. Getting close requires removing the axle housing, not easy. It is crucial to always use JD approved transmission/hydraulic oil because some universal oils destroy the brake pads. Gerald J. |
Posted By: darrel in ND
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 7:53pm
| It is true that wet hydraulic brakes do trump the style that D19's/one ninety's have. But I've re-built the brakes on my D19 and both of my one-ninety's, without a huge amount of capital or labor laid out for any of them, and they have all worked well for me. The first brake job was on my D19, and that was the spendiest one, as I needed a couple of the cast iron pieces. Otherwise, at that time (almost 25 years ago), the good linings were still available from Allis, and were not that expensive, and work good. I studied for a while to figure out what made the brake lock work, but After I figured it out and got all of the parts un-seized, lubed up good, and it works flawlessly to this day. If anyone says that that brake lock is not a good one, I'd argue to the end on it. Pull up a knob, and step on the brakes, and that tractor ain't going anywhere without sliding the back wheels. I don't know what the PO had done to them to screw em up, but like I said, I fixed em up 25 years ago, Have only adjusted them a couple times, and You couldn't ask for better brakes. My one ninety XT was the second one I did, about 10 years ago. Most straight forward project you could ever ask to do. New linings on the disks and drums, new springs, adjust em properly, and I've had brakes that'll stop ya on a dime ever since, and a brake lock that hold er wherever you put it. Last one I did was my one ninety gasser. Don't know what went downhill with the lining material That I used on it, but I had some trouble with those brakes locking up on me during high humidity spells. Fought it for a while and even cussed it. then one day I sprayed half can of Wd40 into each housing, and have had flawless brakes on that tractor ever since as well. So I get a little agitated when I hear about how "POOR" these brakes are. Darrel |
Posted By: AC7060IL
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2017 at 8:40pm
Thanks for posting the weblink to the article written about Harold Brock. I've read several interesting articles pertaining to Henry Ford and his Ford Motor Company. I especially enjoyed this one which has agricultural connections. |