190XT VS 4020

Driven both and they are both good tractors, but ill take an xt or 200 any day over the Deere. Cant stand the annoying hydraulic pump rattle that all the Deere tractors make. The platform on the A-C is far better for carrying some chains, hand tools and handyman jack than the Deere ever hoped to be. For sheer power and torque the A-C wins again. Dad said he had one customer with both tractors and plowing the only way the Deere could keep up was after the installation of a torque topper lp injection kit. The hydraulics are smoother on the A-C . Never really thought the steering was that bad on A-C you do need to keep the front ends greased on any tractor or they steer terrible. Deere spindles are no better than the A-C, thats why Deere has all the holes in their tie rods so you can realign the front wheel after the spindle twists. The closed center system on the Deere is nice for modern equipment and most of the industry has adopted it now, although i believe a WD Allis first incorporated a closed center system so really nothing new! Kudos to the Deere on road speed too, XT's and all the A-C's  of that design are truly snails. Differential lock is also another nice feature as well as the hydraulic brakes on the 4020. Long live the orange tractors from West Allis!!!!!!

As I can see this is a very heated debate!  I have run both but own an XT and use it almost exclusively on my operation.  So I must be a little byus, as this is an allis website.

It takes worn linkage to get to 3rd reverse. It was included in the 4010. It is fast moving and some say the gears can't handle the transmission input torque well either so adding leads to broken transmission gears. The gearing in the 4020 transmission is not simple, nearly ever gear in the box is used in every operating position, just in different orders. It wasn't designed overnight. The shift lever runs two cams, one in the left position, the other in the right position so lots of combinations are possible.

Gerald J.

Russ SCPA wrote: I owned a pair of 190 XT's , have run 4010's, 4020's, 826's, 856's, 966's(owned one of those jewels for entirely too many years), 1850 Oliver as well. Each and every one had strong points and all had weak points.  From personal experience, the AC and Oliver were "torqueier", the IHC's were larger more bulky operating units, and the 966 was the hottest thing I have ever run on operators deck, it was BAD. From memory if I had to pick  1   190 XT overall keep it light and run fast it will stay togeather  2   Oliver 1850,   slower on road, harder to shift, but extremely long design life  3  4020   corperate back up service  4   4010  see above  5   856    6   966   just a little clumsy, never meet a gallon of fuel it didn't like  7   826    the hydro sucked entirely too much power away or this one would have been my number 1 choice    tough, tough old birds

i have to agree about the 826, strongest tractor for weight we ever owned was a 826 manual transmission, the german diesel just did not know the meaning of quit, we never owned a 190, and i am sure that there are things that i would like about one, but when the 826 was bought in 1970, the 64 4020 became a wagon puller,

The XT is superior in every respect because of who made it,,, no other reason needed in this house.

DonDittmar wrote: I think maybe I just confused everyone instead of explaing it, but at least it sounds good

Don is close but... The 3010, 3020, 4010, and 4020 used two 12 volt batteries. The starter and generator were wired directly to the batteries for 24 volt operation and are 24 volt devices. With solenoid for the starter. The junction of the two batteries was grounded to the chassis allowing positive ground and negative ground loads like lighting, planter monitors, radio, and gauges. Some vintages used a really solid ground, and some used a fuse and blowing that fuse with unbalanced 12 volt loads caused seriously confusing voltage readings to ground and sometimes blew lamps on the low load side.

Its not a lot different in concept than what Thomas Edison used for 120/240 volt DC power in the late 1800s. One side of the street got +120 and the other side got -120. With wound field motors, hot plates, and lamps as the loads they didn't care much about polarity. Some electrolytic "meter" for consumption probably did, but no matter the direction of the electrons, material moved and could be weighed to determine user consumption.

In the tractors, it was important when adding loads to split them and add equally to both batteries so the batteries would charge and discharge evenly. That was so important that the lights on the tractor are divided with twice the circuits, circuit breakers, (or fuses), and switch poles. Edison used two generators in series. His benefit was reduced current and thus voltage drop in the neutral.

In a generator, no current is dissipated for half the sinewave. The commutator connects each armature coil in sequence when its at maximum voltage with the proper polarity for the load. And since the armature coils are in series, the brushes ground the negative side of the armature (for negative ground) and tap off the positive side to the battery. Each coil in the armature generates a sinewave IN the coil but the commutator does mechanical rectification. In the alternator a bank of silicon diodes connects each of the three windings to ground the negative going end and to connect the positive going end to the battery WHEN the generated voltage is at or above the battery voltage and swaps ends each half cycle of the sinewave.

4 6 volt batteries would also work, but it wasn't used in the new generation JD tractors to my knowledge.

Gerald J.

Well if we are going into bashing mode IH was pretty good too at making things more complicated than needed. Examples are the 3-point hitch on about all IHs and the wide front end. Lots of peices to wear and break. That all said I still can give credit where credit is due. The 706/806 were pretty comfortable to ride and I never seen an Allis diesel or Deere of the 70's or earlier that starts like a 1066. Well Dad's HD11 starts about as good as the 1066. Deere at least used to be most loyal to the American farmer unlike Deutz or AGCO.

Edited by Lonn - 28 Feb 2012 at 7:36pm