| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
dfwallis 
Orange Level
Joined: 09 Mar 2023
Location: DFW
Points: 627
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Topic: AC vs Farmall
Posted: 17 Nov 2023 at 6:01pm |
|
I did some minor work to a Farmall H and an M while working on my CA this spring and fall. I kept getting the feeling that I was working on something antiquated and poorly engineered, kind of model T-ish and after-thought-ish with the H and the M. Not that the CA is all roses (clear structural weaknesses), but it does seem like a little more thought went into it. Thoughts?
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
WF owner
Orange Level
Joined: 12 May 2013
Location: Bombay NY
Points: 4664
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Nov 2023 at 7:41pm |
If that post was anywhere but in this forum, it would spark one heck of an argument.
Dad had a WD45 that I grew up on. My uncle had an M. For some reason, the M was at our house and Dad had me drive it back to my uncle's (I was about 14). I hated that tractor.
To me it was like going from am a modern car to a Model T.
The AC's had a much quicker governor and were much better on a flat belt than the Farmall.
|
|
dfwallis
Orange Level
Joined: 09 Mar 2023
Location: DFW
Points: 627
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Nov 2023 at 7:52pm |
 WF owner wrote:
If that post was anywhere but in this forum, it would spark one heck of an argument.
Dad had a WD45 that I grew up on. My uncle had an M. For some reason, the M was at our house and Dad had me drive it back to my uncle's (I was about 14). I hated that tractor.
To me it was like going from am a modern car to a Model T.
The AC's had a much quicker governor and were much better on a flat belt than the Farmall.
|
:) I am a retired engineer. I find it hard to believe that any good engineer would not have similar criticisms to mine. I'm being intentionally vague though. Just curious as to what people like and dislike. I kept looking at the H and M layout, controls, routing and thinking "really?"...
|
|
Les Kerf
Orange Level
Joined: 08 May 2020
Location: Idaho
Points: 777
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Nov 2023 at 8:30pm |
WF owner wrote:
...The AC's had a much quicker governor and were much better on a flat belt than the Farmall. |
My late Father-in-law said the same thing; he grew up on a farm in southern Idaho where his Father owned a Farmall M, a Farmall H, and an Allis CA. He said the CA ran the ensilage blower better that the Farmall M, but the Farmall H had the best cultivator controls in the sugar beet fields. Of course the M walked away with the Tumblebug plow.
He brought a well-used WD with him when he moved the family up here to northern Idaho, and I ran it quite a bit; I learned to love that hand clutch! 
None of them are as easy to do routine maintenance on as my 1941 John Deere Model A though  (Brakes, clutch, valve adjustment...) |
|
dfwallis
Orange Level
Joined: 09 Mar 2023
Location: DFW
Points: 627
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Nov 2023 at 9:02pm |
Les Kerf wrote:
WF owner wrote:
...The AC's had a much quicker governor and were much better on a flat belt than the Farmall. |
My late Father-in-law said the same thing; he grew up on a farm in southern Idaho where his Father owned a Farmall M, a Farmall H, and an Allis CA. He said the CA ran the ensilage blower better that the Farmall M, but the Farmall H had the best cultivator controls in the sugar beet fields. Of course the M walked away with the Tumblebug plow.
He brought a well-used WD with him when he moved the family up here to northern Idaho, and I ran it quite a bit; I learned to love that hand clutch!
None of them are as easy to do routine maintenance on as my 1941 John Deere Model A though (Brakes, clutch, valve adjustment...)
The CA operator platform is a bit of a pain to remove to work on things, but I don't think I would like it as well without it. |
|
|
DrAllis
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 20485
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Nov 2023 at 10:22pm |
|
I believe you can replace a foot clutch in those Farmalls, without splitting the tractor ?? That's not a bad thing.
|
|
dkattau
Silver Level
Joined: 20 Mar 2011
Location: Nebraska
Points: 265
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 1:43am |
|
Hs and early Ms. The clutch on the later Ms was too big to get out of the hole on the bottom. If the flywheel needed to be resurfaced, they all needed to be split.
|
|
dkattau
Silver Level
Joined: 20 Mar 2011
Location: Nebraska
Points: 265
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 1:45am |
dfwallis wrote:
I did some minor work to a Farmall H and an M while working on my CA this spring and fall. I kept getting the feeling that I was working on something antiquated and poorly engineered, kind of model T-ish and after-thought-ish with the H and the M. Not that the CA is all roses (clear structural weaknesses), but it does seem like a little more thought went into it. Thoughts? |
More like a Model A. The Farmalls used the same input shaft design.
|
|
Gary(OR)
Bronze Level
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Points: 177
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 3:16am |
|
Well, the Farmall's debuted in '39 and went basically unchanged until '53 with the super series, right? Both IH and AC were ahead of their time with overhead valve engines back in the day. That M engine is quite a torque monster! ....Speaking of engineering, how 'bout the IH "gas start diesels" introduced in '41? They sure had their share of problems (mainly cracked heads), but was a pretty impressive bit of engineering, imo
|
|
AaronSEIA
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Mt Pleasant, IA
Points: 2551
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 5:45am |
You'd be better off comparing an H to a WC. Outside of hydraulics, they were basically the same thing. A CA was literally decades ahead in terms of engineering and design. AaronSEIA
|
|
560Dennis
Bronze Level
Joined: 30 Apr 2011
Location: NE OHIO
Points: 116
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 6:39am |
never owned and AC tractor so cant make a comparsion . I do see them all at the auctions . All have issues from poor maintenance by the owner. This Farmall is a piece of crap. Yep ! It is ! Look at what the owner did to it, nothing
|
|
WF owner
Orange Level
Joined: 12 May 2013
Location: Bombay NY
Points: 4664
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 6:48am |
560Dennis wrote:
never owned and AC tractor so cant make a comparsion . I do see them all at the auctions . All have issues from poor maintenance by the owner. This Farmall is a piece of crap. Yep ! It is ! Look at what the owner did to it, nothing |
I think the thread is more about the design than mechanical problems.
|
|
Fred in Pa
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Hanover Pa.
Points: 9210
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 7:11am |
|
I grew up on Farmalls would take a H over WC any day ,Dad had a lot of attachments for the H . WF a thread like this is going to jump around . It will be entertaining and opinionated .
|
|
He who dies with the most toys is,
nonetheless ,still dead.
If all else fails ,Read all that is PRINTED.
|
|
Gary Burnett
Orange Level Access
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Virginia
Points: 2939
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 7:23am |
|
With the pto set up and hydraulics I'd go with a h over a wc but would like the wc motor better.
|
|
Macon Rounds
Orange Level
Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Location: Pittsburgh Pa
Points: 2143
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 7:49am |
|
We had an H, MD and MDTA in the early 70's.
Dad was looking for something a little safer for us kids to plow with, so he bought our 1960 D17 and the IH's were gone shortly there after.
I do wish I had the 1954 MDTA back. Just because of what it is.
Allis was so much more comfortable and easier to drive. And more safe. To plow with, at least the D series are.
And baling hay with the power director was and still is a dream.
I recently bought a IH 400 tractors at an estate sale.
It was a VERY NICE well taken care of tractor.
After using it to disc and having the wife also try it out. We quickly sold it to an IH collector.
|
|
The Allis "D" Series Tractors, Gravely Walk behind Tractors, Cowboy Action Shooting !!!!!!! And Checkmate
|
|
wjohn
Orange Level
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Location: KS
Points: 1986
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 9:52am |
DrAllis wrote:
I believe you can replace a foot clutch in those Farmalls, without splitting the tractor ?? That's not a bad thing. |
Yep, just on the very late Ms and newer (i.e. Super Ms) the clutch pressure plate is a little to big of diameter to fit out the bottom of the housing because they upsized the clutch. This still came in handy on my Super M because I needed to replace the input shaft seal and bearing. You're crouched under the tractor which isn't fun, but you can get the pressure plate, throwout carrier, and clutch all loose, cocked sort of sideways, and get the input shaft out to replace the bearing and seal. Definitely easier than splitting the whole tractor.
I think the CA would be better compared to a Super C, 200, and 230. They were made roughly the same years as the CA and were similar size. Those Farmall tractors could have true live hydraulics driven directly off the engine so that is a plus over the CA. However if you can keep the hand clutch on the CA in working condition, it does give you a form of live PTO and live hydraulics.
I do like the quick release hood latches on the Farmalls, compared to threaded fasteners on the AC hoods. The bigger rear tires on the Farmalls give you better traction in field work but do cost more to replace. No spinout rims on the Farmalls - pro and con as the spinouts do cost more, but if you need them for cultivating different row spacings, they're handy.
Mounted implements are a plus on the ACs. It's easier to find Snap Coupler attachments, I think. They are out there for the Farmall Super C etc. but don't seem to be as easy to find. Governors are also snappier on the ACs as another poster mentioned above.
|
|
1939 B, 1940 B, 1941 WC, 1951 WD, 1952 CA, 1956 WD-45
|
|
dfwallis
Orange Level
Joined: 09 Mar 2023
Location: DFW
Points: 627
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 11:59am |
wjohn wrote:
DrAllis wrote:
I believe you can replace a foot clutch in those Farmalls, without splitting the tractor ?? That's not a bad thing. |
Yep, just on the very late Ms and newer...
< SNIP>
The bigger rear tires on the Farmalls give you better traction in field work but do cost more to replace. No spinout rims on the Farmalls - pro and con as the spinouts do cost more, but if you need them for cultivating different row spacings, they're handy. <SNIP>
|
Dad likes the larger diameter wheels on the H, but I think you can mostly compensate with wider wheels and proper ballast. Greater ground contact can be achieved either way. I put wider spinouts and wider tires on the CA and plan to add liquid ballast and "properly" distributed weights. I'm not quite sure what I'll be using it for beyond mowing yet though, but it'll be ready at least :)
I like to watch some of the youtube pulling videos but am sometimes dismayed at some trying to use very narrow tires on their Bs and Cs and CAs. They usually end up losing traction long before they run out of torque.
Edited by dfwallis - 18 Nov 2023 at 1:31pm
|
|
DaveKamp
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 5754
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 10:35pm |
Running out of traction before horsepower is the reality of tractive effort physics... and tire diameter, in agricultural tractive effort, is a key element far greater than tire width, because the CHORD ANGLE at which the tire engages the soil determines when the TE slip curve starts it's rapid climb. This is all illustrated in the empirical evidence study done by Wismer and Luth in their 1973 paper publication:
Adding ballast is another key factor, but realize that when engaging in a tractor pull, it is not the TRACTOR, or the TIRES, or the ENGINE that determines who wins or looses, it's the RULES that make the determination. If the rules predicate using stock tire size, and a green or red or yellow tractor used a larger diameter tire than an orange, then the natural advantage at any given weight, will favor the larger diameter, REGARDLESS of the width.
But that's not really the context of this thread.
The point to remember when comparing tractors, especially comparing BRANDS, is that manufacturing tractors wasn't about building the 'best' tractor, it was SELLING THE MOST tractors, and it wasn't about having 'ALL THE BEST' features, it was about having features that YOU controlled the PATENTS on.
The Allis Power Director was a very serious patent feature, it was a reckoning force of competition to the IH Torque Amplifier... because of HOW it worked, and it's competitor could, and could not do.
Now, in the realm of comfort, there weren't many tractors prior to the late '50's that had what we would nowdays regard to as 'good human engineering'... and part of it was simply the agricultural normals of the era. Row cropping used to be very mechanical-cultivation-intensive... they'd plant in check-rows so that weeds could be cultivated out from several angles, several times a season, and as such, a good view, offset from centerline, was a big feature in tractors. Power steering really didn't exist, but if you were rolling through rows, it wasn't massively necessary...
How each company addressed things like this... was highly restricted by PATENTS.
Now comparing IH to Allis in terms of business, International Harvester's primary focus was the manuacture of machinery for the agricultural industry. Their greatest asset, was their ability to reach out to markets worldwide, and to manufacture both domestically, and overseas.
The primary focus of Allis-Chalmers, was the manufacture of industrial and utility power equipment. Farm tractors were a 'surplus product', in the shadow of massive generators, electrical transformers, steam turbines, etc. Their greatest asset, was their foundry and industrial engineering capacity... it enabled them to pour huge components, and then use the excess material to effectively make large quantities of other parts, including engine blocks, transmission housings, etc., at a very low cost. They were masters of Economies of Scale.
All this being said, comparing two TRACTORS isn't a 'which is better?' type situation... it is more a 'which is better for what circumstance, and why'. In making up a side-by-side comparison/contrast chart, one will find that both have significant strengths and weaknesses, both have design elements and operational features. In investigating the strengths, weaknesses, design elements and operational features, then looking at what was PATENTED, and by WHOM, you'll get a really good idea of why everything is as it is.
|
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
|
DrAllis
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 20485
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Nov 2023 at 11:46pm |
|
To expand a little bit on Dave's comments, answer me this riddle: Take an "M" or even possibly a Super"M" Farmall and a 3 x 14's pull-type plow to a field of alfalfa sod to turn the soil over. On the same day, and same time, take a properly equipped WD45 gas with good cond 14.9 x 28 tires (factory option) and 900 lbs of fluid (standard equipment) between the pair. Also, have a couple of rear wheel weights on each rear tire and some front end weight too. Equip this tractor with an AC 3 x 14's 50 series plow properly adjusted and sharp plow shares. Which one should you put in the lead ??? As a package deal (from the selling dealership) you'd better put the WD45 in front, or you will be waiting all the time for the Farmall to get out of the way. I'm not saying a HUGE difference in performance, but the Allis will win and the longer the stretches are, the farther it will keep gaining distance. Traction Booster. A closely hitched and lighter weight plow. And an Operator that knows how to make use of what he has helps with the "win".
Edited by DrAllis - 18 Nov 2023 at 11:47pm
|
|
WF owner
Orange Level
Joined: 12 May 2013
Location: Bombay NY
Points: 4664
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 5:03am |
I guess my biggest complaint about the M was I didn't feel safe driving it. With the WD45, that I learned to drive on, the fenders (especially the right side) made a pretty safe environment. On the M, I felt like I could easily fall under the fender.
Adding to Dave's comments about patents, Power Adjust wheels (starting with the WD) was a huge labor saver and probably a big selling point.
The hand clutch setup was a great help for a kid learning to drive a tractor. I can remember starting and stopping with the hand clutch when I practically had to leave the seat to reach the foot clutch.
|
|
DrAllis
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 20485
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 6:11am |
|
Even with fenders on the IH tractors, you still were somewhat in harms way (no top to the fender) of the moving tire and how high you sat in the air. They were much easier to upset than a WD45 for sure.
|
|
exSW
Orange Level
Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Location: Pennsylvania
Points: 914
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 8:19am |
|
A lot comes down to preferance. I like a rowcrop platform tractor, that pretty much eliminates D series. AC made a lot of properly ballasting their tractors. IH just put the iron in the tractor.AC didn't do that till the 7000 series. IH's 300 and 400 series engines were the best engines of the era for one simple reason. They were the last developed. IH looked at everyone elses and sat down at the drawing board. The torque curve of these engine let IH go without a powershift for so long simply because they didn't need one. Same conditions,same fields same implements IH,AC,JD you're not reaching for that TA as often as you do the powershift. There's slopes were I live and clay soil. But I've ran machines in the loess soil of West Tennessee and same thing. I like my 7010. I like the powershift. The cab beats a Soundguard to bits. But I'd trade it for a 5088 (if I could find one that wasn't slaughtered) in a heartbeat(although an 8030 would probably win over both. Cab and hydraulics). I love my WD as a tractor I wouldn't trade it for even a late battery box Super H. Fast hitch was the best part of those 50's IH. It flat worked. IH was foolish not to licence it. Snap Coupler is slick but it's not FH slick.
Edited by exSW - 19 Nov 2023 at 8:40am
|
|
Learning AC...slowly
|
|
Macon Rounds
Orange Level
Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Location: Pittsburgh Pa
Points: 2143
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 9:24am |
|
More Farmall "M", 400's, 460, 560 etc in our area than Allis Chalmers .
But no one uses fast equipment anymore. Lots of tractors with it. But no one uses it.
But lots of snap coupler equipment being used. Especially for spring and fall plowing.
|
|
The Allis "D" Series Tractors, Gravely Walk behind Tractors, Cowboy Action Shooting !!!!!!! And Checkmate
|
|
wjohn
Orange Level
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Location: KS
Points: 1986
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 9:50am |
DrAllis wrote:
To expand a little bit on Dave's comments, answer me this riddle: Take an "M" or even possibly a Super"M" Farmall and a 3 x 14's pull-type plow to a field of alfalfa sod to turn the soil over. On the same day, and same time, take a properly equipped WD45 gas with good cond 14.9 x 28 tires (factory option) and 900 lbs of fluid (standard equipment) between the pair. Also, have a couple of rear wheel weights on each rear tire and some front end weight too. Equip this tractor with an AC 3 x 14's 50 series plow properly adjusted and sharp plow shares. Which one should you put in the lead ??? As a package deal (from the selling dealership) you'd better put the WD45 in front, or you will be waiting all the time for the Farmall to get out of the way. I'm not saying a HUGE difference in performance, but the Allis will win and the longer the stretches are, the farther it will keep gaining distance. Traction Booster. A closely hitched and lighter weight plow. And an Operator that knows how to make use of what he has helps with the "win".
|
This is just my opinion, but I think the extra base tractor weight and larger diameter tires of the SM/400/450 let a lot of IH farmers (or anyone with a heavier tractor) be lazy about proper plow setup. I think you're alluding to that by stating properly adjusted plow, sharp shares, extra weight, etc. for the WD-45 in your case. The M was no longer in production when the WD-45 came out, and don't forget AC was still trying to compete with the WD-45 by the time IH had already released the 450, although the D-17 wasn't far away.
I'd wager either a good IH dealer with a Super M or a good AC dealer with a WD-45 could set up their tractor to outdo the competitor's tractor that had just had a plow hooked up to it with little optimization, or one that was getting a little worn and out of adjustment. An average setup 450 might even outdo your best setup WD-45, towards the end of WD-45 production.
My answer was to get a WD-45 AND a Super M! Both have their place.
|
|
1939 B, 1940 B, 1941 WC, 1951 WD, 1952 CA, 1956 WD-45
|
|
exSW
Orange Level
Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Location: Pennsylvania
Points: 914
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 10:01am |
Macon Rounds wrote:
More Farmall "M", 400's, 460, 560 etc in our area than Allis Chalmers .
But no one uses fast equipment anymore. Lots of tractors with it. But no one uses it.
But lots of snap coupler equipment being used. Especially for spring and fall plowing. |
I'll plow with my 560 and 3-16" FH all day before I hook the WD to the SC plows. The WD does the garden because it's smaller and handier not because it does a better job.
|
|
Learning AC...slowly
|
|
exSW
Orange Level
Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Location: Pennsylvania
Points: 914
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 10:07am |
|
In terms of Physics the Snap coupler and Fast hitch both essentially work the same way. The wishbone anchors up under the center of the tractor and hang off the rockshaft arms. FH the wishbone(and adjustments/settings)is attached to the tractor and SC the wishbone is attached to the implement(with less settings).
Edited by exSW - 19 Nov 2023 at 10:13am
|
|
Learning AC...slowly
|
|
55allis
Orange Level
Joined: 30 Jun 2020
Location: Griswold Iowa
Points: 698
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 11:34am |
|
I’ll pull an Allis 3-16 plow with my wd without any weights, just 16.9R28 Firestones…
|
|
1955 AC WD45 diesel with D262 repower, 1949 AC WD45
|
|
BrianC
Orange Level
Joined: 16 Jun 2011
Location: New York
Points: 1619
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 11:41am |
|
Much easier to do a brake job on the Farmall's.
|
|
Stan R
Orange Level Access
Joined: 03 Dec 2009
Location: MA
Points: 960
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 11:46am |
|
Maybe they are designed a decade apart is why.
Production data per tractordata.com:
Farmall H built in 1939-1953,
Farmall M 1939-1954
AC CA in 1950-1958.
|
|
Herb(GA)
Orange Level Access
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Location: United States
Points: 1036
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Nov 2023 at 12:14pm |
|
In central KS (1940's, 50's & 60's) the few AC dealers were small, the many JD and IHC dealers were large. Herb(GA)
|
|
