Most Durable Allis Tractor?

Do you guys asks these questions because you really want to know the answers or are you just bored?

I want to know what you think, But it give's me something to read when I'm bored.

I vote either the WD's or the 175's.  our 175 has 6500 hours on it and has never been touched. 

Jeff, that would be my D21, but its not factory and will get cut off some day! Darrel

Jeff, I had a customer,s JD 'D' in my shop a while ago and it had the tallest stack I had ever seen on one!  It was an inch under 8 ft. to the top of the stack. Why??  I figured maybe they thought the echo in that long pipe would make it sound like more than two cylinders!!LOL

All Allis tractors are.

Edited by Josh Day - 07 Aug 2011 at 11:16am

Never bored around here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aL38P8FZrk

Bored, I would say not.
Plenty to do.
I have to get my place buttoned up before winter.

Confucious say:  Man with tall-stack, drives cautiously into shed!

180 !!!! I kno of one that has 18000 hrs on it going stong , has duals on it when  used for tillage work ; runs all the hay equipment , excellent tractor , used but not abused !!

just like josh said all allis chalmers tractors are!!!

It's in really bad shape.
A real eye sore.
Would bring the property value down.

Dave Kamp has a good point. I can't tell you if my 36 WC is going to be more durable or longer lasting than say my 76 7060 or my 84 8050. The WC pretty well outlived it's useful life as a farm tractor almost 50 years ago. It was replaced by tractors with electric start, hydraulics, more power and that were more comfortable and easier to use. It still was used and abused and has survived to become a recreational vehicle, or at least a hobby.

The Orange Ones!!!

Another point-of-note:

There's many who boast that a modern 'big' tractor can do anything a 'smaller' tractor cannot do...  And there's many 'smaller' tractors nowdays that have the features, power output, etc., to do the kinds of things that used to take BIGGER older tractors.

The difference, however, is that the opportunity cost to GET and MAINTAIN an older tractor, is frequently a mere FRACTION of a newer machine.

My uncle still uses a D17-I as his haymaker.  Being open-station, it can mow, bale, and rake under overhanging timber.  With WF, worn tires, 2wd, no weight up front, and fluid on back, it will make brake-applied turns without tearing up the sod, and mow, rake, and bale for days on very little fuel. 

Of course, it doesn't have a radio, or air-conditioning... or live hydraulics with 4 circuits, or a turbocharger, or intercooler, or even a place to put his cellphone... but he doesn't NEED it, nor the complexity or hinderance of 4wd, doesn't need lights, or even a 3-point-  just good manners underhood, power steering, a functioning PTO and the power-director.

What this means, is that, in his application, the greatest competitor to a MODERN machine...  is a 55-year old tractor.  What's the cost impact?  Well... if you figure a Deere 5065 is in a similar size... at about $30,000...

You could get a decent D17 Series IV for about $5,000... or a Series 1 for about $3,000...

For the cost of the LOAN INTEREST on the 5065, you could both FUEL and MAINTAIN the D17... and leave the balance in the bank-book for some other agrarian economic purpose.

Doesn't it suck when a manufacturer has to look at his competitors' current models in order to determine his standing in the marketplace?  It must really, really suck to realize that he's also competing with tractors that his competitors... and his OWN ENGINEERS... developed, produced, and sold TEN YEARS PRIOR TO HIS BIRTH!

Don't think they ain't happy to see good tractors get bought and parted on Ebay, with the rest being sent to scrap.  One of the best things that ever happened to new tractor manufacturers... are high scrap prices and low-IQ opportunists.