This time I'm not telling my oppion because it will be proven wrong some how but I do want to hear yours!

http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/000/0/0/3-allis-chalmers-b.html - http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/000/0/0/3-allis-chalmers-b.html

http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/004/6/5/4656-farmall-130.html - http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/004/6/5/4656-farmall-130.html

http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/000/0/3/38-john-deere-40.html - http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/000/0/3/38-john-deere-40.html

Amen! This is what I was guna say but everybody would of just of tryed to shoot it down!

 

Adam

Thank you I chose the B Because of the size and tecnology and I did not the ca because it would not be in the same catagory with the others.

CA was produced concurrent with the IH Super C/Super A and 100/200 and the JD 40. Those would be better comparisons. The Allis B and C are concurrent with the IH A/B, JD H/M/MT. Those would be the better comparisons. I guess they produced the B for the same period as the CA for an economy tractor for those who couldn't afford the CA so you can throw the late B in with the CA. The late B did offer snap coupler hitch as an option.

 

I used to own a Farmall A, the only 2 things I ever did with it in the year I had it was Drive it on and off of the trailer and let it sit.

 

My Dad own's a late JD H that actually has electric start and hyd. It sits over 99% of the time, it might leave the shop every other year.  

 

The B with a 3pt conversion quickly becomes a useful little tractor.

The A and H, well perhaps if someone rigged a 3 pt to them it might help them, but the options aren't nearly as good. For the A no factory hydraulic so something would need rigged. For the H, who wants to try and do real work fiddling with a jumpy handclutch.

 

Lonn, Last year at our local show there was an 11 year old kid with a JD H, He had a mounted plow on it and actually plowed with it. The kid was smiling ear to ear. To me thats what these shows are about. His mother told me he saved all of his allowance money and such and bought that tractor himself.

 

Just my point of view,

Dave

Would like to have seen that.

I think most of these types of tractors were purchased with the implement attached and it stayed that way. If something else was needed they bought another tractor to mount that implement as it was to much trouble to take on and off. 

How many's B's and A's do you see that only had cultivators on them their whole life? 

My first thought was that when the B was introduced in 1937 there was nothing to compare it to.  International scrambled and came up with the A.  John Deere had the H but was that competition - no way.  It was years before competitors kind of caught up.  The 140 did not come out till the high 50's.  The M came out in the early 50's. 

Did they have better hyds.  Yes they did.  They were newer.

That said, even though the 140 and the M were newer and designed with better hyds and some implements we still had no trouble selling against them. 

The B was - as designed from the beginning - a very dependable, very economical, and most adaptable tractor.  Until they reached the end of their lives in 1957 they were a very good seller in our area.  IN fact, we were most upset when Allis Chalmers discontinued making them.

Good Luck!

Bill Long

 

 

To copy/improve upon an original idea/design is easier than being ingenuitive.  (The Deere M was a decade late to the game.)

 In the subjective catagory I would like to mention the Farmall's idiotic lopsided look.  I find the wide plush bench of the B more practical and better looking.