They don't make 'em like they used to...

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Alex_V

Joined
Apr 10, 2016
Messages
1,296
Location
Campbellsville, KY
Was at a plow day at a local historic farm today and saw this beast.


What astounded me was the size of the engine - the block alone had to be at least 3.5 feet high and long. Dug up some specs:
PTO horsepower: 79
Max. no-load RPM: 1,950
Bore: 4"
Stroke: 5"
377 cu. in.
Valve clearance: .015" int., .025" exh. (which is, coincidentally, the same as the spark plug gap.)
 
Last edited:
Amazing grip.
smile.gif
 
Tractors, like locomotives, need to be heavy. There is little benefit to designing a lightweight engine.

Massively overbuilt with a strong dose of gravity is the design approach.
That one appears to be thoroughly worn out in that respect.
 
Originally Posted By: RamFan
Those must be those new fangled summer field tires everyone's been talkin' about.


You have no idea how sticky they are!
 
Had an uncle down in the bayou country of Louisiana back in the late 1960's who had one like this and two John Deere 4020's. The JD's were nice (even had AC cabs, as I recall). But the Case would out pull them, surprisingly.

One day he had some wood "marsh mats" (timbers strapped or bolted together to make a mat for a drag line, for example) which he had to relocate by dragging them wherever. The JD's could take a couple at a time, but not more; that meant a long process. They would bog down at more than that.

One of the farm hands suggested trying the Case, so one of them went and got it. It pulled without much fuss what the JD's couldn't touch.

As I recall, the Case had a terrific diesel engine, but the rest of it, not so much though I couldn't say why. It seemed like the JD's simply ran well all the time so they were the daily workhorses. As I understand it, the 4020's are still considered legendary workhorses 50 yr later.

(Note: this is not a flame war of Case vs. JD!)
whistle.gif
 
Originally Posted By: RamFan
Those must be those new fangled summer field tires everyone's been talkin' about.


I think they're called Le Klaw Gravitee Defyer GT's
laugh.gif
 
The mass of the big block was to load the nose so as they pulled and dug in, they would transfer the weight to the pulling tires. There is way more to tractoring than just draw-bar HP. Notice the specs do not list the torque of that engine ...
laugh.gif


The issue I had with the Case's, was the lack of power steering. If pulling an off-set plow, they can wear you down keeping them straight ...

Power steering could be retrofitted. But most farmers are cheap and would not do it. Hired hands will always go for the most comfortable and easiest to use tractor. So you may get more work done in a shift. But grunt does count on some jobs.

Some of the start on gas - run on diesel I-H's would pull the earth around they pulled so hard. But they were not fun to drive ...
 
Last edited:
Charley's '47 Sterling had a very similar set up Cylinders were paired and were bridged by the 2 heads. IRRC it was a Continental.
 
One neighbor had an 830 Case when I was young, the other a 1030 Comfort King.

The 1030 had a larger 451 diesel - VERY strong, but low compression so was hard to start in the winter.

Hydraulics and transmission were good - - - the engines liked to use oil.

They never became BIG because the tractors were very expensive to buy (compared to IH and Deere)

IH had the better tractor,
but company politics and bad management killed the IH company.

The Case/IH "Magnum" tractors actually had IH rear ends, and cabs -
with the new Case/Cummins 5.9 and 8.3 B and C series engines.

The Venerable DT466 had to go... to Navistar
 
Yes, it had multiple heads. I've also seen this setup on 2-135? Whites.

Interesting. I can see how Case would have been late to adopt "frills" like power steering which gave other companies an edge. My father-in-law has told me about an IH with a 5.9 Cummins they had on the farm when he was young, and how his dad took the (technically) smaller IH and stomped all over a couple Ford tractors some neighbors had and liked to brag about. He also pulled the hitch off a belly scraper with that tractor... I can't imagine that kind of wear and tear on equipment.
 
Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
I was just thinking the same thing, Pete! That huge block was necessary to run the anti-gravity generator...


You realize what would happen if they used that anti-gravity generator on a black hole right?
 
Originally Posted By: Alex_V
He also pulled the hitch off a belly scraper with that tractor... I can't imagine that kind of wear and tear on equipment.


I have a Farmall Super "C" with a souped-up C-135 engine... the "weak point" is actually tire traction.

All the power in the world doesn't do much if the tires are slipping.
 
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: Alex_V
He also pulled the hitch off a belly scraper with that tractor... I can't imagine that kind of wear and tear on equipment.


I have a Farmall Super "C" with a souped-up C-135 engine... the "weak point" is actually tire traction.

All the power in the world doesn't do much if the tires are slipping.


Cool. My soft spot is Farmalls - my dad owner a Super C for a little while, I had a Cub for 10 years, and my ex-landlord had close to 20 in various states of repair and ran the grain augers with a Super M at harvest time. What does the 135 engine come out of and what have you done to it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom