Combines bullet rotor

Don't know about compatibilty, but I've never entertained the notion. Bullet rotor is really only going to be an advantage in crops like canola, etc. with high volumes of MOG. In corn, you'll be limited by the low shoe capacity of the machine long before the rotor limits you. Unless you've grenaded the OEM rotor in the machine, there's no advantage to you putting a bullet rotor in for corn. If you need more capacity in corn, then I have another recommendation.

I hate to be a smartas* but so whats the reason behind having the bullet rotor in a machine at all if its not going to up the capacityIJIJ

Whats the point in spending the extra money for a 9860 when you are getting the same capcity as a 9660IJ

In high MOG crops such as the ones mentioned, the STS has struggled from a bottleneck or congestion that occurs at the front of the rotor. The boys at Case have known about this for several years in their machine - the area known as the transition cone is the critical area because the crop mass transitions and has to change directions in this area. Aside from causing a good deal of wear in this area (remember the early STS machines before all the stainless steel became available in the FAST areaIJ),anything other than a smooth flow of material will waste a lot of power and limit the machine. Case developed the AFX rotor to help this problem, and JD developed the Bullet rotor. Both rather clever marketing names given to a "fix" to a problem that has long existed by using auger flighting and a long tapered rotor nose to open up that area. In short, these rotors do offer slightly increased capacity in those high MOG crops which gave their predecessors fits. This isn't the case in corn, because the rotor transition isn't the limiting factor at all for an STS in corn. If you do soybeans, it has some potential benefit, but not in corn.

Well here in the mid south where I'm at, most of the farmers that run the STS just rave about the Bullet rotor but when you ask them just exactly what is so great about it over the regular rotor they look at you with a blank stare. In my opinion they would buy a green combine if the rotor was made out of wood! We ran a 9750 (against my will but anyway) for 3 years and I was never so ready to get rid of a combine in my life. looking at it, the front feed accelerator is the hold back. Its taking a crop that is spread out over the whole width of the throat and cramming it into a area almost half the width and shaped like a half moon. We never once choked the rotor up but the feed accelerator was another story. The updated one that Kuchar is selling looks like just the ticket to make it into a good combine. If we had kept ours, I was going to pull the throat and beater and make one up like Massey runs in theirs now. Much better IMO.

By the way, its good to get a little conversation going here. This place was almost dead for a few weeks. Guess everyone is getting laid by with planting and the wheats just not ready enough yet. lets keep it up!

Agreed! And thanks for the laugh too. A wooden rotor; the same mindset exists here in the North too. I can't imagine that an STS works better in rice than the CTS does and did. The hybrid design of the CTS and used by the Cat lexion has real merit when you start talking about performance in a wide array of crops, something the STS struggles with.

You are right about the CTS - it will beat an STS in rice. However, I have found a few ways that can greatly improve the feed of the STS rotor is to slow down the feed accellerator and the feeder chain. I'm talking rice machines because the feed accellerator runs at a higher speed in both low and high on a rice machine than a grain machine. If you run it in high there definately seems to be a chocking or bunching affect at the front of the rotor. I also changed the rotor bars to loewen's - that makes a huge differance. No I don't sell loewen gear. But they really work well.

Horsepower!!! Not much replacement for HP's!