Combines crazy ideaIJ

Guess what Gleaner is already ahead of you. http:__www.agcocorp.com_Home.aspIJBrandName=Gleaner

the problem is $$$$. It takes just as much time to build a "C52" for example as it does an R72...The difference between cost of engines is very little...no $diff between trans _ tires_ metal etc. Engineering cost would be higher per unit because of lower sales to prorate costs over. Get the picture..problem.. The cost of a product has to include the salary of the worker_engineer_salesmen_serivce techs; utility bill_insurances_ allowances for warr._shrinkage (yes plants do lose things as do grain bins) goof ups (the welder, CNC, etc. misfired) freight, interest, health care for everyone involved and probably a hundred other things I forgot. Oh yeah, a tad of profit for the stockholders..The diff between a 150 hp tractor and a 225 hp tractor is less than $5000 material cost. The companies just make less profit off the low hp unit. Gleaner loses $ or breaks even on every R42 sold. So who would get excited over a low profit low sales new item.......... unless there was a proven market. BTW I guess a few on this site really screwed up the C62 sales because it was supposed to be a higher capacity machine at the same price as a R62..... shhhh

I'm glad you brought that up Mo-Farm. As I told below, the sales engineer at that Gleaner open house a few years ago was telling us about the evolution of the C62. The original plan was to take the M3_l3 design and add accelerator rolls to it. The problem was there wasn't enough height in the separator to add the rolls below the raddle chain where much of the grain came from. The engines sat too low in them to get the height to add the rolls. They would've had to do a major design change to the l_M to make this work. So they decided to do a whole new combine that was to become the C62 eventually. The C62 is a better design in sidehills anyhow - there is less chance of a sideways shift of grain before it gets to the accelerator rolls - the l_M design has those long raddle chains that allow too much sideways shift of grain before it would get to accelerator rolls. The drawback of the C62 is with the cylinder mounted so far back in the machine, the walkers need to be shorter to keep overall machine length within reason. Separation at the cylinder_concave is crutial in these beasts and it sounds like they are great performers.

Hello Tbran! As the proud owner of a C62, I can vouch that it has very little additional capacity compared to an R62. I still own a Deere 9610, so my Gleaner dealer has been trying hard to convert my totally to Gleaner, since I have a strong Gleaner track record. We ran a demo R62 alongside my C62, with similar heads, and the R62 had no problem keeping up.