Combines Gleaners NHs and MFs oh my

[Illinois_Gleaner]

Good honest post Harvester. That is always the stupidest thing I hear, I had an old 410 or G and they were the biggest piles of junk. And what does that have to do with todays machines.

 

[Ilnewholland]

Harvester, I agree with some of your post except the CR comment. The CR is not that much bigger than a TR is in size. Turning radius is 173" on CR- 252" on TR, wheelbase 148" on CR- 130" on TR, height 155.5" on CR -162.7" on TR. I do not think the drives are any more complex than any other combine that would have a self-leveling cleaning system. Sure it weighs more than a TR did, but that may solve the durabilty problem you talk about on the TR. I do not think a TR needs much work done on them at 1200hrs. Most go to 3000 hrs or more before major work is needed. I hope you looked at a CR and better yet drove one before you made up your mind about the CR. Ilnewholland

 

[JD]

Being a TR owner forever, and like Ilnh commented, I'll take issue with a couple of your statements concerning "wear life" of a TR. We have owned 7 different TR's since 1977, a couple had over 3000 hrs put on them before they left without the problems you speak of. Never have we had to replace sheet metal caused by normal wear. No rotor gear boxes replaced, no final drives, no Hydros, straw choppers replaced, rear ends beefed up and only on the latest have we had a motor problem. On a TR-85 we had some trouble with the bubble-up auger gearbox but we solved that after rebuilding it the second time. The same machine had a piece of wood get attached to the flighting on the bubble-up auger and it wore a hole through the tube where it was rubbing, not normal wear thoughIJ Other odds and ends and yes some caused days of downtime or had a very expense part to be replaced. And don't get me wrong, yes they do breakdown and I have cussed 'em out more times my calculator can multiply! But not too the extent I've read some folks claimIJ It is just a matter of timely upkeep as with any machine on the market, period! Keeping watchful eyes and ears is a mustAnd yes we raise high yielding crops when the weather cooperates. Now, I agree 100% with your statements pertaining to the CR. It just amazes me the transformation they(NH) made from compact a machine to this skyscraper! The weight is a big issue with me. That's why I'm looking at the 8780XP as a "go to" in the near futureIJ Would like to just get a TR-99 but it's resale has gone down the tubes and NH is to blame, as they did the exact same thing to the "Genesis" tractor line last year and I'm starting to question NH's "comapny goals" and futureIJ It's nothing like the company it was just 5 years ago and down right pitiful compared to when "Sperry Rand" had control. JD

 

[Harvester]

Yep, was able to spend a week or so around one and drive it. Some nice touches, but definitely a European influence. My primary concern is weight and ease of transport for custom harvesters. The CR is going to encounter some great resistance with custom harvesters due to its weight and size which make transport more difficult than other models out there, especially the Gleaner. The CR should find a home in the Midwest among owners who will never (hopefully) have to transport this machine by truck. I thought this would spur some conversation. Actually, I've seen TRs hold up quite well in longevity, but these were primarily the 5, 6, and 7 series. The 88 and 98 seem to exhibit different and more severe wear characteristics than the previous models. Of course combines generally tend to last longer in corn_soy areas than in small grains. And we'll have to see how the CR fares, at least after the first few years of getting the start-up glitches resolved, as all new models will have. And JD, I see exactly what you see. NH itself has changed a great deal. I used to consider NH and AGCO two very easy companies to do business with: down-to-earth and approachable. Now Case is running the show and it's just like dealing with Deere-you're just a number. I think a lot of TR owners feel a bit alienated as we witness the metamorphosis of CNH and the intro of the CR and are also looking to brands like MF for the features they loved on the TR.

 

[JD]

Harvester and others, tell me about the "new" Gleaners some. Are they as simple as the Massey rotaryIJ There hasn't been a new Gleaner in my area in a couple decades. Only 2 "N" series ever and they didn't stay long, one guy had both. They are still referred to as "Silver Seeders" here! No Masseys either for that matter since the late 70's. But I have looked at the 8780xp at the last couple of shows I've been to and it reminds of the TR's. My Dad had 2 of the first Gleaners in this area back when, he didn't keep them but one season. Now this was years ago as they traded 2 pull type Allis C's in on them. His only positive thought about the Gleaners has always been.....they wouldn't rust out! Needless to say, he's not much on them still to this day. He went to Deere's after that and then to NH when the TR debuted. So, we'll try anything once......I guessIJIJIJIJ Thanks, JD

 

[Harvester]

I admire your open-mindedness. One doesn't often encounter it anymore. There is NO combine that is more simple and has a lower cost of ownership than the MF rotary. Great performance too. The Gleaner is not as simple as the MF rotary, but is very easy to work on nonetheless. Quite a bit better to work on than the TR, the Cases, and the Deeres. The new Gleaner uses the same concept as the N, which is a highly efficient design that offers excellent reliability, performance, and serviceability. The difference is that the new Gleaners are built considerably heavier than the N and are extremely reliable machines. To tell you the truth, I cringe every time I hear someone call a Gleaner a "silver seeder". I know you didn't call it that, but I consider anyone who uses that term totally ignorant about Gleaner combines. Actually, the Gleaner maintains incredibly low loss at amazing capacity rates due to its unique 2 part cleaning system. In my opinion (for what it's worth) the Gleaner has the best cleaning system in the business, which is not to say that the MF cleaning system is lacking, because it has its own distinct advantages. The Gleaner and the MF rotaries deserve serious consideration for anyone in the market for a new combine, just as the TR once did when it was still alive, and just maybe the CR still does.

 

[Ilnewholland]

Harvester, Thank you for not writing the New Holland CR's off totally. I still disagree that a TR-98 will ware faster than combines before. I think we are just running more threw the combines than before. With my TR-95 I would get maybe 7-8 acres an hour, now my TR-98 gets 10-11 acres per hour, plus I now no-till so I am running cornstalks with my soybeans. Also my yields are better(not this year) than 20 years ago. I see the new MF's have gained some weight also. It seems like most new combines are getting more heavy all the time. If we(as farmers) like the companys to build a stronger combine that will last longer and the complain that it weighs to much, I'm just not sure the companys can do it any different. I am sure a MF rotor combine is very good, but we here don't have a dealer for maybe 115 miles of my farm so there are not any around. There used to be many 510, 750, and 760's around but not any newer ones here. Gleaners are good as I have an uncle that has a R-52 that likes it very much and I have said that a Gleaner would be my second choice combine. I think the new CR's should have most bugs worked out as this combine has been around for many years being tested. I first saw one in 1998 and it was supposed to take the 88_98 place as there was not supposed to be a 89_99 combines but there was bugs to be worked out so it took till now to be right. The 50+ combines out now are a test run to get any more bugs out so next year if say JD buys one he will be very happy with it. Any new combine is good nowdays and any rotor combine in the midwest will harvest a lot of crop fast. It is more what one likes and I hope we can all have whatever we like. Have a good day,see you later, Ilnewholland

 

[RamRod]

Harvester, I agree with your very accurate representation of the new Gleaner, and I would add that they have a design that allows for the biggest and best balanced (set lower in machine) grain tanks in the business, all in a compact package.