Combines lexion versus STS

Interesting Statistic, and may I say from the outset that I have not had the pleasure of operating either machine, that said, neither of which I would discount when looking to upgrade again in the not to distant future when the season's start to turn around. Questions to you dakota: The 35% figure you quote, is that a gross figure for the day ie, the STS took 650l and the 470R's took 422lIJ Or was it a 35% more fuel on a litres per acre basisIJ As you stated the STS was doing slightly more acres per hr. What difference do you think it would have made if the STS was traveling slower with a 36ft draper header on itIJ Obviously you would be all to well aware of the conditions and what a difference a draper front can make to the way a crop feeds in and how heavy conditions can really suck the power out of a hydrostatic machine trying to travel faster to compensate for a smaller, less efficent header. Do you think the new emmission controls on the later machines my have played a factor in the higher fuel consumtionIJ As I said, an interesting statistic to state, but until it is looked at in the cold light of day, a very sweeping and broad one, and I will be interested in your reply. Please don't take this as some one eyed green man taking a swipe and anything that doesn't have the green paint on it, it not. To be qutie honest I from what I have seen of the Rotary lexions and my personal experice in the CTS's. If price and distance from back-up service wasn't an issue, I would go a lexion over the CTS's. So I am always interested to hear reports like yours on any machine to come to my own conclusions.

Nice to see this side by side comparision. Since you have expreience with both machines maybe you can answer a couple of questions. What is HP of the 470IJ Did you notice a drastic difference in the performance of the machines. Was either really starved for powerIJ If the Deere was starved for power, will the coming 60 series with 375 HP be enough to overcome the limitations as compared to the lexionIJ

We had former the european version of the 480 and now also the european version of the STS with more horsepower then the US-Version. And what I can say after the first 350 acres is that the STS can do more bushels_hour than the CAT. We drive the STS with a 30feet header. I must say - its unbelievable what capaciti this combine has - unbelievable! The lex had always problems when the straw was really green and wet to get the material through. Then he is making balls with the straw and not able to get the barley or wheat out of the wet straw!

Was the 470R competing against a 9650 or 9750STSIJ

Too bad the STS didn't have a draper head on it as well so we could be comparing apples to apples. Still good information though. My experience has been that you can go up one size of draper vs. an auger platform and still maintain the the same ground speed as what you were doing with the auger head. This is due to the smoother feeding characteristics of the draper. Of course this depends a good deal on crop conditions, the tougher the conditions the greater the advantage to the draper head, especially with cylinder_concave machines.

I agree. This is my experience, too.

It was a 9650, the "little" one.

The 470R has 340 HP. I was never able to utilize the HP, because the machine would throw grain over long before it reached the HP limit. The limit on the 9650 STS was the auger head because of the massive straw this crop had. Otherwise it would have been the HP, what is a good thing to happen. So you never have to worry about grain loss.

The fuel figure arose from just filling up both combines at the end of the day. The STS took 100 gallon while the lexion took 135 gallon. I am sure that with a 36' draper the STS would have traveled the same speed, because of the feeding enhancement a draper provides. I have experienced that. I have never checked a CTS closely, but the grain quality of the lexion (unthreshed heads, trash, cracking) is unacceptable.