Combines light weight combineIJ

I never heard a complaint by a TR owner about the feeder being to shortIJ Never heard one about the cab on a late modeled TR being uncomfortableIJ Never heard that a late modeled TR didn't have enough fuel capacityIJ Never heard anyone say they wanted their next machine to out weigh their previous machine by 10,000n's plusIJ!IJ! The most common complaint about a TR that I was aware ofIJ.....bubble up auger itself and drive group and the 973 floating header if you want to lump it in also as a machine flawIJIJIJ SO, who was it that they heard these glamorous insights fromIJ The Deere and other owners who they asked what they disliked about TR'sIJ Yep, makes me feel good! I asked this the other night and got no responce so I'll ask again and see if I get luckyIJ A CR 940 has how much more hp that a TR 99 and doesn't it carry the same motor as a TR 99IJ So, where's the extra power going to come from to get a CR 940 through a wet field like we experinced this year hereIJ Again, the same tires are_where offered for both machines, soIJ For illustration purposes only, say a 940 weighs only 9000n's more than a 99, now...can you imagine another 160bu corn worth of weight to carry around while it's wetIJIJIJ Hell, I can't even hardly load mine half full and keeping moving forward when it's real wet like this year was! The answer to your question is YES! You have one of your own already. A TR-97,98,99 could handle a 12 row corn header as my friend up the road had one on his with no extra weights. Mine handles an 8 row and 30ft platform like it's not there from a balance view point. It is not in a manufactors best interest nowadays to decrease parts from a combine, they have to give the machines away(relative.. retail versus sale price) already in order to move themIJ They will make the money back on the parts, labor and finance assumidlyIJ JD ps...drive out to KS and convince Mark U. to sue Deere so he can get his patents back and we then can have a VERY SIMPlE design, MAYBEIJ!IJ! (~;

JD, as far as I was told first hand, the law suit has taken place a long time ago already and Mark has most of his rights back.

Anything new going on thereIJ JD

JD, I have to agree with you that the CR920 and 940 are overbuilt. I don't think that they would need to be that heavy of a combine for a 30' grain head or 8 row corn head. I guess I was thinking more of the CR970 and 42' draper and 12 row corn head on it. It seems the mfg. can save money by running one size of basic combine down the assembly line than having twoIJ I guess I would like to have the feeder longer if I can, as when I harvest beans I push the seat all the way up and lean over the steering wheel some. It kind of gets to my back sometime doing that. I like the bigger cab also, have cut with a Gleaner R-52 and the big cab is nice. You put a couple of kids in the TR cab and it gets small fast. I know they shouldn't be out there with me or the wife, but sometimes thats the way it works out. I'm just not sure if any company or dealer is making any money todayIJ look at stock prices or how many dealerships are closing. I still think if they could build a better combine they wouldIJ Ilnh

JD built their STS too light. After 1300 hours everything what comes in contact with grain is worn out. You could buy another used combine for what it cost to fix a gutted STS.

After the combine buying market has waited 30 years for a combine manufacturer to finally build and manufacture a machine with some ENGINEERING INTEGRITY, and substance behind it, why would we want to go back to a TIN lIZZY machine. The North American combine manufacturers have been guilty to no end of building flimzy tinny products that wear out prematurely, in comparison to our European combine manufacturers, {lexions,Class, New Holland TX} These European combines are 10000 hr. machines, not 2 or 3000hr machines. Combines shouldn't be traded like todays cars and pick-ups. For what we pay for them they should last like a pair of CARHARTS. Furthermore why would we want to pay more and get less. Believe me after running one of these European built machines for seven years, there is no more shaking, vibrating as you go down the field. Hats off to New Holland for building a combine of the 21st century, one that is designed and built to take anything the North American farmer can throw at it.

I sure hope your right. That would be nice to have a 10 year old combine and it still be worth something. The only problem is if it gets real wet then it will sink like a rock. Tracks are most likely the answer, just that it will cost a lot more. I have never understood why they couldn't make a combine with the same size tires all the way aroundIJ Maybe even duels on the back alsoIJ Maybe a quadtrack combineIJ Ilnh

Dakota, you run the Cats that are on the heavy side also, do they sink on soft groundIJ Are they too heavyIJ What size tires do you haveIJ Thanks, Ilnh

We run a R72 and a TR99 and the TR does need a bigger fuel tank for our conditions and that cab is cramped compared to the gleaner,the floor of the TR's cab should have been at least 6 inches longer.

What kind of conditions and what crops were you running inIJ How many hours could you run on a tank (125 gal.) of fuelIJAt 8.8 gal per hr. is about 14 hours of running under full load, thats a big day's work.