Combines MASSEY S AT HESSTON

[tbran]

No(yeslater),no,no,yes,no,yes,no.

 

[T__langan]

Seems someone posted here last year sometime that the two speed gearbox for the rotor is rated at 400 hp. We are at 330 now on the R72 so there is room for mo' power thus mo' capacity. Feeders can be tweaked more (Dan Hurtt's a pro) and maybe made deeper to handle more materialIJ How about a "Split Flow" Gleaner. Use the super wide C62 feederhouse and feed a crossways rotor in the center. Crop is threshed and then divided to flow in opposite directions for separation and with a discharge on both rear corners. It would be a simple design like we're used to, still have all the advantages of the transverse rotor vs longitudinal, could be built on the current frame, use many same parts as the C62 (feederhouse, concaveIJ),and have massive capacity.

 

[Silver_Bullet]

Sounds good to me. You would basically have two R52 seperators side by side going left and right out the rotor. WOW! The only problem I see is getting the material to divide. But then, maybe it would not be a problem at all. With the spreaders on the outside corners both kicking the material to the outside, spreading 30' to 36' would be no problem either. I hope that it has or is being tried. What a machine it would be!

 

[SilverTurnedGreen]

I like Tom's split flow idea, but I think a second, larger diameter and slower running rotor behind the first to draw the crop back into a single windrow would be the "cat's answer"! You would have additional seperation area, and more versatility with your settings, since the primary function of the split flow rotor would be threshing, NOT threshing and seperation.

 

[turbo]

I would not want to bale straw out of a twin discharge system. The straw needs to come out the center of the machine. I beleive the Massey system would be a much better system. The combine is much more simple. One feeder chain, no distribution augers, no acellerator rolls, no over threshing on left side of concave, no discharge beater, no cylinder vibration. The Massey rotor has a better rock protection system. The technology is here to load the seives evenly with out the bean cracking accellerator rolls and dist. augers. All it needs is a big bin, fast unloading, the Gleaner seives (the largest in the industry)Gleaner cylinder bars and horsepower. It already has a better cab and controls. Gleaner has made the same combine and cab for ten years now. It is time for a change.Agco owns both Gleaner and Massey. Its time they put the two together and make a super combine!

 

[T__langan]

Whoa Hoss! Slow down a tad bit here! You are implying taking away All the things that make the Gleaner rotaries great combines. For starters, longitudinaly oriented rotors WIll NOT feed nicely in tough conditions, period. When that crop coming up the feeder is fed into the rotor intake that is spinning sideways, the crop will and does get bunched up. And then you're trying to thresh bunches and ropes instead of a flat, thin mat of crop. longitudinals are fine for corn, ok for nice, dry conditions in other crops, but bad news in tough conditions. The tines and egg shaped separation area in the green STS's are there to strip and fluff that crop back out of the bunches and ropes. It is a cure for the symptoms, not the cause. I am not familiar with the Massey rock protection system, but again, nobody that I'm aware of has any better rock protection than the Gleaners and the crossways rotor is the reason. When a rock gets to the rotor, a cylinder bar will force it downward and trip the rock door. Axials, to my knowledge, still rely upon the front feed drum to stop rocks and that, in my opinion, limits feeder capacity. The STS's have already got a reputation for only catching about 20% of the rocks. You also say we should eliminate the distribution auger and accelerator rollsIJ And take away what makes for the highest capacity cleaning system that existsIJ The whole idea of the accelerator rolls is to reduce shoe load by doing the great majority of cleaning BEFORE the grain gats to the chaffer. It is much easier to blow chaff out of the grain in mid air than to have to lift it away from the grain on the chaffer. We cut our share of beans and have noticed no more grain damage than anyone else with other makes. But our beans sure come in a lOT cleaner and free of dirt. What technology do the Masseys have that help to reduce sideways ahift of grain on slopes that would match or excede the Gleaner setupIJ This is one area that I'll take the extra moving parts in exchange for a far superior cleaning system! My split flow idea would help to eliminate the overthreshing on the left side of the concave. The small P3's have less overthresh in this area than the larger P3. If we combine two small P3 rotors and have the crop go in opposite directions, there would be minimal overthresh. As for the twin discharges, we always have to rake our straw to get it dry enough to bale anyhow so it's a moot point for us. I'm sure that for areas that you'd prefer a single windrow, it shouldn't be too difficult to contrive an apparatus that would divert one windrow onto_next to the other one. They do it with haybines and swathers. How much bother is it to remove the rotor from the MasseyIJ Can you do it in 30 min. like we canIJ How many inboard drives do they have compared to zero for GleanersIJ Once we reach maximum useable capacity in the current large P3's, we may be able to increase capacity without going wider by increasing rotor diameter. We could gain concave area and considerable cage area for separation by doing that. That also would not require any major design changes that I can foresee. The only trouble I see with that is the larger the rotor diameter gets, centrifical force is reduced. It's something to think about anyhow. Anything would be better than going longitudinal though!!

 

[gleaner_boy]

they could call it a Mass Glean.

 

[turbo]

The Gleaner rotor feeds the thickist mat out there. This causes problems with pluging between the 2 chains, (ever made a round bale in thereIJ)more horsepower use than other combines in the same class. You can not put any more horsepower to the current processor with out tearing up gear boxes, output shafts, cylinder couplers, and belts. The gearbox might work at 400 horsepower, but not for very long. The Gleaner is not a tough condition combine. The drier it gets the better they are. Especially wheat. But in 10 or 11 percent beans you can not turn the cylinder slow enough to keep from splitting them. When it gets tough in those conditions you have to speed up the cylinder to keep up capacity and then you split beans. The reason you have to rake straw is because it is in a little tight chewed up windrow and will not dry out if cut when wet. The rock protection system in a Gleaner is prone to opening when slugs are run thru. When they put acellerator rolls in a haybine they call them crimpers.Get the ideaIJ I will agree the cylinder in a Gleaner is easy to take out. Done enough to be able to do it in 15 minutes. I still run silver, just ready for some changes. TURBO Turbo turbo

 

[johnboy]

Turbo i do not agree at all.We have run rotary gleaners for years and each update is so much better.We contract harvest and i often work with other makes and i have found that the R72 will keep on going with any other machine in tough conditions.I tried a rotary massey last year the XP model and while it did a good job it was underpowered to say the least and i did not rate the cab over the gleaners considering the time the 2 series has been out.Yes that thin windrow can be Fun to bale although the rollbelt N.H.s handle it okay most times. The biggest problem is that AGCO don't seem to want to back up their products with parts availbility and service,(it's not the local dealers their parts lady is great) that is why we traded a massey and gleaner combine the other day on another colour not because we were unhappy with the machine.P.S. still have a 72 to keep the others honest.john.

 

[Dan]

Thanks Tom and yes I know there is room for even more capacity in feeder and seperator than the 72 uses now. I also believe split flow would be the answer for even more capacity than the 72 can be brought to. I've lost lots of sleep thinking of a split flow and believe it is a very workable idea. If I had the time I would be building a split flow right now. I think crop could be split behind concave quite easily and effectively. Keep on dreaming and sharing with us all Tom.