Combines STS Question

[Deere4life]

On our operation we run both a 9600 and a 9650 STS. Both are very good machines that will cover a lot of acres. We have a 25 ft flex and 8 row for the STS and a 20 ft flex and 6 row for the walker. With the heads we have, both machines run around the same mph. We harvest some very power consuming crops and the STS never runs out of power. Both are very good machines and I think you will be happy with either of them.

 

[nod]

You sound just like the guy I have been looking for! A side by side, unbiased, field trials! How does the grain tank samples compare between the two machinesIJ Also how about making seperator adjustments, is it easier to operate the STS or the conventionalIJ Do you avoid the tough conditons with the STS and let the conventional do itIJ Ever plugged the STSIJ

 

[Deere4life]

The grain tank samples, when set properly are excellent for both machines. From our expierence the STS does produce a SlIGHTlY better sample in corn. As for ease of operation, again both are nice machines to run. When switching from corn to beans and back again the STS is a little easier and faster. We have had two STS's and we've found that our 9600 is quieter in the cab at full throtle. We do not avoid tough conditions with our STS at all, both machines start to growl after the dew sets in. Have never plugged the STS yet! other than the feed acelerater once. We have only plugged the straw chopper a couple of times on the 9600. late in the season the STS seems to break up the straw a bit more than the conventional, making it tougher to bale behind. If we could some how solve that problem and pick up a few more acres we would have two STS's. Feel free to ask any other questions you may have. Hope this helps you in your decision! let us know what you decide.

 

[dakota]

We ran 9610s in 2000 and four STS in 2001. We got our STS's with about 750 separator hours and added another 650. They run about a mile faster than the 10's did. But they wear out a whole lot faster. After we were done we even had holes in the rotor housing. If you wish, I send you my 4 page report on the STS. We would not buy any more. If you don't put as many hours on it might work for you. But after about 700 separator hours they need a lot of work already. The old 9610's were a little more durable.

 

[Greenblood]

Dakota,I am starting to wonder about how much experience you have at all with STS combines.You tell everyone how horrible these combines are,but you forget to mention that these combines were owned by someone before you're boss purchased them.As everyone knows,some people can absolutely destroy a new piece of equipment within a few hundred hours.If these combines had 750 hours on them,there would certainly be a few things wore out before you even started harvest.If they were not gone through andbrought up to top condition beforehand, how can you give a honest report on themIJ WE looked at a 9610 with 129 seperator hours on it that was in worse condition than our 9600 with 1800 seperator hours.We run 2 9500's,2 9600's and a 9610 4-500 hrs each a year in corn,beans and wheat here in MO without any breakdowns because I personally go through them each winter from top to bottom, end to end.The reliability of machinery no matter what brand boils down to operator and maintenance. Oh, by the way, my Greenstar has worked excellent in 1000 hrs on my 9610. Must have been problem with operatorIJ

 

[greengoose]

We have two 9650 sts and the each have about 1000 separator hours on them. The only problem that we have had is one of the combines had the clutch pump go on it other than that there hasn't been any problems for us... It depends mostly on the operator and how well they take care of things.