Combines The

I guess I should change my name on here, since I'm entering into my third season with a Gleaner combine. I purchased an R42 originally, then traded one year later for an R52 with 4WD and all the "whistles and bells". Do I like the combineIJ I love it! Simple to setup for various crops, easy to maintain and work on; - it is literally a combine which I can anticipate running many hours on, with little maintenance in the meantime. My ONlY complaint is the condition it leaves the straw in, since I custom combine for several horse and dairy farmers but, with time, I'm gradually "fine-tuning" this machine to leave better balable straw with minimal grain loss to achieve it. My biggest single word of advise for anyone purchasing a new gleaner is this: "Click onto the HYPER MODS link and perform as many of the modifications as you can afford, WHIlE THE MACHINE IS STIll NEW! (didn't mean to shout, just trying to make a point) Tom langan has done an excellent job of assembling this information (complete with pics). I performed very few mods on my R42, and most of the mods on my R52, and the result was 2 totally different combines.

Isn't it odd that only 6 or 7 years ago they were saying how rotors are poor combines, and now they are pushing people towards themIJ I am a little curious, what kind of price difference does the dealer want between the two machinesIJ If the sts is very much higher he's pushing it only because he will get a higher commission$$. It may also be what he's being told to do. Around here very few convential Deeres are sold any more compared to even five years ago. tj

Deere's "official stand" on rotary combines always was that they weren't a good alternative unless some of the "pitfalls" were addressed, which (supposedly) the STS's have addressed (like roping, excessive power consumption, etc.) Even to this day, they don't admit that an STS is even a rotary at all; - it's a Single Tine Seperator. My dealer hasn't priced either machine out yet. He's getting back to me with a day or two! I'll let you know the outcome!

Deere dealer got back to me just now with pricing info. It seems the 9660 conventional will only be about $17,000.00(Canadian) cheaper than the comparable STS. He's telling me to expect about a 20% increase in corn capacity with the STS over the conventional, and close to 10% in beans. He commented that the 2 machines should be very comparable in small grains! I really need some input from anyone who has migrated from a 96XX conventional to an STS.

I've come from 1680 to CTS to 9650 CTS to 9650 STS (all green have had a chip on them)and I can say that the STS is better in canola, corn and beans but as for wheat and barley - well that is very debatable. CTS wipes a STS of the map in rice - there is absolutely no debate in that. That's not saying that a STS is useless in rice, it's much better than a 2388 in rice but it's no match for a CTS. CTS will clean up a STS in barley especially if you have to take a lot of straw. I will say a STS is a lot easier to service and once set correctly and you know and understand how they work, there is very little adjustment required - apart from the obvious. They are a very versatile machine. The reason I changed from CTS to STS was manily because of resale value and doing more corn than rice nowadays.

After our first year running a 2002 9650 STS, here are a few things I have noted. Wheat- The STS combines are as bad as other rotories in the evening when the grain starts getting tough. We have had several 9600s and still have a 9650 walker and they would all run circles around a 2188 during this time of day and that doesn't seem to happen with the STS. Yes, you still feel it get tough but this year our STS would run circles around the 2388 in our group during that time of day. The wheat wasn't quite as clean as the sample out of the 9500 or 9650 walker but there weren't as many "white caps" as we saw coming out of the 2388. Beans- Started to notice that the combine was hungrier than the two walkers we run. At times, it seemed as though a 930 with an air reel wasn't enough as we couldn't cut beans fast enough to keep the machine full. Threshing was about even with the conventionals. Corn- This is where we saw a huge difference in capacity. losses were just slightly higher with the STS compared to the walker but the productivity more than made up for it in the sheer volume of a harvest like we had this year. While the 9650 walker could only manage about 5.5 mph, the 9650 wasn't even bothered by 6.5 and sometimes we were even running over 7.0 mph. Be prepared to use more fuel as the tanks are huge on an STS and there is a reason, because they burn a lot! Obviously though, the increase in capacity is enough to make up for the fuel. Spreading straw and bean stalks was not an issue after the chopper was upgraded with new knives and with the 12 veins rather than the original 8. All in all I like the machine but still wishing we would have just stepped up and bought the 9760 with the high rate unloading system. At the time of purchase, we were in a drought and had no way of telling that we would have a bumper crop. Hindsight is always 20_20.

Sorry to hear about the deal falling through. least you have a few months before it will be needed. Kinda dumb on their part for doing this to ya. Anyways guess that's life. Take care. Nathan

How did they compare in breakdownsIJ

where are you from twinsilversIJ i have a 2004,low houred 9660 for sale if you are interested. if so let me know your email and we can talk.

What sort of corn yields were you running in going 5+mphIJ