The Combine Forum banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We are looking at upgrading combines this off season, currently run a 2004 670 challenger and have been quite happy with it, very few issues over the years. Ran an 8780xp before that. Feel it's time to upgrade machines and headers however. We will be looking at used 9795/9895's and 9540/9560's. Just wondering what kind of updates were done to the 9795 compared to the 9790. I definitely like the design of the 9540/9560 and would prefer to make that jump instead but used availability and price might restrict that as we are on a budget. Wondering if anyone has ran all 3 and could give a good comparison between the 3. Thanks in advance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
We ran a 9690,9795 and now a 9560. The 9690 we had chipped up and that thing would just about keep up to the 9795 in wheat. The one thing to look for is the heavier rear axle. The 9795 with the standard rear axle they use is a Gleaner axle and with the weight of the combine and 300 bushel hopper they tend to break in our rolling hills. Otherwise they perform very good. The 9560 is a beast for capacity in wheat and barley it's rated as a class 8 because of horsepower, but capacity is closer to a 9. In canola not so much if you push it it will toss. The cooling system is the BEST in the industry 1100 hours later and never ever needed to be blown out !!!! The engine air filter will go 250 hours before it needs to be serviced. If you like the 670 you will like a 9795. If you can find a good 9540 you won't be sorry. The one thing is the change in rotor on the 9540/9560 takes some getting use to adjusting and setting they are harder to get a clean sample, but after a while you catch on and can make them perform. If you got cattle you'll want to stay with the 9795/9895 those are still the best rotaries for baling behind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I’ve heard it’s a lot harder to get a clean sample in the 9500 series combine, something I’m not used to as our xp and 670 both had air foil Chaffers and they were extremely easy to set. I have heard issues about 670/9790 shoe frames cracking, however we haven’t had any issues yet. Has there been updates done to that area for the 95 series combines? Have seen some with quite a few sep hours out there so makes a guy think they will withstand the test of time
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Yes there has been updates on them, they have got the bugs out by 2014. the 2012 had the most issues like anything new.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
i run a challenger 540c, aka yellow 9540.these combines are great! the sisu 7 cylinder engine is the best in the industry. the combines are very simple and not that hard to get a pretty good sample.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
Personally I would stay away from 2007 and 2008 9895's and 2012 9500's. Both have a long list of upgrades and change ups that if they were not done make them nightmares. If i remember right there was over 100 updates to the 9500's from 2012 to 2013. Imo the 9895 is underbuilt in many areas and start to rip themselves apart by 1200 sep hours. Make sure you don't end up with a 9005 series that has the perforated precleaner, I know of one that was ordered that way and makes them not fun to set in canola. To be honest after 9 seasons on a 9895 I can say with some certainty the next one might not be an AGCO combine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Personally I would stay away from 2007 and 2008 9895's and 2012 9500's. Both have a long list of upgrades and change ups that if they were not done make them nightmares. If i remember right there was over 100 updates to the 9500's from 2012 to 2013. Imo the 9895 is underbuilt in many areas and start to rip themselves apart by 1200 sep hours. Make sure you don't end up with a 9005 series that has the perforated precleaner, I know of one that was ordered that way and makes them not fun to set in canola. To be honest after 9 seasons on a 9895 I can say with some certainty the next one might not be an AGCO combine.
Why do you say the next one won't be agco? Just curious what kind of issues your seeing on your 9895 that would make you want to switch brands
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
I think the 9895 was rushed into production before it was ready. The big hydro to drive that rotor took a lot of power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Realy like our 2014 560c (same as a MF 9560) simple machine and very economical with the 7cyl Sisu
No experience in canola but it has some impressive capacity in cereals and peas.
Actually we’re looking to sell our 560 since we down sized our grain acres considerably and are looking to go to a 9790/670 or older Agco rotary.
If your interested there’s a possibility we would take your 670 on trade. Just throwing it out there as an idea or would sell it with no trade as well. If you want feel free to send me text 780-645-9630.
Tire Wheel Sky Cloud Vehicle
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
Why do you say the next one won't be agco? Just curious what kind of issues your seeing on your 9895 that would make you want to switch brands
Reliability issues, namely the cleaning shoe and the the unloading system. Both of which are basically the same on the 9500 and 9505's, moving up to a fendt is totally economically impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
A chipped 9790 is a good unit, just the right amount of power for the combine. 9895 was not much bigger for capacity but burnt twice the fuel, a total bi__h if you plugged the rock beater,the extra power really jams it in. They have a crazy wine in the hydro too. 9560 is 20-30% more capacity than a 9895 and 1/3 maybe more less fuel. Good simple combine, and don’t worry about buying a 2012 , the updates were paid for by AGCO so they should all be done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
A chipped 9790 is a good unit, just the right amount of power for the combine. 9895 was not much bigger for capacity but burnt twice the fuel, a total bi__h if you plugged the rock beater,the extra power really jams it in. They have a crazy wine in the hydro too. 9560 is 20-30% more capacity than a 9895 and 1/3 maybe more less fuel. Good simple combine, and don’t worry about buying a 2012 , the updates were paid for by AGCO so they should all be done.
Ran a 9795 beside a 9895, at worst the 9895 burnt 2 gallons an hour more fuel. They are the same size until you get into heavy straw then the 98 will walk faster. Further the 2012 updates were not always done by dealers especially if the dealer did not keep checking what was all on the list. Items were still being added in late 2013.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
I traded a 8780 and a 8560 for a 9790. It could do the work of the two I traded. What I found is in heavy straw, it was under powered. I could have chipped it, but was offered a deal that got me the 9795. The 9795 had the power, but was basically the same machine. From the 9795, I traded up to the 9560. This machine made the others look like toys. The fact that I have had it for 8 seasons and never looked at the rads was worth it. Way more power and does an incredible job. I have deleted the def and put in sunnybrook concaves. This harvest we were pushing a honeybee 36 foot header at 5 miles an hour and Used half the fuel I normally burn.. Ideal harvest so far. If you can afford it, I would only consider the 9560. If money is the issue, the 9795 works good as well. My 9795 and 9790 had the air foil sieve which made setting it real easy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I traded a 8780 and a 8560 for a 9790. It could do the work of the two I traded. What I found is in heavy straw, it was under powered. I could have chipped it, but was offered a deal that got me the 9795. The 9795 had the power, but was basically the same machine. From the 9795, I traded up to the 9560. This machine made the others look like toys. The fact that I have had it for 8 seasons and never looked at the rads was worth it. Way more power and does an incredible job. I have deleted the def and put in sunnybrook concaves. This harvest we were pushing a honeybee 36 foot header at 5 miles an hour and Used half the fuel I normally burn.. Ideal harvest so far. If you can afford it, I would only consider the 9560. If money is the issue, the 9795 works good as well. My 9795 and 9790 had the air foil sieve which made setting it real easy.
Was the 9795 a big improvement over the 9790? Or basically the same capacity? We definitely will be looking to get into a 9540/9560 but if money is tight and we can find the right deal a 9795 is a possibility. Were the Sunnybrook concaves a good addition to the 9560 also?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
The 9795 had cab updates, a pre cleaner ahead of the sieves, a bigger cooling system 350 hp. versus 330. The AGCO 8.4l engine instead of the Cummins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Was the 9795 a big improvement over the 9790? Or basically the same capacity? We definitely will be looking to get into a 9540/9560 but if money is tight and we can find the right deal a 9795 is a possibility. Were the Sunnybrook concaves a good addition to the 9560 also?
The 9795 had enough improvements to make it worth the trade. The sunnybrook concaves were a major upgrade. I needed to replace a few of the original concaves and the sunnybrooks were less money. Also like that I can replace up to three per concave. I find I can get a cleaner sample and the rotor does now slug like it did before. I've had them for two seasons now and I get a sample in the hopper that is really clean. They could also be helping me get better fuel use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
The 9795 had cab updates, a pre cleaner ahead of the sieves, a bigger cooling system 350 hp. versus 330. The AGCO 8.4l engine instead of the Cummins.
all grey chassis and even the last of the black chassis 9790's had the sisu's.
I also believe the 9790's with the sisu had 350hp. Our 670 with the C9 CAT is advertised at 350.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top