Joined
·
150 Posts
Just out of curiosity, will an 8820 titanII handle a 12 38 in. row corn head? I don't own either of these but would just like to know. Thank in advance for the info.
8820 12 row corn head
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Joined
·
150 Posts
Is drive it down a road all I can do? Lol
Joined
·
150 Posts
Thanks harsh, just wondered. Do you have to upgrade anything to be able to run a 12 row?
Joined
·
321 Posts
If it's a levelland 12 row you'll be ready to roll.
The only thing I'd suggest is some weight in the rear
The only thing I'd suggest is some weight in the rear
The 1981-up 8820's with the 225 hp engine could be obtained with the "12-row ready" package, which included larger lift cylinders, planetary final drives, etc. Duals would be a necessity for 12-38", you have 10 more feet of header, and you will need to put as much cast iron and liquid weight as you can in the rear wheels, and you might have to add an additional lift cylinder. You might also have the engine turned up a tad, an additional 25 horses would come in handy. Don't let anyone tell you that an an 8820 won't handle 12 rows, because it will. It can't count the number of rows, all it knows is what is being fed to the cylinder. Such a combo wouldn't set any speed records, but it would work. And Deere was offering 12 row corn heads for two decades before C/IH finally put a 12-row on their rotary wonder machines.
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
The rotary wonder machines that deere used as insperation for their STS WONDER machines? Like it was said earlier the machine doesn't know the number of rows just the amout of material.
The rotary wonder machines that deere used as insperation for their STS WONDER machines? Like it was said earlier the machine doesn't know the number of rows just the amout of material.
Oh, another member of the "Deere copied IH" group. A five-year old could tell the difference between the STS and the IH Axial-Flow. Axial-flow style separators are not the best for every condition, the canola boys have proven that. What Deere really needs is a 500 hp version of a 9600-sized CTS. The axial-flow rotor is NOT the best or only way to harvest grain---it has simply become the most POPULAR style of combine, primarly because of that "bettter grain quality that IH ran and was proven to be BS. Who ever got paid more money for non-food crops at the elevator because he had an AF? Exactly nobody. Proud to say that most crops in this area are harvested with Deere walker machines---oh, a few of the BTO's are running STS's, very few AF's here, and mostly old 1460s. Nobody's come close to knocking Deere out of the No.1 spot here or in a lot of other places.
Oh, another member of the "Deere copied IH" group. A five-year old could tell the difference between the STS and the IH Axial-Flow. Axial-flow style separators are not the best for every condition, the canola boys have proven that. What Deere really needs is a 500 hp version of a 9600-sized CTS. The axial-flow rotor is NOT the best or only way to harvest grain---it has simply become the most POPULAR style of combine, primarly because of that "bettter grain quality that IH ran and was proven to be BS. Who ever got paid more money for non-food crops at the elevator because he had an AF? Exactly nobody. Proud to say that most crops in this area are harvested with Deere walker machines---oh, a few of the BTO's are running STS's, very few AF's here, and mostly old 1460s. Nobody's come close to knocking Deere out of the No.1 spot here or in a lot of other places.
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
Yeah 105 its funny how many people are in that club. Besides i didn't say copied but the similarities are un deniable. A concure with you also that a larger CTS available in NA would be an extremely formidible machine. The AF may not work in your area but they are close to if not the majority in my area. The thing is in our harvest conditions they flat haul butt, and they are a simple design. They have proven to be reliable and simple to work on when they do break down. There are obvious differences between an AF and an STS, but a 6 year old could tell that quite a few of those differences where to work around AF patents, like the feeder beater.
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
Fair enough.
My contention with the axial-flow separator, regardless of what color it is, is that most of them don't feed very well or very evenly, and so to overcome that little problem, pump up the power until it'll digest a 2x4. I ran cylinder/walker machines for a very long time, and learned early on that a combine only functions as well at it's fed. I think that's why we now read of chaffer/rotor losses like we used to read about chaffer/walker losses. I know that if I could achieve even feeding, I could increase machine capacity and could pretty much stop chaffer and walker loss within machine limits---in other words, keep it FULL, but not overloaded.
Today, because of the feeding problem, the capacity limits of the 30-inch axial-flow rotor have about been reached, now they are just throwing more and more horsepower at them so they can call the machine a Class 9 by the addition of more horsepower, with no other changes in the machine. To build more capacity will take a larger rotor and even more horsepower.
No doubt rotary is here to stay, and old fossils like me had our day. But, I live in one of the better corn-growing counties in Iowa, and the majority of the harvest is still harvested with old 9XXX Maximizers. Oh, there's a handful of newer IH's around, and some STS's, but one local still runs a 7700, one a 4400, and there's a couple of very old 14 Series Axial-Flows. A couple of R-62's that are very impressive, that's a concept with a lot more potential left in it. Still, the old cylinder/walker machines do pretty well, and the elevators don't pay any more per bushel of grain for it being harvested with a rotary, as the advertising of that "other" company implied that it would in years past.
Today, because of the feeding problem, the capacity limits of the 30-inch axial-flow rotor have about been reached, now they are just throwing more and more horsepower at them so they can call the machine a Class 9 by the addition of more horsepower, with no other changes in the machine. To build more capacity will take a larger rotor and even more horsepower.
No doubt rotary is here to stay, and old fossils like me had our day. But, I live in one of the better corn-growing counties in Iowa, and the majority of the harvest is still harvested with old 9XXX Maximizers. Oh, there's a handful of newer IH's around, and some STS's, but one local still runs a 7700, one a 4400, and there's a couple of very old 14 Series Axial-Flows. A couple of R-62's that are very impressive, that's a concept with a lot more potential left in it. Still, the old cylinder/walker machines do pretty well, and the elevators don't pay any more per bushel of grain for it being harvested with a rotary, as the advertising of that "other" company implied that it would in years past.
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
I've never really felt that an Axial Flow holds much of an advantage over a conventional in corn, except maybe parts count. But in cereal crops where you have centrifigual force to seperate the grain from the straw instead of just relying on gravity there is a significant advantage. Even feeding has been an issue in the past, but i feel like the AFX style front on rotors has solved that issue. Also draper headers have helped with even feeding on all types of machine. You are 100% correct that the capacity of a machine is largely based on the performance of the header. If you look at the 7088 or 9770 i think they are well sized with regards to hp and all they sub systems. Frankly most of us cant utilize much more capacity. In my area you would be hard pressed to run bigger then a 35' draper and these machines will handle that like a champ. So i don't really care what they do with the 9895, A86, 680B, 9870 or 9120...I probably wont run one cause i don't need that big of machine for my terrain.
Joined
·
31 Posts
Actually, back in the day when I ran the drier at a local elevator (did pretty much all the corn samples) 90% of the time tell you the corn that was thrashed with a Deere walker by the amount a fines/grinds in the sample, and that did equal dock, which actually did lead to getting paid less at the elevator for the Deere guys. Plus a LOT more work for me at the drier, having to take away all the extra screening.
Actually, back in the day when I ran the drier at a local elevator (did pretty much all the corn samples) 90% of the time tell you the corn that was thrashed with a Deere walker by the amount a fines/grinds in the sample, and that did equal dock, which actually did lead to getting paid less at the elevator for the Deere guys. Plus a LOT more work for me at the drier, having to take away all the extra screening.
That tells me that a bunch of guys didn't know how to set their machine, rather than any particular advantage of an axial-flow separator. Have a friend who's in the elevator biz, says he's seen about as many bad samples come in from Axial-Flows and STS's as he has cylinder/walker machines. I will grant you that the axial-flow separator may have some advantage in wet corn, but it's not the magic machine the axial-flow freaks have made it out to be, either. Most of the crops here is still harvested with Deere conventionals---perhaps a bulletin should be placed in the local paper, telling them how much money they are losing by running those machines.
That tells me that a bunch of guys didn't know how to set their machine, rather than any particular advantage of an axial-flow separator. Have a friend who's in the elevator biz, says he's seen about as many bad samples come in from Axial-Flows and STS's as he has cylinder/walker machines. I will grant you that the axial-flow separator may have some advantage in wet corn, but it's not the magic machine the axial-flow freaks have made it out to be, either. Most of the crops here is still harvested with Deere conventionals---perhaps a bulletin should be placed in the local paper, telling them how much money they are losing by running those machines.
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
Axial-Flow freaks? Are we any more fanatic then Galloping goat enthusiasts? Maybe most of the crops in your area ARE still harvested with conventional Deeres, but being in the majority doesn't make you right. The majority of people voted for Obama...
Joined
·
31 Posts
Quote:That tells me that a bunch of guys didn't know how to set their machine, rather than any particular advantage of an axial-flow separator. Have a friend who's in the elevator biz, says he's seen about as many bad samples come in from Axial-Flows and STS's as he has cylinder/walker machines. I will grant you that the axial-flow separator may have some advantage in wet corn, but it's not the magic machine the axial-flow freaks have made it out to be, either. Most of the crops here is still harvested with Deere conventionals---perhaps a bulletin should be placed in the local paper, telling them how much money they are losing by running those machines.
Argue all the second hand info you want. I post it like I saw it, before working there I had ZERO opinion one way or the other.
It's pretty hard to believe that many Deere walkers have it wrong, and what many "axial-flow freaks" have it right, especial when the Deere dealer in the area is d**n good (we run Deere tractors).
Argue all the second hand info you want. I post it like I saw it, before working there I had ZERO opinion one way or the other.
It's pretty hard to believe that many Deere walkers have it wrong, and what many "axial-flow freaks" have it right, especial when the Deere dealer in the area is d**n good (we run Deere tractors).
Joined
·
528 Posts
whoever was talking about deere copy case has it backwards senerio #1 deere makes an ivt transmission....few months later case makes one...senerio2# deere makes a sugarcane harvestor a year later case makes 1 that looks exaclty the same....senerio# deere have a side by side few years later makes one that looks just like it
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
