The Combine Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
So had a chance to get some seat time in a 2014 9560 after our 9895 decided to drop its tranny so had a loaner/demo for about 10 hrs. This was not a head to head assessment but i feel after 3 seasons on a 9895 that i can make a fair judgment. We were in 30 to 35 bus. canola taking in a 30ft swath on a very hilly field.

Pro's

- 15 to 20 % more capacity over our 9895, gap was more noticeable the heavier the crop, feederhouse just seemed to take more
- fuel use seemed to be good, 18 to 20 gal/hour, much the same as a 9895, but would need more time to make a fairer assessment, remember plus DEF
- processor is smoother, the spring loaded concave may add to this.
- 7 cyl sisu is smooth and quiet inside and out
- in fact the whole combine is smoother than the 9895
- cab is nicer and no corner post is a plus, as is the lighting and night time visibility.
- unloader is as fast but is smoother and much, much quieter
- v-cool was imo the best change overall and sets this combine apart from others.
- high/low shift on the hydro was also nice and made the hills much more manageable, this was my brothers most liked thing.
- power fold hopper, transport height was much reduced, a 9895 is too tall imo for our semi urban area

Con's

- sample, however i made big progress by setting like our 9895
- dealers telling people to forget everything they knew about their 9895's or 9790's when in fact in the end it was set close to our 9895
- air choke/baffle, is a major confusion point for many and imo is more suited to corn and beans than canola. If i would have a had more time i would have opened it right up and used fan speed to control air flow, just to see.


Overall it is a nice upgrade from the 9895 and i had a hard time to give it back. Things like the cab, lighting and powerfold hopper would be not be noticeable on 2009 and newer machines but none the less were nice anyways. In the end when we trade next 9560 will be at the top of our choice list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thx for the review..

if U plan on keeping the 9895, and want to gain that 15-20% capacity.. I'd suggest installing a St Johns rotor and chipping(if U haven't already) the Cat..

made a Big difference to my 9895, fuel usage did go down about 10% too.
Goood point on the chipping part, your not the first to tell me that. On the rotor side I am probably one of the few that likes the ATR rotor. Just for the simple fact that in our condition's it seems to be totally goof proof, but hey change is good too, will keep that in mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Awesome review. I agree with everything you said. I find we get better fuel economy with ours. Still working out the settings. I agree about the choke and the cascade sieve. Have not figured them out yet. Love the rads. Did not have to clean them once in 600 hours. Used to be the worst job in the morning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,507 Posts
Thx for the review..

if U plan on keeping the 9895, and want to gain that 15-20% capacity.. I'd suggest installing a St Johns rotor and chipping(if U haven't already) the Cat..

made a Big difference to my 9895, fuel usage did go down about 10% too.
I think if you did those two things you like others in the past would be actually disappointed.. A chipped cat makes the 9.8l look short of power, which it would be..
It really comes down to the money on trade. Farm economy is really going to slow down now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I think if you did those two things you like others in the past would be actually disappointed.. A chipped cat makes the 9.8l look short of power, which it would be..
It really comes down to the money on trade. Farm economy is really going to slow down now.
Maybe but the Cat will still be a rattle trap compared to the Sisu. ;)
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top