The Combine Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
I know this is straying from topic, but in reply to what you just stated, an even worse case scenario can be seen throughout north central Texas, pretty much all the way to the southern outskirts of OKC. Yes, that's basically a 200 mile strectch of geography. Once prime farm or even pasture land, if it's not being bought for outright develepment [i.e. urban sprawl] it's all those danged horse farms!

This is just driving the "value" of land way out of reach for any wannabe farmer or stockman, who does not want to breed/sell quarter horses.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
Quote:Even when you have 5000 acres, I dont see whats special about the 9860 vs 9760. You still have the same cleaning capacities except engine hp. If you gave me money to buy either one. Both with same options, I'll take the 9760.

That is EXACTLY my own thinking, HFH. I really can't see any justifiable reason for such increase in cost, either.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
Quote:I can understand a guy in (farmboy) situation having an 8010 because up until now case hasn't had a class seven machine. And from what I hear there is a big difference in an 2388 and a 8010 (true class 8) Plus if you have that kind of support equipment and bin setup why not let the big dog eat. A lot of CH's run 9660's and 9760's but very few run 9860's for some odd reason and a lot of them are going through as many acres as anybody is. However, different situations require different equipment. And if your trying to harvest as much acreage as a custom harvester would with 3 class 6 or 7 machines a class 8 would help ease the crunch.....

Operaider, I know what you're talking about. Back in the early to mid 1970's and well into late 1980's, many CH's still preferred the next to largest combine by size. For example, more ran John Deere 6600's than 7700's, or more had Massey-Ferguson 510's or 750's than 760's. The family I got my first really good Axial-Flow experience with, only ran 1460's, not 1480's.

One good reason for such, was the saving in the cost of buying the combines themselves. I don't know about the Massey-Ferguson 750 to 760, but between a 510 and the 760, there was at least a $20-25,000 price difference, depending on time frame. The 6600 was only 10" less of cylinder width, yet was listed for $26,000 while the 7700 was priced at $38,000. Was it really worth 12 grand's difference for just 10 more inches of cylinder?

It was no accident, that the Model 6600 became Deere's absolute top-seller in combines, actually outselling the 4400 AND the 7700, combined! In 1979, when it was a time for the "changing of the guard," it was the larger Model 7720, which really filled the 6600's shoes. Obviously, it was the same kind of case scenario. The 7720 [although a close match to the 7700's size], was still not as big as the huge 8820! The Model 8820 took the title of being the world's largest combine away from the Massey-Ferguson 760. It was also a very expensive combine, and even for most custom harvesters, it was considered "too big." The 8820 was longer than the 760, too, and efficient transport was an issue.

Still, that was the current trend in combines then, and is still, now. Combines are getting increasingly bigger and more powerful! The 7720 was itself, stronger and had more separation capacity than the former 7700. Still, that one, not the monster 8820, was sold more than any other single Titan ever made.

I'm not around Axial-Flows or even their market enough to know if the 66 or 77 is still outselling the 88 or not. My observations were of Deere and Massey for the most part, and of A-F's only in the 1980's and 1990's. Still, that explains much about a harvester's or even a farmer's choice in the matter of purchase at the time.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
Quote:Ok so you own a car that goes 3x the speed limit and your too big of a chicken to drive it the way it deserves to be drove. And for the record the guy who told me that the challenger was a piece of crap is not only a farmer he is also an accountant who I can assure you can crunch numbers in circles around you.... In his sleep!!! A wise man once said you can either keep your mouth shut and make them wonder if your stupid or in muddy's case you can open it and remove all doubt.
your momma must be proud to say she raised the most argumentative person in the world. You must have got beat up a lot when you were young...


Whoa! Slow down, Operaider. I don't know about the Challenger thing, and I do agree with the others here, that the Deere CAN handle that big of a head, but you are getting rather carried away with comments about getting beat up a lot and such.

Yes, on the car's max speed and safety. I realize he just used that only as an analogy, but he IS correct. By the same token, you don't drive all over the countryside [at least I hope you don't] with you pickup's speedometer completely maxed out, either. Being "chicken" has nothing to do with logical, safe operation of a fast car, combine or tractor.


So let's again, just keep personal attacks out of this. I know of another farmer on here, too, who had a terrible experience with a Challenger combine. I am presuming you are talking about a bine and not tractor, as I've heard of no such nightmares with Challenger tractors]. It is rather heartbreaking that given today's technology and especially their tremendous cost, that ANY combine should ever be so flawed!!!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
Kinzepower, correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't a big Deere like that burn around 18-20 gals per hour of running time?
If that's the case, look again at how many acres per hour a big bine like that cuts.
Now, factor in approx BPA.
If our math is right, his figure of 49 bu per gal does not seem illogical.
I see a lot of 45-65 BPA wheat in most good areas.
Just some additional thinking and figuring here. If you can give me more accurate data on actual fuel use and ac/hr, please do, too.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
Sorry, I missed the point. It sounded like you were really knocking him down and later finishing the post by reference to this as being "coffee shop BS."


Anyway, I was thinking roughly 1 acre [give or take] per gal of fuel in wheat. NO--the last 2 years in Oklahoma DON'T count. LOL!
 
1 - 7 of 7 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