The Combine Forum banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In wheat crops of 60-80 bushels/ac or barley crops of 85-100 bus/ac, I am wondering how the capacity of the new 8000 series combines is in the same field with a 700 series. Lots of reports on the 8000 series, but few direct comparisons in the same field. Will the 8600 do 15% more acres per day than a 760 in the same conditions? Or an 8700 do 15% more than a 780?

Usually it is dry here in the fall. Don't start threshing until the straw is almost dry in the morning and quit around 11pm when the straw is starting to get damper, so really hoping to find comparisons during the heat of the day.

I do understand that the 8000 series is way better than the 700 series in peas and that in the dry conditions of 2020 the 8000 series sucked in canola, but I am mainly interested in hard red spring wheat and 2 row barley, both with lots of straw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
We ran 2 8700’s this year. We had 2017 760’s prior. Both class 9 machines. We were consistently 20% bigger in wheat, durum and canola. In 63 bushel Brandon wheat we were over 30 acres an hour. 2 superb’s and a 16” auger on a 3 mile haul could just keep up. Yield monitor accurately calibrated with agrimatics scale on grain cart within 1/2% with elevator. We were very impressed.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
I guess it depends on a few things. Are we talking of the earlier 780's or the later 780's? There are a few differences. If you take the latest 780....they had longer rotor grates and high speed gearboxes like the 8800's have. If i am remembering correctly....my dealer told me that between those late 780's and the 8800 is around 10-15% difference in wheat. They also mentioned, that to older 780's will be roughly a difference of around -25% to 8800's. I think there is a kit for rotor extensions for the 8700 available, but i don't think you can order them with high speed gearboxes. So in wheat you probably will be slightly ahead with a late 780 compared to a 8700, but it also depends what kind of wheat you are growing and the amount and condtion of the straw. We had a 760 before the 780 and i noticed the biggest difference was in wheat because of the longer rotors and the high speed gear boxes, but we grow a lot of straw in the RRV. With the 760 was the limiting factor rotor losses and that went away with the 780.
It is probably a question for SWMan, because he had a late 780 and a 8700.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
We ran 2 8700’s this year. We had 2017 760’s prior. Both class 9 machines. We were consistently 20% bigger in wheat, durum and canola. In 63 bushel Brandon wheat we were over 30 acres an hour. 2 superb’s and a 16” auger on a 3 mile haul could just keep up. Yield monitor accurately calibrated with agrimatics scale on grain cart within 1/2% with elevator. We were very impressed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Was that capacity with a stripper header? I only seem to get 16 acres/hr out of my 760 due to all the straw. Normally cut 8” high.

Is the 8700 power limited? Debating on 8600 or 8700. Almost never power limited in my 760, but not doing 25 -30 acres/hr with it .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
No. This was with 50’ Draper header. Leaving 8” stubble. We were consistently between 5 and 6mph. Wheat was probably 3ft tall. We we’re running close to power limit. But conditions vary from area to area. The 8700 can use the power. We had some durum that caught some extra rains and had logged 4ft straw was cutting right on ground still over 21 acres an hour. The 15.6l motor makes big difference. Takes a lot to really drag it down unlike c13 which seemed to fall of cliff when it powered down. We were rarely power limited on our 760’s. usually rotor loss was limiting factor. Now on 8700 the shoe is the limiting factor. The aggressive rotor grates made a difference for us. But could see it being a problem on 8800 with extra grates or with 8700 under certain conditions. Some guys hate them in dry canola. We didn’t have to much trouble in canola but we harvested so fast this year we were catching canola just as it was curing so we didn’t have sieve overloading. These new machines are incredibly smooth and big. But I feel you need large header to really maximize these machines. Gets your speed down and puts more power to the machine instead of using power to move machine at higher speeds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
We went 8600’s this year to replace our 760’s. 8600’s are power limited compared to the 760’s. However, our crops are never as big as you are talking and the 8600’s are more cost effective for us. The size of crops you are talking about I would recommend the 8700.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Our 760’s and 8700’s struggled in 100plus bushel barley. We try for under a bushel loss. If you grow lots of barley I would recommend high speed rotors. In wheat cutting 45’ with 760 we would often hit power limit whether in a low spot or when unloading auger was on. The 8700’s with the power boost, power was never an issue. I looked on the claas parts website and the gear boxes of the 8700/8800 are identical. Just a couple gear changes on the inside of the case and you could have high speed!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
We added extra separator grates to our 760’s with a home made extension of the grain pan under rotors. Couldn’t really tell if it made a difference in wheat. Probably made it worse in canola. That why were thinking a couple 100 more rpm for rotors would be better for separation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Garitt1980,

In 100 bushel barley with 45’ header, what would your ground speed be? I find with my 760, that I travel 2.5-3.2 mph and power is limited. This is malt barley and slow cylinder speeds are part of the limit as kernel cracking becomes an issue when sped up.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,926 Posts
I looked on the claas parts website and the gear boxes of the 8700/8800 are identical.
Partsdoc is somewhat less than completely reliable.
It shows C8900171 having the straight paddle impeller.
C8900171 never had a straight paddle impeller. Ever!
As we speak parts doc still wrong.
162354

Exhibit A
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Garitt1980,

In 100 bushel barley with 45’ header, what would your ground speed be? I find with my 760, that I travel 2.5-3.2 mph and power is limited. This is malt barley and slow cylinder speeds are part of the limit as kernel cracking becomes an issue when sped up.
We travel about the same. We grow all malt also. We swath half of our acres to speed up harvest window a bit (35’). The other half we straight cut, we are usually on the early side combining it. Straw will be a touch green and we struggle with rotor loss. Don’t recall being short on power in barley with the 760’s. But that’s 2 harvests ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Twix we also put round bar concave insert in one 8700 this year for the malt barley. Going to try round bar aps and concave this year. Leave them in for peas and barley.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,926 Posts
I would say rotor losses are cut in 1/2 with an increase from 1000 to 1250 rpm rotors,
that is the high idle max set no load rpm difference between normal and high speed rotors.
It for sure is not a linear relationship but is much greater.
Of course chaffer trash flooding can limit that advantage but until staggered finger rotor grates are gone we will not know just where max capacity is for the new models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
I have SkFarmers keystock I plan to install for this coming year. I had a seal out in a gearbox this winter and I asked what price was to swap out for high speed. 7500$ per box if memory serves me correctly. It’s a lot but it’s not if you cut hours by 15%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,818 Posts
I would look hard at a smaller pulley change at rear rotor drive on flat belt (i think this is applicable on your model, not sure aabout 8000's. A machine shop can fix a pulley easier than 7500$ gearbox.

How effective was the keystock on the grates for you?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,828 Posts
Seedcleaner good to hear from you. Most guys that put the rotor keystocks in in Western Canada have had quite a bit of benefit. When putting in keystocks in the 2nd and 3rd grate from the front the benefit is greater in the wide body machines than the narrow body machines. The rotor grate area is around 33% more for a wide body than a narrow body. The wide bodies have 32 keystocks in them compared to 24. I am wondering if the narrow body guys should run 3 sets of keystoccks and run them on section 2,3, and 4. We had guys that put them into 760s that figured they gained 1 mph in barley because of the less loss. One guy with a 760 that added a 6th set of rotor grates said the keystocks worked so well he though of taking the 6th set of grates out because after the keystocks it mainly increase chaff load. That producer struggled with rotor loss and said they had a huge benefit for them. They said in green straw lentils the benefit was huge. In cereals where rotor loss is a issue it has helped a lot. In canola there was no down sides reported and many felt they had a benefit decreasing the shoe load and loss in general like we saw. In very dry canola we ran most of the season with no rotor covers and 5-10 lb per acre loss in 40 bushel straight cut canola. For the little they cost they have had a big benefit for us and several others that have used them. If anyone wants a set for this coming year send me a private conversation. The rotor keystocks have been a huge game changer for us in gaining more capacity in cereals and decreasing rotor loss. We have gained 20-30% capacity in cereals after keystocks because we have finally been able to solve the rotor loss issue. In canola we have reduced our loss and reduced our need for rotor covers because the keystocks decrease chaff load. After installing keystocks we feel there is no need for us having high speed rotors to control rotor loss and they are a fraction of the price to put in compared to changing the rotor speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
I would have thought the keystock would cause would have resulted in finer straw - more sieve load . Do you run your rotors slower ?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,828 Posts
Thats what everybody thinks Ebear but when you see how they are welded in, it actually prevents the straw from being forced through the grates when doing canola. We were crazy dry here last year with our canola getting around 3 inches of total moisture through little rain showers. We did not need any rotor covers in canola till the last 100 acres when we added one set. We never sprayed any roundup on our canola before straight cutting because it burnt up to a crisp on its own. Prior to keystocks we would often have at least 2 rotor covers in for canola depending on conditions. If you have rotor loss in your 500 series it will help. It helps in canola as well. There has not been one down side reported in any crop with them so far.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top