The Combine Forum banner
1 - 20 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What are the main differences in a 9180 versus a 9280 tractor. I found two very similar in hours and tires and priced quite close to each other. The tractor would pull an air drill and do some tillage. Looking for a good long term value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
9280, better hydraulics and a few more ponys, Scott.
You will always get a P/S in a 9180 , they started to be an option when they went to the 9200 series !! I have a 93 9270 with a P/S and I just love it , tweaked it abit and am pulling 58ft 5000HD with 3850 cart no problem !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
My late Dad bought that IH 560 brand new in 63 ! Still have it and still runs decent , never been touched ! I'm pretty sure that would rival a Duetz for fuel consumption !! Its one year younger than me !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,603 Posts
9280, better hydraulics and a few more ponys, Scott.


Not exactly the early 9180s before serial number 17900650 had a larger pump a 40gpm Vickers a carry over from the Steiger Lion. They also had a heavier centre section similar to a ADT. Then Case IH started cheaping them up the last serial number break was the same as the 9200 series although on the 9200 series you had to pay extra for the powershift. The cabs had less insulation and as stated a lesser flowing 27gpm Cessna hydraulic pump. I would go with the older one if possible unless the 9280 has powershift and is in nicer shape
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
You can't go wrong with the 9280. I had one of those tractors and it worked on the farm a long time without a single breakdown. Nothing but grease and oil changes, replaced fan belts once. Great tractor, simple and built great. Oh I miss those days,
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,681 Posts
Not sure Don , I've only seen the skip in a 9200 series ! Did you have P/S in your 9280 ?
We came from a troublesome standard in an 1150 Versatile, knew we were giving up a bit of power so felt the power shift was necessary.

Who am I kidding, never would have ordered the standard regardless!

When we bought the 1150 it was used, fairly low hours and Versatile Designation 6 tractors had just come out with power shift but about the same price as the 1150 so dad won that one.

It was surprising how little overall we gave up moving to the 9280.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,681 Posts
You can't go wrong with the 9280. I had one of those tractors and it worked on the farm a long time without a single breakdown.

Great tractor, simple and built great. Oh I miss those days,
In 1900 hours here is the maintenance on our 9280:
Changed the cab pressurization fan motor at 1100 hours.
Thus ends maintenance report outside routine.
Even that, never cleaned the air cleaner or radiator.
Check both when trading and they were essentially clean.

Those were good days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
The VERY EARLY 9180 tractors had a tan interior (not grey like the later ones) and were MUCH more expensively built as they were "red" Steiger Lions. The cabs were sometimes referred to as "SECC cabs", as the whole tractor was controlled by a computer in the RH rear of the cab that had several removable cards. While these cabs were easily the most luxurious (and quiet) of all the 9000 series tractors, if the computer gave trouble, it was VERY expensive to repair (most of the cards are no longer available from Case IH). Any work done inside the cab console is MUCH more difficult to do than on the later ones, as the console covers are "covers only", not "cover and panel combined". The very early ones used 4 batteries mounted on the rear of the cab, and the later ones used 3 batteries under the cab RH side (on large frame tractors).These tractors are quite scarce and any 9180 you will find will likely be a later one (with the smaller hydraulic pump) and the cab will be absolutely as cheap as Case IH could make it (no storage compartments, etc.). When Case went to the 9200 series, they offered a "deluxe cab" as an option, which gave it some storage compartments, etc., and year by year they fixed a few of the other items they had originally "cheaped out" on (ex.: temp control for the A/C, better headlights in the grille, etc.). All 9100 and 9200 tractors came with the power shift trans, but manuals were offered in the 9300 series. I would suggest avoiding the manuals at all cost, as they were actually less reliable than the power shift, and most parts for them are unavailable (and ridiculously expensive) Skip shift was not available on any of the pre-9200 series, but the odd tractor has been retro-fitted.


If condition and hours are close, I would definitely choose a 9200 over a 9100, but I believe either are typically very good choices for the money.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Had a 1992 9280.
Best tractor ever put in this yard.
It remains the only large piece of equipment I traded I regretted getting rid of.
It replaced an 1150 Versatile.


I had a 1993 9280 PS and I agree with Don 100%. Best tractor ever:x . The engine in my 9280 was the NTA which was the higher HP version of the Cummins and had lower compression than the engines in the 335/360 CPL range which made them cold blooded for starting- smokey, slobbering diesel till they got warm. I put a Webasto on it and totally fixed the cold blooded issues. The oil was still clear in that engine at oil change time.


Wasn't there an update between the 9180 and 9280 in the Raba planetaries going from bushings to needle bearings? I never heard of it being a big problem though. The last year I used mine pulling a bigger 54' drill and 6450 TBT tank, I had the 8 bolts holding the Tiger duals on come loose. All the extra weight and side thrust was just too much for it. The 9300s went to double the bolts in the duals. But then I was way over the 40,000? lb weight limit for the tractor. It did amazingly well considering the Challenger 965 that replaced it had it's hands full pulling the same load. The 9280 is still my favorite!!


Nice tractor rocker!! You posted while I was doing mine so now I see your 9180 has the extra bolts in the Tiger dual mounts. Along with all the extras! Don is right again! Case cheaped out on their production! I added a 31 gpm piston pump to mine to get the hydraulic flow up to date, to where Steiger had it way back in the 80s!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
I have personally seen more 9200 series with standard trannies than P/S ! I think the P/S in the 9200's were a $10000 option(ruffly) , that's why a lot have standards to compete with the cheaper Versatiles ?? In the 9300's they offered the 24sp which was a 12sp with a rocker switch to split each gear !! Some fella's on here might be able to explain that procedure abit better than me !! An CIH tech told me that it is almost impossible to get new parts for the standards in these tractors , P/S no problem !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I had a 1993 9280 PS and I agree with Don 100%. Best tractor ever:x . The engine in my 9280 was the NTA which was the higher HP version of the Cummins and had lower compression than the engines in the 335/360 CPL range which made them cold blooded for starting- smokey, slobbering diesel till they got warm. I put a Webasto on it and totally fixed the cold blooded issues. The oil was still clear in that engine at oil change time.


Wasn't there an update between the 9180 and 9280 in the Raba planetaries going from bushings to needle bearings? I never heard of it being a big problem though. The last year I used mine pulling a bigger 54' drill and 6450 TBT tank, I had the 8 bolts holding the Tiger duals on come loose. All the extra weight and side thrust was just too much for it. The 9300s went to double the bolts in the duals. But then I was way over the 40,000? lb weight limit for the tractor. It did amazingly well considering the Challenger 965 that replaced it had it's hands full pulling the same load. The 9280 is still my favorite!!


Nice tractor rocker!! You posted while I was doing mine so now I see your 9180 has the extra bolts in the Tiger dual mounts. Along with all the extras! Don is right again! Case cheaped out on their production! I added a 31 gpm piston pump to mine to get the hydraulic flow up to date, to where Steiger had it way back in the 80s!!



I actually drilled and tapped the 10 extra 7/8" holes in each planetary hub so the 9300 series rims (using 20 bolts instead of 10) could be used. I also built the rear weight brackets, as the rear frames on the very early tractors were different and the 9300 series brackets would not work. The front weight brackets from the 9300 series fit perfectly, but the holes need to be drilled in the older frames.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts
I had a 9150 and a 9330. both were awesome tractors. I did have power shift problems with the 9150, but I always attributed that to pulling the 4 x 4 baler too fast and shifting all the time for the turns at the end. had no problems with the 9330, but baled way less hay with it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,738 Posts
I thought there was something about the hinge system that was diff that guys preferred the 91?? don't know for sure, we had a 9380 for many years, left the farm with 16,000 hrs, went to Canada, I believe Butler sold it with the hours on the 3rd meter, if someone up there has it I would love to have it back, it has a sticker on the engine and the air cleaner lid that says something about Cummins in Tennisee, it had 500+ hp, needed weight really bad, power shift and just before we sold it dad went cheap and put firestone 23 degree bias tires on it. Only things we ever did was upgrade the hydraulic pump, replace starters, altanators and batteries aside from oil changes and what not.


I wish everything was made as bullet proof as the stigers and versi's
 
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Top