machine capacity

case has a chart on their advantage case site http://www.advantagecaseih.com/?utm_sour....aign=CaseIH_com . If you have hilly land i would probably go with a 7120 or an 8120. Since you are gonna run a 40 foot header you would be able to justifiy the 8120's horsepower especially if you are chopping the straw in a good crop.

And the leveling sieves....

Thanks guys. but how tonnes per hour can i expect with a good standing crop yielding about 1.5 tonne to the acre. Is there a big difference between the 7120 and the 8120 in capacity or is it that the 8120 design to handle more straw. wolters

Nice chart. But, unless CIH explains what their combine productivity index numbers represent, how can you know what's what?

It could be any one of the standard measurements. Bu/hr., Ac/hr., Tonnes/hr, what ever you want it to be. All that chart is showing that Case has a combine that bridges the gap in sizes to fit every producers needs. If you are getting X amount done with a 6088 and you took on some more land and now you need to get a new combine a 7088 will be 10% bigger, a 7120 will be 20% bigger, etc.

Like anyone else who views that chart, You obviously do not know either. If that's the case, they (CIH) need to publish the criteria, otherwise, an index without detailed explanation cannot be considered valid.

It's productivity. Look it up. It's the amount of work being done in a given amount of time. Every thing is different from one person to the next, one farm to the next, one crop to the next, one field to the next. Its all different. I bet if we would have painted that graph green you would have belived every last bit of it! Wouldn't you?

OK what machine is suited to be the same capacity as a r72 gleaner with a 36ft draper. I know it is a class 7 combine but i think it is a very hight class 7 if not a class 8 combine.

In wheat running a 30 ft head with wheat that is running 3.5 ton to the acre and taking 85% of the straw and spreading it we had no problem doing 17 acres an hour with the 8010. That was also green straw.

A 7120 will do every bit as much as an a R72. In 1.5tonne/acre crop and a 40 ft head i would guess around 5-6 mph with the 7120, the 8120 should bump that up to 5.5-7 maybe more if conditions and terrain permit. Clearly the chart indicates realitive productivity within the models Case offers. So on average a 7120 will do 20% more then a 6088 which is the baseline for their index hince it has an index of 1 and the 7120 has 1.2. Hope that clarifies.

If it were green i'd likely be more critical.

If different from one person/farm/crop to the next how can you assume such a vague chart is correct?

If productivity (amount of working being done in a given amount of time), then those details should be published. Otherwise, it's all just an assumption. Do you buy $250,000+ machinery based upon the assumptions of others?

I can't even use that chart as a guideline because it doesn't offer enough information.

Thanks guys that has help lots. Has anyone had a r72 gleaner and a 7010/8010 together in the same field.

Unless everybody else grows more grain and less straw than us the speeds posted earlier are way heigh. In a 1.5t (55bu./acre) a 9120 demo couldn't do those speeds nor could our lexion 590's. If every time all the companies actually got the twenty percent more capacity they advertise we'd all be travelling 10 mph with 40 ft heads. I believe the best way to learn what a combine can do is ask a farmer that owns one, who isn't colorblind. How many combines are you running? I don't think a 7120 would be faster than your R72 especially if your 40 bu. crops are bigger straw crops or you have to harvest in tough conditions. A rotory with the same horspower as a conventional will generally thresh less grain. Unless the conventional can't save it at peak hp and has to slow down. Maybe you should wait one more year demo a few different machines and know for sure.

Well John Deere don't have to clarify their propoganda or productivity (or lack there of) either. By painting it green + yellow and putting a galloping goat on the front of it, it must be valid. God knows how many times I've heard people saying 'it must be good - it's got a high rate discharge auger on it. i'm sold'. Pfft! That's just there to compensate for a smaller grain bin. The list goes on. People pick out these "key" improvement points and use them as smoke and mirrors to deter people from the real underlying problems they have with their product. JMO - slam me if you want.

I have seen an R72 and an 8010 side by side, r72 with 36' draper, 8010 with 40' in 50-55 bushel wheat, 8010 would consistently run 1 mph faster, and in milo r72 with 8 row head, and 8010 with 40 foot draper, run almost exact same ground speed if theres any green at all.

Wolter - Just some info that may be of interest to you. Not sure about your area but Gleaner owners are getting out of them. It's not because they have had a bad run with them, it's because there is no resale value in them. One farmer I know who has run gleaners for 20 + years has had a great run with his and had great dealer backup, but was sick of getting nothing for them when he traded. He thought it was time to go to a more common brand where resale was higher and with something that had a few more bells and whistles. None the less he has gone to an 8120 with 40' flex draper. Another has gone to NH and another went to JD but has since traded that on a CIH.

That true about the resale value. After 6 or more years you get bugger all for your trade. That is why we are looking at red. Service is excellent with gleaner and hoping that if we go red the service will be the same or better. We are just looking for the same capacity as our old r72.

Muddy,

The chart is only showing the size increase (capacity) from one Case Ih combine to the next. It is not compairing any other brand, just one Case IH to the next.

I agree it's not comparing anything but CIH combines. It is not, however, talking about size increases from one model to the next, it is illustrating the % productivity increase from one model to the next (read the chart again). That being so, I want to know what specs or criteria is being measured to make these assumptions? Clarification is required if this chart is to be of any use to anyone.