There is also a report where they tested both in wheatin the same area saw it on deere's website.Can't wait till don reads it and comments or mabey he has seen the report way before us.

 

Is there a link to this report by PAMI for the same machines?

 

Couple guys I talked to that ran the X9 against a 8800 said it was impressive during the day. Once the sun went down it was a different story. And at the end of the day they did pretty much the same.

 

Very interesting reports. Both combines did very well. Canola was interesting. Almost no difference in loss in either the header or the combine. 18% fuel saving for the X9 in Canola.

 

Wasn’t the 8800 a flop in dry canola? Compared to 780

 

Nice to see Deere in the game! Will need to give it a serious look from here on.

Looking at the results in wheat I’m a tad confused why rotor speed was so low with 4 grates covered on the 8800? Normally, in wheat those are almost spun right up to avoid separator loss, and gain capacity.

Have a suspicion Claas still not updating their manuals with North American settings for harder thrashing lower yielding wheats.

I’m sure Don will have some theories.

 

It was an interesting read for sure. I find it funny how the Deere was set by the Combine Specialists and the Claas was run off the owners manual by a PAMI member. Seems to be a fair comparison. lol. With that being said its to bad Claas didn't send someone to properly run the 8800. But I guess when someone wants to play in their own sandbox not everyone gets invited. Classic

 

Is great to see some testing done. Agree it makes good reading. Some huge numbers out of both machines compared to what can be achieved here in Australia. Noted on the fuel consumption test, the JD settings were changed considerably from the loss test, compared to the Claas. JD. Fan -18% 8800 no change. JD Roto -17% 8800 down 2%. and Cylinder down 6%. Concave opened up 5/32 more on the JD, and only 1/32 more on the 8800. Sneaky or just "optimization"?
End of the day if the "client Pays, the client Plays"

 

My understanding was that a Claas could set itself and practically drive itself better than any human endeavour as long as it was pushing a MacDon.

 

I was under the same impression Haystack!! I was at a combine clinic a few years ago when I had a fleeting thought about a Claas combine. The "guest speaker" (farmer that wouldn't STFU) that was there couldn't say enough about the Cebis?? auto adjust system and went on and on about it! Went something like this..."If any of you here think you can set a combine better than Cebis, you are stupid"
I'm sure it is a great system, but we really didn't need the smartest of the smart taking over a combine clinic and then telling me and the other 25 guys there we are stupid!!

 

All this testing was done on my farm both in very heavy crops they were here for over a month very detailed prof testing of both machines.

 

So where are the reports for all the rest of the conditions?

 

Go on google and look. You probably couldn’t find a better place to hide out in western Canada and not be close to a major city or dealer or anything then where this testing was done. And they grow crop right in that area with reasonable straw.

To many times in the past everyone was testing combines in shorter straw conditions with extremely dry grain. ( Testing a X9 at Saskatoon or Regina is a joke in my opinion just because of average straw and grain conditions)

 

Go on google and look. You probably couldn’t find a better place to hide out in western Canada and not be close to a major city or dealer or anything then where this testing was done. And they grow crop right in that area with reasonable straw.

To many times in the past everyone was testing combines in shorter straw conditions with extremely dry grain. ( Testing a X9 at Saskatoon or Regina is a joke in my opinion just because of average straw and grain conditions)

It is of particular note of the weather conditions when the testing was done in this report. For an OZ perspective …… that’s ffaarrken freezing! 🥶.
But this is what great testing work requires & includes in their reports.
OZ conditions would be something like, 42°C, 6% RH, wind 5-10k WNW, grain moisture 5-7% & 2t/ha (whatever that is in that ancient measurement of volume😁)
And everyone would realise that these harvesting conditions are way, way different to SK conditions …… but machines (all colours) have to be able to accomodate for these changes. Some do it better than others but most machines designed for European conditions don’t like it at all WITHOUT changes to their configurations. Just the same as machines that are designed for corn & beans …… they need to be changed & configured for cereals, then optimised even more for environmental & crop conditions to give them a chance of obtaining optimum performance.
So surely the next advancement in (harvester) machine automation is an on-board weather station that’s feeds that info into the brains of automation to help improve performance.
I‘m pretty sure I saw a weather station fitted to an (test) X9 in western North Dakota a couple of years ago.
Anyway, John Deere should be congratulated for commissioning PAMI to do the independent evaluation of their machine & Claas (or whoever owned this particular Claas machine) should also be congratulated for being a comparison machine. MacDon would have gained information out of this testing.
Just wish we in OZ had the same facility …….

 

I was surprised they did not use the same header size on both machines. The Deere had a 50ft and the Lexion had a 45ft. I would think a smaller header would lead to more fuel use because a machine has to travel more to cut the same amount of crop.

 

When we moved from a 35’ to a 40’ header our productivity went up and fuel use down. My friend with deere machines said the same thing when they switched. It is much easier to keep the machine at capacity with a bigger header and slower travel speed.

 

I am amazed at the amount of testing and work that goes into bringing a combine to market any thing and everything gets tested.

 

So far I’ve only skimmed through the test to the canola losses at page 20. It looks like both machines can be operated to about two thirds capacity in canola until the 3% loss threshold arrives. The difference being that the distress level arrives later on one of the machines allowing you to press onward to 5% losses if you want to. Some things never change. But they seem like a good match if both are operated reasonably.

 

I sure like to see pami testing again!!!

 

I have to say the straw conditions in the wheat and canola were tremendous some of the deere eng said they had very little testing in those conditions.They test in New Zealand Scotland Brazil USA and many others and have done crops that yielded double mine but rarely in such tough heavy chewing.

 

So what area is this ?

 

Evan how much of a micro climate do you have? And how many ft of black dirt. Because you never see crops and straw like you guys grow even 10miles either direction and some of that very high assessment Cut Knife country never grows straw like you guys do.

 

We are in a pocket of some nice farmland but prob has a lot to do with fert package wheat and canola getting over 200lbs actual N from 28-0-0

 

Now let’s lay both machines over on their sides in steep long side hills havesting high yielding wet corn? Next let’s try armpit high green stem ropey seed beans with green leaves that leave black sap all over the inside of the machine. Now do all this at night with a heavy dew coming on. Fair weather banker hour machine or not? Does Pami stop when the dew starts? Good luck! Tiger

 

Obviously you must not have not read the entire report in full!
It is stated very clearly, & quite often by PAMI in both reports, & I’ll paraphrase this: “these results are for these machines, in this crop, at this time & may we’ll be different for any other crop, crop conditions & weather conditions ….. etc. etc.etc”

 

Do you put all 200lbs up front?

 

I’d bet a bag of marbles the yellow/blacks in those same conditions would have out done the new Class. Not power limited and shoe overloaded. Also probably why they are going back to the old style grates by the sounds of what Don was saying in one of his posts.

So is there a wheat report?

 

On John Deere's web site I want to see then bring both of those machine to our area and try to come up with the bushel an hour and use that kind of power and still be at 2% loss

 

Yes there is a wheat report. That’s where Deere put a beat on Claas. As pointed out earlier maybe if Claas had a 50ft head gap wouldn’t have been as big on fuel or capacity in some of the tests.

Conditions vary year over year so this PAMI report is about as good as you can hope for

 

Got a notice that this thread was moved because “it belongs in the Deere thread”. Thought it was a comparison of two combines, a Deere and a lexion?
Did I put it in the lexion thread to stir the pot? Sure. Am I disappointed in the lack of pot stirring? Absolutely. Actually maybe the moving of it satisfies that itch a little ha.

 

I doubt you’d find any Claas guys begrudge JD owners that they finally have a combine in the same league as the Claas! 😂
Call me a bit skeptical if the test was bankrolled by JD and they have techs and the Class gets the owners manual.
Nonetheless, it don’t hurt my feelings it’ll push Claas along to do better.
And is it any surprise they picked Claas to compare to!

 

Why has'nt Don given this a 3 page comment like he always does when class and deere are talked about?This is not a jab is seems odd he has'nt commented,i see he has replied to different threads since this thread has been started.

 

Because either pami did the testing wrong or the deere combine did better than the claas. He is a huge fan of both.

 

X9 sure wasn’t impressive here for loss or throughput. Real nice machine big improvement from 790 but still got out done in acres per hour and had double the loss of 8700 claas

 

It would have been nice to see the test done with a common header. Unfortunately, the new JD only works with the JD heads. No provisions for short line heads due to proprietary electrical connection/signals... Gone is analogue connections, and replaced with non-ISObus, "secret" CANbus protocols... Welcome to the new JD walled garden...