The Combine Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,334 Posts
Case contacted dad 2 years ago and wanted to know what he thought about there plans on tier 4 engines... and well... one was was a super complicated motor and the other was the type like agco and everyone is going with urea...its simpler so dad finally said well i guess the more complicated... didn't like the sound of the urea adding and well then she said well what if in 5 years down the road thats possibly the only option.. so in that case i guess go with the urea based... lol

it does keep the motor pretty simple im guessing you would have to fill that container every couple days or once a week perhaps...so that wouldn't be bad...

All of this tier 4 bs is ridiculous when it comes to farm machinery... were getting thrown into this fast and quick and auto vehicles are slowly moveing towards high mpg vehicles... its going to be a long long time till even half of the farmers get anywhere near this kinda motor...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
588 Posts
It really is a waste of resources considering the annual duty cycle of these machines.
I mean 3-400 hours a year...what is the impact...sheesh.
How many gallons of diesel are consumed in NA on farms compared to the NA trucking industry, I would love to see that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
620 Posts
Good point, difficult to discriminate and only crack down on the highway sector and not the off road. Ag is grouped in off road along with construction and other equipment. At least we've had slower phase in for the regulations than the highway guys, they test the technology first and work the bugs out before we get it. I for one prefer to breathe cleaner air thank you.
Took far to long for us to figure out that dumping toxic waste into our water and air might just kill us one day. Someone has to start to think about future generations and I guess were it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Talking to the MX rep at the FPS in Decatur, I was led to believe that they were leaning away from the separate urea tank. The rep mentioned that the technology was changing fast enough that they hadn't decided to lock in on just one direction because they might be able to do what they wanted without the "having to fill 2 tanks" problem and some of the new technology might yield better options than what is making the press now. It did sound like performance issues could be bad for everyone the first year -- good reason to buy a Tier 3 now?

At any rate, it will be interesting to see what shows up under the hood for 2011 models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
There is a ton of discussion in the heavy equipment forums on this subject. Nobody is happy for sure. Problems include the second tank, reduced power, increased fuel consumption.

In the trucking industry there is a move toward what we call sliders. You buy a new truck minus the drivetrain, transmission, axles, etc. Basically you get a new cab and chassis. Then you equip it with a completely rebuilt tier 2 or 3 drivetrain. You get to register it as a tier 2 or 3. For this to make any sense, there must be serious fuel economy savings over the tier 4

It makes a ton of sense to order your tier 3 now if you can.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Latest I read is about 17% of fossil fuels are used in agriculture. I would expect that includes nitrogen production and drying. A fact I found interesting is that more energy is consumed drying a wet crop than it takes to till,plant,spray and harvest it. With NG sources dwindling I can see natural drying being big soon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
Great points, guys.






Reduced power and increased fuel consumption? Hmmm...in other words, burn more clean fuel as opposed to burning less, not as clean fuel. Gotta love the legislator's thinking. It's like don't drink a can of regular pop, instead, drink two cans of diet pop.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,231 Posts
In about 73 Ford put catalytic converters (a friend called them Catholic perverters
) on a 360 pickup engine.
Incredibly high fuel consumption and unbelievably gutless.

Don
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
In about 73 Ford put catalytic converters (a friend called them Catholic perverters
) on a 360 pickup engine.
Incredibly high fuel consumption and unbelievably gutless.

Don

An implement dealership I worked for was having problems with a pickup's performance. After removing the catastrophic converter and welding a straight piece of pipe in it's place, highway fuel mileage increased 2-3 miles per gallon.

In a bit of environmental irony (which seems to becoming more prevalent all the time), one of the state forms we are required to fill out when our local volunteer fire department has fought a wildfire, has about 20 or so possible causes that lead to wildfires. These include lightning, human carelessness, exhaust debris from passing trains, and...you guessed it, cataclysmic converters. And I have seen a few of those instances where this smog eliminating device has resulted in a great amount of pollution discharged into the air. (As well as that detrimental " carbon footprint" the firefighters leave in battling the blazes).
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top