The Combine Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
Tires are better and cheaper for us smaller farmers. If I cant pull my drill with duals then the seeds will drown anyway. Once you get out to 85ft drills I question if dual 800's have the traction.

I dont really think the track guys have been going with compaction as the number one justification anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,247 Posts
Show me some tires that can run at 4psi. After having one tractor on tracks the only reason why every piece of equipment we have in the fields are not on tracks is cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
Since Cat introduced the Challenger 65, tire manufactures scrambled to compete with them. Versatile and Steiger tractors that competed with the 65 had mostly 20.8-42 bias tube type duals on them at 20 psi or more back when the Challenger was introduced.

More recently, tire manufactures adapted to the need for low compaction, high traction, and increased stubble wear. I have a season on some 800 Firestone IF radial tubeless duals that run at 6-7psi. Before that I ran 800 Good Year radial duals at 6-8psi for 6 years. Before that I ran Michelin Agribib 800 radial tubeless duals at 6-8 psi for 10 years.

Tracks are great for not having flat tires, but their is extensive maintence after a thousand hours or so and they are a very expensive option. Tires go flat, they are often rough when they get flat spots from sitting, but they gain traction as they sink into soil. I've found compaction to be similar between tracks and metric radials at low pressure. With the exception of the cost, differences between tracks and tires are minimal and I own both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,259 Posts
Sometimes I really wish people would quit comparing apples to pine cones. :(

Tracks will excel when the conditions favor tracks, and tires will excel when conditions favor tires.

Better comparisons would be undercarriage designs, brand vs. brand. Or various tire tread patterns at different psi. A lot more knowledge could be gained from that type of comparison that the useless wars tracks vs. tires causes. When one spends the money it takes to buy a new tractor these days, even if one made the wrong decision on tracks vs. tires, the cost involved will not allow most to admit to the wrong decision.

IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,800 Posts
In our conditions tires cause more compaction. We have both and have ran both for a few years. Drive though a low spot with duals and the ruts are a foot deep. Drive through with tracks and they are maybe an inch deep. Both have advantages and disadvantages. We have a hard time keeping tires on rims at 7 psi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
The whole point of IF/VF tires is to run them at low PSI like 6-8. They can be ran that low because of the flexibility of the sidewall.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
I have a hard time reading studies that are contrary to what I have experienced. It's really all about surface area. What width tracks are they comparing it to? 12'' or 30''? I love my track machine to plant behind because I can't hardly tell what direction that it worked the ground because of the lack of compaction. But I only have one, and the rest are wheel tractors and thy all have their place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,800 Posts
Not to mention the % of the field compacted with tires is much greater. Two squished out 800's compact a lot more area than 36".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,232 Posts
I've had both, and in our heavy clay I'll never go back to tires
X3....except I have a clay-loam soil.

Actually had tracks and tires (710-70R42) hooked back-to-back on same implements in same field last spring. It was VERY wet and we were working fields where we could and harrowing in canola seed. Tires were in-capable of doing what my Quad-trac pulling.....not even close! What was done with wheels had compaction evident all summer in crop, even visible in stubble after harvest. No such evidence from Quad-trac. That cost me a lot of $$$ I am certain.:(

Extreme conditions I know, but I owed most of my 2013 crop to my Quad-trac.;)

Tires were set to 10 psi...maybe if I had dropped them to 7 they would have magically started working better???:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Tracks cause very little soil disturbance at planting. Tires lugs will flip up the crust and expose the mud below, causing gauge wheels to lock up while planting rice. The compaction issue is not as big a problem as being able to plant on time to achieve higher yields in our operation. Plus the stand will be more uniform behind a track tractor.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,109 Posts
Sometimes I really wish people would quit comparing apples to pine cones. :(

Tracks will excel when the conditions favor tracks, and tires will excel when conditions favor tires.

Better comparisons would be undercarriage designs, brand vs. brand. Or various tire tread patterns at different psi. A lot more knowledge could be gained from that type of comparison that the useless wars tracks vs. tires causes. When one spends the money it takes to buy a new tractor these days, even if one made the wrong decision on tracks vs. tires, the cost involved will not allow most to admit to the wrong decision.

IMO.
Agree with you totally.

Two years ago when we were super wet, I put 250 hours on a tracked tractor pulling our air seeder. I have never been stuck so much in my life. Only had 2 days when I wasn't stuck. Some days I was stuck 2 or 3 times. I will admit maybe we shouldn't have been out there. Two things would happen. The tracks would stay on top of the ground and just spin out. Then if it could maintain traction the air seeder would break through and bring you to a stop.

I really do believe our 9560R on triples weighted up has more traction then the 9530T that was fully weighted. When the air seeder would break through the T would spin out. With our 9560 I can have the 30.5x32's on the back of our Nh3 wagon broke through half way up the tire and pushing dirt and still be moving. The places I pulled our air seeder through this past spring I thought it would get torn apart.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,358 Posts
These threads always seem to spin out (ha ha) the same.;)
I guess the good news is the tire manufactures can keep making tires, the track manufactures can keep making tracks, the tractor manufactures can keep making both and farmers get to argue both ways on CTF!
What a great world eh!:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,232 Posts
I really do believe our 9560R on triples weighted up has more traction then the 9530T that was fully weighted.
I would agree that a properly set-up tractor with 46" triples is the closest thing to a Quad-trac, this from experience as well.;) Around here 2-track units are almost non-existent.

Don: you are correct, this has been discussed a few times. Guys don't seem to search for the threads. Interesting discussion though.......farmers seem to be good at talking about the same stuff over.....and over.....and over.....:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,109 Posts
And over
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,800 Posts
I would agree that a properly set-up tractor with 46" triples is the closest thing to a Quad-trac, this from experience as well.;) Around here 2-track units are almost non-existent.

Don: you are correct, this has been discussed a few times. Guys don't seem to search for the threads. Interesting discussion though.......farmers seem to be good at talking about the same stuff over.....and over.....and over.....:)
Whatever we do let's not let this turn into a two track vs four track thread! We've all been there before too. Ha ha.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top