To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

Mower

Rst277

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
1,686
Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
If I go used, I’ll run it through basic functions. Look for leaks. Shifting. Etc.

But what tests would you recommend? Even if I have to pay for them. Compression, other? Is there a way to test the hydraulics other than just observing operation?
If it has a 3 point hitch, raise the implement and see if it stays up. If it sinks under weight that is not good. Tires can be worth more than a tractor so good rubber is a must. You can do a compression test and check the plugs on a gas tractor. The usual stuff.
 
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

carlaisle

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2022
Messages
361
If you go for a used tractor, get one old enough that there are no circuit boards on it. No fancy tests are needed. Just make sure it is physically capable of reliably doing everything you want it to do. Part of this is running it up to operating temperature before testing. This will reveal any severe leaks, worn out hydraulic pumps, etc. that can inform your decision making. Tire condition is relevant to the offer price, but nothing else - they're easily (not necessarily cheaply) replaced. Worn hydraulic pumps/cylinders, final drives, clutches, brakes, etc. can all become very expensive to replace/difficult to source and are thus worthy of attention.
 

Wrench97

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 23, 2018
Messages
12,036
Location
Southeastern Pa
This will happen when mowing with a mid-mount mower and no rear ballast on the 3 point. Simple solution is to detach the loader when mowing. Takes less than one minute on my JD 755.
His is older I don't believe the loader comes off that easy, I know the bucket is not a quick connect.
 

JeepYJ

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
8,897
Pretty sure he bought it new or close to new in the late 70's...........
That’s nearly a half century ago. There are things that have improved significantly since then, small tractors being one of them.
 

Wrench97

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 23, 2018
Messages
12,036
Location
Southeastern Pa
That’s nearly a half century ago. There are things that have improved significantly since then, small tractors being one of them.
He's now retired in his mid 70's for many years when he was working he paid to have someone take care of the lawn (4+ acers) now that he is retired it's his enjoyment, we have breakfast every Saturday morning and I swear every week he has a new project in the yard going he likes taking care of the equipment rarely buys new but shops well and gets what he needs/wants.
 

Firebrick43

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2015
Messages
13,975
Location
West central Indiana
At one time several manufacturers had their own oddball/ unique mounting systems, but they have gradually been standardizing on the universal SSQA design over the past twenty years.
They are not standardizing on the SSQA

Global/Euro/ALO which ever name you want to call it by is taking a huge percentage of the market share. And JD QA is much better for small loaders as it has the bucket or forks a few inches closer so the owner doesn't loose as much load capacity from extra leverage nor the extra weight of the SSQA.

I have SSQA on my tractor and really wish I went with JD for the simplicity, durability, and weight savings.

Perfect example of why one should stick with relatively modern equipment, contrary to those that recommend worn out, obsolete equipment.
Will you stop. No one is recommending worn out equipment. And we are not talking about 70's and early 80's IHC that was way behind the times, being outclassed by competitors from the mid 60's
 

BombShelter

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
541
Location
State of Hockey
If you go used and the tractor has hydraulics, I think the hoses might have date stamps? Look for cracking, leaks or cylinder ends that look like someone used a pipe wrench to remove.

I've got a baby Bobcat Skid Steer, it has around 10+ hoses, some are nearly impossible to get to so I have to slide the tiny engine out. That's a small job itself but then the lines are also buried in between plate steel with very little clearance and that's where the connections are. I had to grind down a few wrenches, almost to nothing, for clearence. Luckily I have a semi-close hose store that will duplicate my hoses for around $40/each about 1/3 the price from Bobcat.
 
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

finn

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
16,181
Location
The UP, God's country
[QUOTE="Firebrick43, post: 11337420,


Will you stop. No one is recommending worn out equipment. And we are not talking about 70's and early 80's IHC that was way behind the times, being outclassed by competitors from the mid 60's
[/QUOTE]


Who’s recommending an early 1980’s IH. They had pretty much abandoned the small tractor market by then. It was a money loser by that time.

The 84 Deere 650 in the other post is a Yanmar with Green paint. I don’t think any domestic were making tractors like that in the 80s and beyond. They’re all, or most all Asian imports, branded with domestic names, then the industry consolidated globally and a lot of names disappeared.
 

AC-WC

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 22, 2023
Messages
754
Location
NE, Indiana
As most have said you will need a tractor/bush hog combo for that much acreage and rough fields. You should be able to rent that combo from a local rental yard to get a feel for what it's like and to do initial cutting. You will get a better feel for the equipment you want to buy.
With a 10 k budget you should be able to find something reliable used.
 

Firebrick43

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2015
Messages
13,975
Location
West central Indiana
The 84 Deere 650 in the other post is a Yanmar with Green paint. I don’t think any domestic were making tractors like that in the 80s and beyond. They’re all, or most all Asian imports, branded with domestic names, then the industry consolidated globally and a lot of names disappeared.


There were lots of small tractors under 55 hp that were not rebadges. John Deere had 20, 30, 40, 50, and 55 series tractors from the mid 60's to mid 70's that had quick attach loaders all the way back to 1965`, closed center hydraulics, draft control, single finger steering, syncro shift/shuttle shift options, 50/55 series even powershift. Some of the 55 even FWA, nice extendable 3 point arms and simple yet durable, mechanical diesels.

Case had the 1190/1290 that were very nice as well as the 1194/1294. Loaders I see on these tractors around here were mainly westerndorf but depending on which models could be quick attach

MF are few in this area but they made some nice utility tractors in that era as well and some areas are quite plentiful.

You are right about IH in the early 80s, they were so far behind every other major with their british made compact/utility tractors they were not selling and making any money, but their big tractors had no innovation either. The 44/54/64/74 utility tractors were durable but were little better than the 04 series utility from 1961 in features. Loaders took hours to get off, terrible rust issues in the fuel tanks, transmissions cooked your legs in heavy work due to the open center hydraulics.

The big tractors were no better even if they sold. While they had good durable engines there was not refinements in the 06-86 series. By the 86 series they were lagging and just riding on loyalty and namesake from the 60's and before.

The 88 series finally made the leap forward and caught up but they were to late to effect the necessity of the sale from terrible lack of innovation from the late 60's on.
 

whateg01

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
11,188
Location
doo dah, kansas, usa
There were lots of small tractors under 55 hp that were not rebadges. John Deere had 20, 30, 40, 50, and 55 series tractors from the mid 60's to mid 70's that had quick attach loaders all the way back to 1965`, closed center hydraulics, draft control, single finger steering, syncro shift/shuttle shift options, 50/55 series even powershift. Some of the 55 even FWA, nice extendable 3 point arms and simple yet durable, mechanical diesels.

Case had the 1190/1290 that were very nice as well as the 1194/1294. Loaders I see on these tractors around here were mainly westerndorf but depending on which models could be quick attach

MF are few in this area but they made some nice utility tractors in that era as well and some areas are quite plentiful.

You are right about IH in the early 80s, they were so far behind every other major with their british made compact/utility tractors they were not selling and making any money, but their big tractors had no innovation either. The 44/54/64/74 utility tractors were durable but were little better than the 04 series utility from 1961 in features. Loaders took hours to get off, terrible rust issues in the fuel tanks, transmissions cooked your legs in heavy work due to the open center hydraulics.

The big tractors were no better even if they sold. While they had good durable engines there was not refinements in the 06-86 series. By the 86 series they were lagging and just riding on loyalty and namesake from the 60's and before.

The 88 series finally made the leap forward and caught up but they were to late to effect the necessity of the sale from terrible lack of innovation from the late 60's on.
Some would say the lack of innovation was a good thing because all those features were just things that would break.
 

Firebrick43

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2015
Messages
13,975
Location
West central Indiana
Some would say the lack of innovation was a good thing because all those features were just things that would break.
Not on the John Deeres or Cases. Very common to see 10k plus hour examples. They were good reliable tractors too.

The crappy side shifters needed more maintenance as well as the TA's on the IHC on the larger models. They were still reliable for the most part but they didn't have any advantage due to their lack of features. The smaller utility IHC with loaders I hated to work on due to the time to remove the loaders. I never have seen a quick attach one on an IH utility like the other brands offered.

But Finn shtick is that all tractors are akin to the post ww2 ones without live pto or live hydraulics and manual steering, thread after thread.
But set someone down on a post 65 John Deere utility tractor that was optioned correctly and there are not many things other than a cab that is missing feature wise without all the EFI/DPF/EGR ****. And the cab part can be solved in the 1975 plus tractors.
 
OP
B

bluedog225

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
3,241
Location
Texas
For the same 10 grand, I could get a used ATV and one of these.

No loader but a good transport and wagon would be nice.

Evaluating whether I need a full meal deal tractor.

IMG_3625.jpeg
 

pembol

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
264
For the same 10 grand, I could get a used ATV and one of these.

No loader but a good transport and wagon would be nice.

Evaluating whether I need a full meal deal tractor.

IMG_3625.jpeg
Assuming you have other landcare type things to do, then a tractor, particularly one with a loader, is WAY more useful than an ATV. I have a Kubota BX23s (admittedly more than $10K), and can't imagine how I ever lived without it.

Edit to add - not just land care type stuff, also workshop type stuff - once you have pallet forks, moving an rearranging things becomes fun, not a hassle.
 
Last edited:
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!
Top Bottom