A3.152, ad3.152 are the common 3 cylinder diesels (non direct and direct injection)
If you want to be flashy they can be converted to a at3 turbo easy enough.
Always wanted to do this after seeing this
1000bhp the nipper!!
- Thread starter julianf
- Start date
A3.152, ad3.152 are the common 3 cylinder diesels (non direct and direct injection)
If you want to be flashy they can be converted to a at3 turbo easy enough.
Always wanted to do this after seeing this
1000bhp the nipper!!
When I was young most farmers around here had grey fergies & 35's, except my dad who had a rare red David Brown 770. Whenever the neighbours bogged the front axle of their MF's it was usually my dad who pulled them out!
Older MF's have all the same problem, the front end is too heavy & the back too light. If you hit a boggy patch in the field the front wheels go down & the back ones sit on top of the ground spinning but going nowhere.
The DB on the other hand is a much better balanced tractor & great on soft or boggy ground. Unfortunately the prices for DB's are heading the same way as MF's. There were less than 2000 red 770's built, if only we had kept that tractor it would be quite valuable now!
For the prices MF's fetch there are much better tractors for the money. Most of the older MF's are being exported to Africa, etc and that is driving prices up. Any 399's are making crazy money now!
Older MF's have all the same problem, the front end is too heavy & the back too light. If you hit a boggy patch in the field the front wheels go down & the back ones sit on top of the ground spinning but going nowhere.
The DB on the other hand is a much better balanced tractor & great on soft or boggy ground. Unfortunately the prices for DB's are heading the same way as MF's. There were less than 2000 red 770's built, if only we had kept that tractor it would be quite valuable now!
For the prices MF's fetch there are much better tractors for the money. Most of the older MF's are being exported to Africa, etc and that is driving prices up. Any 399's are making crazy money now!
addjunkie
Member
- Messages
- 12,902
- Location
- Northumberland. Reet oot in the sticks
If you ground is wet Id not bother with two wheel drive, I have more modern case, and had it down to the front axle a couple of times. Though it has a loader so it very very handy. If you want a loader make sure what ever you buy has power steering.
It amazes me, how much trade there is in old tractors, and the prices.
It amazes me, how much trade there is in old tractors, and the prices.
The_Yellow_Ardvark
https://www.death-clock.org/
- Messages
- 19,868
- Location
- Going Away.
KemppiFrog
Member
- Messages
- 4,270
- Location
- Aquitaine
My neighbour has an old Int Harvester for topping, but he gave away a 135 that was in the shed to someone that was going to tidy it up.
'Cors, my little Energic is running and will be out and about soon, was free from the same neighbour's back shed. It is also a vine model and the well offset rear rims can be reversed to change the track and the front axle slides to match.
'Cors, my little Energic is running and will be out and about soon, was free from the same neighbour's back shed. It is also a vine model and the well offset rear rims can be reversed to change the track and the front axle slides to match.
Mick Annick
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 2,709
- Location
- Burgundy, France (450 miles SE of Somerset)
arther dailey
Member
- Messages
- 6,592
- Location
- England
I have a gold belly , original rough condition, un like most fires up straight away ,wouldnt part with it.
arther dailey
Member
- Messages
- 6,592
- Location
- England
KemppiFrog
Member
- Messages
- 4,270
- Location
- Aquitaine
I think of you all the time while I am slopping red oxide over the rustGlad to hear you’re not neglecting my tractor
The advantages of heavy front end would be when using a linkbox etc she wouldn't be wheeling as much and better grip when cornering, A lot more usable as a work horse.
My only experience with David brown/ case wasI a case 1494 and I can't believe as bad a gearbox was every built.
Sold her and bought ford 4610. Night and day difference between gears and brakes etc.
The DB front end was plenty heavy enough, I buckraked many tonnes of silage with the 770 & had no bother lifting it, same with a 996 & a heavy push off buckrake.
A neighbour called one day on his MF 165 & tried to show me how to buckrake silage. He lifted a load & went tearing up the pit in high reverse & loads of revs, emptying the load randomly as he went. That didn't go too well, when he had only half the load off he lost the weight from the back wheels, they started spinning & he went no further. He had to dump the rest of the load there leaving a mound in the middle of my nice flat pit.
I lifted my load in the 996, went up the pit in low reverse, dropping grass where I actually wanted it right up to the top without stopping!
The slagging the neighbour got from the silage crew got so bad he left & never came back. It was embarrassing, an experienced farmer beaten by a schoolboy! 
Did the 1494 have the hydrashift gearbox? They can be very troublesome if not serviced properly during their lifetime & expensive to repair.
As for the Ford, did they change the shift pattern from the 4000 series? Got to be one of the most confusing layout I've ever used when trying to go through the gears!
Great tractors otherwise, would have on before a MF of the same vintage.
Munkul
Jack of some trades, Master of none
- Messages
- 7,655
- Location
- Cumbria
We've nearly always had masseys and I'm similarly biased against DB and JDs etc of same vintage.
135 - lightweight tractor, you can't expect it to do lots of draft work. It'll run those 47hp's all day every day flat out, though. Done loads of mowing with one, great machines. Now relegated to the cow shed mostly.
165 - heavier tractor but ultimately ours was a disappointment. The 65 of ours was a better machine.
185 - well balanced, good for pretty much everything. We led silage in them til probably 4-5 years ago... bit sketchy on hills, mind! Had 2 of them from new i believe. Still have one of them with a loader as a winter back-up machine.
390 - I hated this tractor. The lift wasn't any better than a 185, it started poorly, pulled poorly and the 3 stick gearbox was just awful to use. Only upgrade from 185 was the cab and 4wd.
390t - one of last of the line ones, 12x12 shuttle, 40k, little pocket rocket, was our rolls-royce of the 2000's
4370 - got this 2nd hand 4-5 years ago, it's basically a more comfortable 399 with a 24x24 powershuttle + splitter, really nice tractor to use but hasn't been the best for us, its got 6k hours on it and it's basically worn out. Avoid.
We also have a Case JX1100u which is an awesome tractor, same size as the 390t but bit more poke, 24x24 power shuttle+splitter, great capacity for the weight. Just a bit small for today's work.
Plan is to replace the 4370 with something heavier... ideally a 6480, or maybe a case maxxum.
135 - lightweight tractor, you can't expect it to do lots of draft work. It'll run those 47hp's all day every day flat out, though. Done loads of mowing with one, great machines. Now relegated to the cow shed mostly.
165 - heavier tractor but ultimately ours was a disappointment. The 65 of ours was a better machine.
185 - well balanced, good for pretty much everything. We led silage in them til probably 4-5 years ago... bit sketchy on hills, mind! Had 2 of them from new i believe. Still have one of them with a loader as a winter back-up machine.
390 - I hated this tractor. The lift wasn't any better than a 185, it started poorly, pulled poorly and the 3 stick gearbox was just awful to use. Only upgrade from 185 was the cab and 4wd.
390t - one of last of the line ones, 12x12 shuttle, 40k, little pocket rocket, was our rolls-royce of the 2000's
4370 - got this 2nd hand 4-5 years ago, it's basically a more comfortable 399 with a 24x24 powershuttle + splitter, really nice tractor to use but hasn't been the best for us, its got 6k hours on it and it's basically worn out. Avoid.
We also have a Case JX1100u which is an awesome tractor, same size as the 390t but bit more poke, 24x24 power shuttle+splitter, great capacity for the weight. Just a bit small for today's work.
Plan is to replace the 4370 with something heavier... ideally a 6480, or maybe a case maxxum.
8ob
Member
- Messages
- 14,006
- Location
- Nescient in the vale
[QUOTE="addjunkie, post: 1661573, member: 8842"]If you ground is wet Id not bother with two wheel drive, I have more modern case, and had it down to the front axle a couple of times. Though it has a loader so it very very handy. If you want a loader make sure what ever you buy has power steering.
It amazes me, how much trade there is in old tractors, and the prices.[/QUOTE]
I hear you but it's not always the case, the only tool we have for rescuing any of our kit is an old nuffield winch tractor. That thing will drive through the same mud and mayhem to get to the front of buried kit without ever getting stuck. We have used it to recover Mogs, 4X4 tractors, Forwarders and some pretty heavy tracked machines. Never fails, just skips across the mud
Bob
It amazes me, how much trade there is in old tractors, and the prices.[/QUOTE]
I hear you but it's not always the case, the only tool we have for rescuing any of our kit is an old nuffield winch tractor. That thing will drive through the same mud and mayhem to get to the front of buried kit without ever getting stuck. We have used it to recover Mogs, 4X4 tractors, Forwarders and some pretty heavy tracked machines. Never fails, just skips across the mud
Bob
arther dailey
Member
- Messages
- 6,592
- Location
- England
uncle had along with others a nuffield, loverly engine on it would pull a house down on tick over
Have you any photos of the 1494 shift pattern.The DB front end was plenty heavy enough, I buckraked many tonnes of silage with the 770 & had no bother lifting it, same with a 996 & a heavy push off buckrake.
A neighbour called one day on his MF 165 & tried to show me how to buckrake silage. He lifted a load & went tearing up the pit in high reverse & loads of revs, emptying the load randomly as he went. That didn't go too well, when he had only half the load off he lost the weight from the back wheels, they started spinning & he went no further. He had to dump the rest of the load there leaving a mound in the middle of my nice flat pit.
I lifted my load in the 996, went up the pit in low reverse, dropping grass where I actually wanted it right up to the top without stopping!
Did the 1494 have the hydrashift gearbox? They can be very troublesome if not serviced properly during their lifetime & expensive to repair.
As for the Ford, did they change the shift pattern from the 4000 series? Got to be one of the most confusing layout I've ever used when trying to go through the gears!
Great tractors otherwise, would have on before a MF of the same vintage.
Top gear was high 3 but when you shifted down to high 2 it wasn't down one gear it was down a full range and going to slow.
The actual next gear down was medium 3 but their was no synchro to change this on the move.
The next gear down was then low 3. I never seen such a mixed up load of rubbish.
She was deadly for carrying round bales because the front was heavy but on mucky ground she just drove the nose straight in and bogged. Loads of power but useless because of the gears.
If you had the radio on and it mentioned rain on the weather, she started to spin thinking about it.
She needed to be 4wd.
