[AT] Ford 8 N

[Ricky Prescott]

I have to agree with Farmer on the Ferguson TO's.  They are lightning proof
also.  Never had one foul the plugs with a lightning strike close by.  I
really don't like the N series myself, but most of them I have come accross
were wore out completely and people were still trying to use them in this
condition.  I don' t guess I have ever been on one that was in tip top
condition.  Might change my mind if I were to see one restored.  One of my
Tractor buddies here used to farm 250 acres with one of them when he was a
kid.  Took him all summer to plow with a two disk breaking plow and an 8n.
He started at sun up and finised at sun down.  His dad would come and jump
on it during lunch so he could eat.  I think he had about 15 minutes to eat.
He said he was glad when school started because he didn't have to ride that
thing all day.  He is about 65 now.  I think he has six or seven different
ones now. Cussing them every day but wouldn't sell one if his life depended
on it.  Ricky
----- Original Message -----
From: "Francis Robinson" <robinson at svs.net>
To: "Antique tractor email discussion group" <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:29 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [AT] Ford 8 N


> At 12/9/04 8:06:00 AM, you wrote:
> >I think some folks are being a little sensitive. My comment was
> >essentially that the Ford N was a good little tractor in its day, but
> >that the lack of live hydraulics and transmission driven PTO could make
> >mowing with a brush cutter difficult, if not dangerous. It should also
> >be remembered that the N was a crop tractor first, back when the PTO was
> >mainly used with flat belt pulleys to run stationary mills, corn
> >shuckers, elevators, etc. I am sure that the designers of the N never
> >envisioned that they would someday end up being used solely for rough
> >cutting fields or plowing snow.
> >
> >Like every tractor, the N had its good points and weaknesses. It is
> >comfortable, very reliable, easy to drive, easy to get on and off of,
> >economical to operate, has a starter interlock, has an integrated three
> >point hitch, has a standard PTO (if you change out the early ones), is
> >very reliable and sturdy, and is relatively inexpensive to maintain
> >and/or repair. On the down side are the strange brake pedals and no foot
> >boards on the 9N/2N, marginal draft control, too fast a reverse,
> >difficult to access engine, difficult to access distributor up until
> >1953, axle seals prone to leak, and the lift and PTO problems mentioned
> >above.
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >Ndg1952 at wmconnect.com wrote:
> >> Thanks Farmer.  That's what I have been trying to say for years.  If
the
> >> N-series is as helpless as some people try to say, how did so many
survive to
> >> still be used today?
> >>
> >> Nathan
> >> _______________________________________________
> >
>
>
> Hi Mike:
>
> I should have pointed out that my post was not in response to anything you
said. The N Fords have
> taken an unfair bashing not only on this list but parts of YTMAG and other
sites for far too long.   :-)   I just
> decided to set the record straight. Too many guys want to put it down as
weak and unfit to do serious work.
> That is poppycock.   :-)   Thousands of them were the primary tractor of
farms of several hundred acres all
> across the midwest. They compared well to "most" of their contemporaries
in the same 25 HP class. The
> trouble is too many want to compare them to much larger tractors of the
late 1950's and 1960's and that
> simply isn't a fair comparison.
> Yes, they had good and bad points just like the rest. That "marginal draft
control" was not only as good
> as anything on the market at that time it was about the only draft control
on the market at that time. I never
> found the reverse too fast but it sure is on my 1948 Deere A. The side
mount distributor, BTW, was
> introduced in 1950 not 1953.   :-)   that old front mount dist. was a
#$%&... That starter interlock was about
> the only one out there too.
> Actually the Ferguson TO-20 (which we later put TO-30 pistons in) in my
mind was a much better
> tractor than the Ford in several ways. Rear axle seals was one.   :-)
The biggy was the OVH Continental
> engine. I did like the Ford brake pedals both being on the right side (8N
up) better than Ferguson's master
> pedal with a seperate turn pedal on each side. Our Ferguson TO held up
well under a zillion hours of hard field
> work and when we wanted an new tractor about 1961 we traded the 1953
Jubilee Ford and kept the
> Ferguson. The Ford was traded for a Massey Ferguson 65-D
> One of the nice things about having a wide range of brands of tractors and
loving them all is that I get
> to be more objective than many who see only green or red.   :-)
>
>
>
> "farmer"
>
>
> Francis Robinson
> Central Indiana USA
> robinson at svs.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at