[AT] Three point hitches and Dean's commentary

[Michael Miller]

List,
    I appreciate all the help so far.  The comments on the pony were pretty 
similar to what my thoughts were.   The way they are starting it now either 
requires 2 people or becomes very very interesting.  I had thought of trying 
to convert it over to electric start, but wasn't imagining it costing 
upwards of $1000 to do!

I am not sure what 3 pt it is, but he did say it was JD and he thought it 
was powrtrol.  So that would be the 800 series?   How hard is it to convert 
to accept ASAE standardized 3 pt equipment?  I do not need the draft sensing 
capabilities---the main thing I'd like 3 pt for is for a 3 pt crane, a 
blade, a cultivator, possibly a disk or field cultivator.  It isn't really a 
"need" thing but it'd sure be more useful than the M with just a standard 
drawbar.  For a guy who just bought his first hydraulic lift implements last 
year 3 pt is really moving up:-)



Mike


>From: "Dean VP" <deanvp at att.net>
>Reply-To: Antique tractor email discussion group 
><at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>To: "'Antique tractor email discussion group'" 
><at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
>Subject: RE: [AT] Three point hitches and Dean's commentary
>Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 13:41:13 -0700
>
>Grant:
>
>Appreciate your comments and none of the two cylinder era three point
>hitches of any variety had power down that I am aware of. I'm not sure of
>the 40 through 430 series tractors but I doubt they had it. I know on some
>tractors the operator could use the three point as a jack. In fact I think
>Ford/Ferguson sold an accessory for this very function. I'm not familiar
>enough with the other manufacturer's products to know which had the power
>down feature. I surely can see where the power down feature would be very
>helpful at times.
>
>The load sensing feature was more important for the smaller tractors such 
>as
>the Ford/Ferguson and the JD 40. They tended to be light in the rear end 
>and
>the increase in traction provided by the three point was mandatory. That
>wasn't as critical on the larger Two Cylinder Row Crop tractors since the
>typical weight distribution was 70% to the rear. The early power lifts on 
>JD
>were either all down or all up. Then the power-trol allowed control of the
>in-between but no real closed loop depth control. That is why gauge wheels
>were required on the implements. Then the 20 Series tractors gave full 
>three
>point closed loop control and the gauge wheels were not needed as much.
>
>However, I have had a personal experience with my 620 when plowing where 
>the
>added traction provided by the active three point was an absolute 
>necessity.
>We had a local club plowing day here one spring where it had rained and was
>raining. But us goofs plowed anyway. Those with tag-along plows couldn't
>plow at all and those that didn't have their three point hitches set
>properly had extremely high wheel slippage. I plowed behind a JD 4440 with 
>a
>3 bottom integral plow whose hitch was not setup properly. I too was 
>plowing
>with a three bottom integral plow right behind. And the left rear tire lugs
>on my 620 were about gone. The 620 with a properly set up hitch crawled
>right up onto the back of that 4440 all the time. I would have to stop and
>wait so they could get far enough ahead. That tractor probably has more 
>than
>twice as much HP as my 620 but it wasn't getting enough traction help from
>the hitch. The wheel slippage on the 4440 was atrocious even with better
>tires. The increase in traction I was getting from the hitch was very
>noticeable. I could hear and feel the hitch working.
>
>Also the load sensing is very important when plowing with a limited HP
>tractor. If the tractor is working close to its capacity and then hits a
>really tough spot, one could run out of power real quick. With load sensing
>the plow lifts a little to reduce the load and in turn also provided more
>traction. I am a firm believer in the attributes of a completely functional
>and active top link on a three point hitch.
>
>The 801 version of the 800 series hitches called a traction-trol hitch had 
>a
>mechanical means of detecting load and as the load increased the system
>would try to reduce the depth slightly or at least stop the implement from
>going deeper. JD advertised a 30% increase in traction due to that
>mechanical leverage system.
>
>No aftermarket hitch that I am aware of mounted on a JD A, B, G, 50, 60 or
>70 can provide that kind of capability. Now I agree on many three point
>implements that load and depth control is not needed or desired. In fact on
>the 801 hitch there was a way to lock that capability out. One of the
>interesting side effects that JD had trouble with on the 801 hitch was that
>operators would have difficulty getting some plows to penetrate the ground
>due to the way the 801 hitch floated. Since there was no down pressure and
>the 801 hitch would allow the plow to drop perfectly flat on the ground the
>plow shares and points had to be in a good sharp condition and set 
>properly.
>
>You have correctly pointed out that all the features of a conventional 
>three
>point hitch may not be needed in this person's intended applications.
>
>
>
>Dean A. Van Peursem
>Snohomish, WA 98290
>
>What people can dream, people can do! George W. Bush
>
>www.deerelegacy.com
>
>http://members.cox.net/classicweb/email.htm
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
>[mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Grant Brians
>Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 12:21 PM
>To: Antique tractor email discussion group
>Subject: [AT] Three point hitches and Dean's commentary ...snip
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AT mailing list
>http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at


_______________________________________________
AT mailing list
http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at