[AT] MF 1135

charliehill charliehill at embarqmail.com
Sat Dec 13 13:46:58 PST 2008


Ralph I think I'm somewhere between you and Al on the MF tractors.  I don't 
have a problem with them from the ones I have experience with.  I've never 
run the big ones.  I just know their reputation in this area and I'll have 
to say Al agrees with the majority opinon in eastern NC when it comes to big 
MF tractors.  I really don't know.

Now as for the NEW MF tractors.  Being an AC man I have to kind of fall in 
line with them because they belong to AGCO now.    I think the new MF 
tractors might be a mix of different brands.  Some made my MF, some made by 
AGCO and some maybe hybrid.  AGCO has been changing things around so much in 
the last couple of years it's hard to keep up.  Now before the AGCO bad 
mouthing starts, let me remind all of you that they are the LARGEST Ag 
equipment manufacturer on the planet.  And, getting back to the MF angle, a 
large part of their business is outside the US and a lot of that business is 
MF.

I'm not sure where the "behind in engineering" came from.  I don't think I 
said that.  When I said they won't take a lot of abuse I could have 
re-worded that to say they are built strong enough to do what they are 
designed to do.  That typically indicates pretty good engineering.
The reason being that if you don't know exactly how to build something you 
tend to over build it.

I suspect that if I were in the market for a new tractor to farm with today 
my choices would be between AGCO/MF and Case-IH (I guess Case-IH is still 
the company name.  It's hard to tell these days.  things change so fast). 
If you come down here to coastal NC about all you see is JD and I guess all 
of those guys can't be totally wrong but I think a lot of that has to do 
with finacing and dealer support.  IF I bought JD it would be because I 
convienced myself they were the most bang for the buck.  Right now I don't 
believe that (no offense to the JD guys).

Charlie




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ralph Goff" <alfg at sasktel.net>
To: "Antique tractor email discussion group" <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AT] MF 1135


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Cecil Bearden" <crbearden at copper.net>
> To: "Antique tractor email discussion group" 
> <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 8:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [AT] MF 1135
>
>
>> Ralph:
>> You can take that little side mounted pump off and take it apart and
>> machine off the wear on the sides with a surface grinder.
>
> Thanks for that tip Cecil. If I can ever stop using this Massey long 
> enough
> to remove the pump I might try that. Right now I need it every few days to
> put hay bales out for the cattle.
> I'd have to disagree with Charlie and Al about Massey being behind in 
> their
> engineering and not able to take abuse. When I compare my Super 90 to the
> 730 Case which is the same vintage, I don't see where the Case has any
> engineering advantages over the Massey, at least for the work I do. And 
> far
> as take abuse, this Massey has certainly seen it's share from previous
> owners . Although I try not to, I have done my share of gear grinding,
> burning the clutch and trying to dig rocks that were way too big. It just
> keeps on working for me.
> I have nothing but respect for the Perkins diesel engines, never heard of
> any inherent weaknesses in them. The old Buda six gas engines in the
> Cockshutts  had a very short lifespan when my Dad used them for heavy 
> field
> work but they do fine for light duty chores and belt work. Low oil 
> pressure
> and leaking valves were commonplace. Maybe today's better oils and gas 
> make
> a difference too.
> Ralph in Sask.
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at 




More information about the AT mailing list