[AT] TMCOTKU tractor count is down by one.

charliehill charliehill at embarqmail.com
Tue Oct 20 04:49:30 PDT 2009


Al, I've never run any IH stuff since past the end of the letter series so I 
can't make a direct comparison between the 424, 444 and the MF tractors but 
I've spent a lot of seat time on 35's and a fair amount on 1xx and 2xx 
series Masseys and most recently on a 265.  They are very easy to operate. 
Everything seems to be where it should be.  Your hands seem to fall onto the 
controls.  They have good power and seem to run effortlessly.  I don't think 
they are quite as tough as the AC stuff I grew up on but unless abused I 
can't see that would matter much.  I'd like to run a 424 or 444 sometime to 
see for myself.  I will say this.  It was pretty easy around Craven County 
to get seat time on a MF and there were very few of the IH tractors.
We had a good IH dealer about 15 miles from our farm in Washington NC so it 
wasn't a matter of dealer support.  I'm thinking maybe the MF stuff might 
have had a price advantage over IH.  The MF dealer that most folks used was 
actually further away.

Charlie
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve W." <falcon at telenet.net>
To: "Antique tractor email discussion group" <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: [AT] TMCOTKU tractor count is down by one.


> Al Jones wrote:
>> Well yes, they cast a very similar shadow.  But the IH was built so much
>> better.  I believe you could drop a 424 or 444 IH off the side of the 
>> grand
>> canyon, and once it hit bottom, you could crank it up and drive it out.
>> (Unless it landed in the river in which case you would have to dry it out
>> first!)  Then, you got an 8 speed transmission.  And better hydraulics. 
>> Etc.
>
> If I showed you my 35 you might just think it made that trip.....
> It's had it's (and a few others) share of abuse.
> When it was on the farm it was THE tractor, anything done on the farm it
> did (even after he got a low hour TO-20). Not sure how many hours are on
> it but he bought it new and ran it until about 1998.
>
>>
>> What I have been trying to say is, Ford/ Ferg. might have pioneered the
>> small, light weight, low-bodied tractor, but IH, JD, and others "refined"
>> it and made it something way more useful. With the other choices on the
>> market now, similarly priced, and many now old enough to be called a
>> "classic," I just can't understand why somebody would spend the money on
>> the Ferd/Furg.
>>
>> But, to each his own! :)
>>
>> Al
>
> The main reason I like them is simple, I grew up with them. :-)
> The TO-20 was MY tractor on the farm, I used it a bunch and even skidded
> more than a few LARGE logs with it. (most were large enough that to
> steer it down out of the woods and up to the drop I never touched the
> steering wheel, But I did wear out 2 sets of brake shoes!!!)
>
>
> -- 
> Steve W.
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at 




More information about the AT mailing list