[AT] TMCOTKU tractor count is down by one.

[Steve W.]

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.