[AT] narrow vs. wide front tractors

[Dan Glass]

In regard to safety, more people are killed on wide front tractors than 
narrow fronts.  I think there are two reasons.  One is there are more 
wide front tractors still around and most tractor rollovers are flips 
and doesn't matter if they are wide or narrow.   Often it is from 
pulling something heavy when the chain is hooked to the center link 
above the axle.  Many wide front tractors are lower to the ground making 
this problem worst. In my area there have been three lethal tractor 
flips in the last few years and I think they were all on 8N's.
On 4/4/2014 5:25 PM, Dean Vinson wrote:
> I think an underlying reason is simply history:  When IH introduced the
> original Farmall in, what, the 1920s, it had a narrow front end.   I would
> guess that contributed to its maneuverability and its adaptability to a
> variety of front-mounted implements, both of which couldn't have hurt in
> establishing the advantages of that type of tractor over the competition of
> its day, at least in row-crop country.   Given the dominance of Farmall in
> that market for quite a while, I think it just became "what row-crop
> tractors are supposed to look like."
>
> The stability advantage of wide vs. narrow fronts gets discussed now and
> then.  My conclusion is always that if you're counting on a wide front end
> to make a high-center-of-gravity row-crop tractor behave like a
> low-center-of-gravity utility tractor, you're asking for trouble.   Given
> that it's still a high-center-of-gravity row-crop tractor, I believe the
> spacing of the rear wheels and the operator's awareness of his speed and the
> terrain on which he's operating are much bigger factors in preventing
> overturning than is the front end style.
>
> I've experienced some of the ride and use advantages of wide fronts that
> others have mentioned, and as I contemplate purchasing a general chore
> tractor for my recently-acquired property a relatively modern wide-front
> utility type is the only thing on my list.  But for fun and aesthetic
> appreciation, I still love the narrow fronts.  They're just what tractors
> are supposed to look like.  :)
>
> Dean Vinson
> St Paris, Ohio
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Greg Hass
> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 10:16 PM
> To: at at lists.antique-tractor.com
> Subject: Re: [AT] narrow vs. wide front tractors
>
> Since things are a little slow on the list I will ask something that has
> bothered me for quite some time. I suspect the answer is somewhat regional,
> but here goes. First of all, this applies to older tractors; but why do some
> areas lean heavily to narrow fronts and others to wide fronts? In our area
> of Michigan, IH starting with the late letter series and JD starting with
> the early numbered series, almost everyone bought wide fronts; whereas in
> other areas,I'm thinking maybe Indiana, people stayed with narrow fronts. As
> an example, google "plowing of the past 1962" and you will see what I mean.
> In this video, the sound does not start for 30 seconds. Almost every tractor
> is narrow front, although a town is mentioned, I am not sure what state the
> video was in. I have driven both types and I personally hate narrow fronts.
> When Farmer was on the list, I know he said his 4010 or 4020, I forget
> which, had a narrow front. So my question is, why do certain areas seem to
> favor one or the other, and also those of you on this list, why do you
> prefer one over the other?
>                   Greg Hass
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at