Author Topic: My Old VS. New Ford 861 (Read 49002 times)

Finally Home · « **Reply #40 on:** December 28, 2013, 09:48:27 am »

Them kind are everywhere. Like I said, I like to use them on my property for awhile to make sure all is well.
Famous last words in the old tractor world ------ "Ran good when parked" -------

tecumseh · « **Reply #41 on:** December 30, 2013, 06:02:29 am »

those old ford had little hydraulic capacity and since a great number of them were gas a wreck often meant you died via fire. thank goodness when I worked at Ford my boss insisted that I purchase a model with a diesel engine < funny how sometimes when you follow old men's advice it can literally save your life. not certain if I have the current history correct but the New Holland I think now belongs to a European (I want to say Fiat) folks. imho the new stuff ain't half the tractor of some of the older tractors. it appears all the manufactures now also manufacture the horse power ratings.

I still have and my old 3000 that I purchased back in 1973 and after I rolled it over on my chest did build a roll over bar.

G3farms · « **Reply #42 on:** December 30, 2013, 10:33:56 am »

yep tec you are right, somewhere fiat is in on it. I have an allis chalmers 6080 that has the fiat motor and transmission in it. The pto housing broke and had to buy a brand new one, the casting was marked new holland.

iddee · « **Reply #43 on:** December 31, 2013, 10:13:53 pm »

Tec, does your 73 Ford 3000 diesel look similar to this?

tecumseh · « **Reply #44 on:** January 02, 2014, 06:19:14 am »

yep... only mine is prettier < evidently I wasn't the only one who knocked off the front head lights??? about 10 years ago I had it worked on just a bit and at the time I repainted that old work horse.

even this particular model had fairly insufficient hydraulic capacity but you could add an extra pump in line with the crank and get all the flow you needed. mine has one set of external hydraulic couples and this will operate some things but really doesn't have the flow capacity to operate a loader at any kind of acceptable speed < it will physically run a front end loader but it is soooo slow that trying to operate a loader will quickly drive you to drink.

during this period they measured horse power based on 'the Nebraska Test' which basically measured the horse power at the pto... now day it appears from the sales brochures that horse power is measured at the fly wheel.... which essentially means the stated horse power is being overstated by about 25%.

Perry · « **Reply #45 on:** January 02, 2014, 07:23:24 am »

Well, they say there is such thing as a dumb question, so here goes.
When did they start using power steering on tractors? I remember swathing hay using an old International with a loader and no power steering. I had to have the loader way up in the air to see properly and man was it tough to steer!

G3farms · « **Reply #46 on:** January 02, 2014, 11:08:12 am »

I have a 65 MF that has power steering, think it is a 1965 model.
The first ones were built in 1957 and power steering was an option.

Finally Home · « **Reply #47 on:** January 02, 2014, 11:49:00 am »

1958 for Fords... Also considered an option.

Perry · « **Reply #48 on:** January 02, 2014, 06:05:28 pm »

2nd dumb question. If a guy bought an older Ford (53-58), could you put power steering on it?

Finally Home · « **Reply #49 on:** January 02, 2014, 06:31:55 pm »

absolutely. Aftermarket or find a dead tractor and snag the system off that one. Here's one company that many guys deal with.

http://jacksonpowersteering.com/category/products/complete-steering-kits/

Perry · « **Reply #50 on:** January 05, 2014, 04:51:27 pm »

Well, I stopped in to the fellow down the road and talked to him about his tractor.
It's a 1958 Ford 901. He said it had a 5 speed straight shift (?) and it looks to be in real nice shape. Still 6 volt (last year). New emblem for the front is in his garage.
Said it was easy to steer, heavier and more powerful than older 8n's. He paid $3,800 for it a half dozen years ago and said he's put $600 into it (new front tires and rear loaded).
I told him if he was interested to give me a call. He said he had been thinking of parting with it.
I left him my card.

iddee · « **Reply #51 on:** January 05, 2014, 05:17:35 pm »

Is it a wide front end or a tricycle. You DON'T want a tricycle for a first tractor. Also, a 901 may drink a bit more gas than you want to feed it. It is a fairly large tractor.

Finally Home · « **Reply #52 on:** January 05, 2014, 05:18:17 pm »

Good deal. Basically the same as mine but the 901 is a row crop. I also have the 5 speed. Like that a lot better than the 4 speeds. Is it a narrow or wide front?? Narrow fronts are pretty easy to steer. A lot of row crops came with power steering. Find out if it's a 951 or 961 (would be stamped in the bell housing on the flat behind the starter). Serial number would be stamped right below the 951/961 stamp. Both would be a 5 speed. The 961 would also have live PTO which would be a plus. If a 951 you can still put an ORC (over running clutch) for bush hog work. But like IDDEE says, they do drink the gas (if it has the large carb upgrade) if you plan on driving it a lot.

Perry · « **Reply #53 on:** January 05, 2014, 07:18:04 pm »

Not a tricycle, and he said it was a 901. No power steering, I asked and he said it was easy.
I can check out more if I get a phone call. I will probably have plenty of questions should that happen.

Finally Home · « **Reply #54 on:** January 05, 2014, 07:25:53 pm »

901 is the series (hood might say 901 powermaster)- - - - - - 951 or 961 is the model. Wide fronts are better for loaders to if that's an option for you. I'd like to get the model that follows that one. The early thousand series (4000 - 62-64)

iddee · « **Reply #55 on:** January 05, 2014, 07:55:27 pm »

Fin, you have acreage. Perry has 2 acres. He would need a 2 or 3 thousand at most. A 601 series would even be better than the 901. A 2000 would be a very nice tractor for his application.

Finally Home · « **Reply #56 on:** January 05, 2014, 08:03:44 pm »

Yes a 600-601-2000 would be fine. I have 10 acres but my garden that I use the tractor for is only 60 x 160. 600' driveway to plow. Might tow a wagon of firewood from the back of the property to the middle. Its actually way more than I need (power wise) but I just love that tractor. Friend of mine has a 961 in Nebraska. His does not have the HP upgrade that mine does and doesn't use much more fuel than his 62 - - 2000. Mine has the 2" exhaust. It does eat up the fuel but it doesn't run every day nor all day so it isn't killing me.

Finally Home · « **Reply #57 on:** February 09, 2014, 07:29:03 pm »

With 6 1/2' Meyers plow added. We just put the round pipe on the blade so my gravel drive stays that way. Only moves snow.

Perry · « **Reply #58 on:** February 09, 2014, 07:33:46 pm »

Smart idea with the pipe!

That tractor looks too nice to use in the snow.

Finally Home · « **Reply #59 on:** February 09, 2014, 07:36:22 pm »

Was repainted about 4 years ago. Decided to use good quality paint. Friend of mine ordered it for me. It gets used for everything. Especially snow right now.