For alla u modern hay farmers

FarmboyBill · #1 04/07/14, 05:24 PM

I saw where, on YT Forums that somebody posted about bailing rounds with a M Farmall. Sever people named a 1/2 doz bailers to do it, and also said that it was doable but hard. Im wondering how tight those bales would be. I wouldn't think that the M would have the power to pack a 4 X 5 bale tight enough

springvalley · #2 04/07/14, 05:35 PM

I think I would have to agree with you Bill, I bale with a JD 385 4x5 baler and it makes a very tight nice shaped bale. It takes two Hydraulic hook ups to run the thing, one for the twine, and one to open the back end and poop them out. Never seen an M with two hydraulics on it. I use a 100 horse power tractor on it and that has plenty of HP, I`m not sure an M would handle it. > Thanks Marc

FarmboyBill · #3 04/07/14, 07:38 PM

No they didn't come out with 2 way hyds, but many had them put on. That's the least of my worries. Having the umph to do a 4X5 TIGHT is where my worries are

Phil V. · #4 04/07/14, 08:32 PM

Seen the Amish use them with a power unit behind horses. They use an 80 hp. diesel as the unit.

COWS · #5 04/07/14, 08:37 PM

A round baler with a roller in the bottom for the bale to ride on is fairly easy to pull. The design of the belt tensioning devices determines how tight the bale will be. Balers generally don't get hard to pull until the last foot or so of diameter. Running the baler at that point also will pack the bale tighter, assuming a belt baler with a variable chamber design. A baler, for example Krone, that has a big open non variable chamber tghat the hay is packed into, forming a bale with a soft center and the last foot or so packed very tight is harder to pull when finishing the bale.

At one time I had an older Vermeer belt baler. I was curious about how how much horsepower it would take to pull it and borrowed a neighbors compact tractor which was a 35 hp Long made in Korea. It pulled the baler without any problem, but I was on leverl ground. A possible issue with a small light tractor is that the baler when full of hay may be to heavy for the smaller tractor to handle on hills and when making turns, not unlike a heavy trailer pushing a light truck. A Farmall M has 35 hp but it is too heavy to be pushed around.

COWS

FarmboyBill · #6 04/07/14, 09:19 PM

I was watching on U Tubes a M pulling a , what looked like a 5X5 bailer, and a JD 70 pulling a JD round bailer but not sure of the size. Boy said that row crop tractors are preferred, as they pack down the windrow so that it goes into the bailer easier and faster.

rambler · #7 04/07/14, 09:21 PM

I with you, Bill, I wouldn't want to try making round bales with 35hp.

Well actually I did, I put the Oliver Super 77 on my old 605F round baler. Count get past 3.5 foot bale, and then you can't get it tied when its stalled out.....

I know there are a couple very small round balers, but it takes a lot of running around picking all those little fellas up, and you use more twine.

I just stayed out of that conversation.

Paul

Bubbas Boys · #8 04/08/14, 07:36 AM

So, would the old 300 that I got handle a small square baler? We want small squares out of our future hay. Also, does it have single or double hydraulic the back. Had a guy ask me that the other day since he has the disc I gonna borrow. I told him honestly I don't know. It has 2 ports on the back side of it if that means anything.Thanks

COWS · #9 04/08/14, 08:06 AM

Small square balers are not hard to pull. 35 hp will handle one just fine. I assume you have a 300 Farmall, which will pull a baler with no problem. Light compact utility tractors may have more trouble even with enough hp because a square baler has a heavy recriprocating mass with the plunger going back and forth and compressing the hay. The smaller tractor dosen't have enough mass in its flywheel, gears and engine to smooth out the baler strokes. The Amish will get a square baler with its own engine and pull the baler with a team of horses. The engine I saw on a baler in a dealer's lot was one of the models that is usually used on larger riding lawn mowers, maybe 20 hp.

COWS

FarmboyBill · #10 04/08/14, 08:12 AM

Yes, the 300 will pull a sq bailer with its eyes closed lol. Im guessing that a 300 and a super M are about the same hp. I can find out easily enough.

Bubbas Boys · #11 04/08/14, 08:20 AM

Thanks guys! I am really excited to get this 300 home but will have plenty of questions as I learn it. It is the one I learned to drive on with grandpa but just been mowing his property with it for years not using it to really work.

FarmboyBill · #12 04/08/14, 08:23 AM

The 300 has the same power thereabouts as a Super H or a M

rambler · #13 04/08/14, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubbas Boys

So, would the old 300 that I got handle a small square baler? We want small squares out of our future hay. Also, does it have single or double hydraulic the back. Had a guy ask me that the other day since he has the disc I gonna borrow. I told him honestly I don't know. It has 2 ports on the back side of it if that means anything.Thanks

An IHC 300 ag tractor has ran the New Holland 270 small square baler on this farm for about as long as I have been around.

Works well.

This 300 has 3 hyd ports running off the front distributor pump, which is a very low output pump but works good enough. It has the Fast Hitch which was the IHC incompatible but same idea as a 3pt. It has a working Torq Apmlifier so it has 10 forward and 2 reverse speeds, you can shift the TA up or down while on the go, no clutching. It has live pto.

All those options makes it about an ideal baler tractor, don't know if you have all those options. The TA is just a dream for an older tractor to have with a baler, as well as the independent pto.

I do not know how it would do with a newer higher capacity small square baler, but it is perfect for the 1950s and 1960s era small square balers, works well with a hay rack of 100 bales or a bale basket behind the baler too.

There was a smaller compact 300, and a taller ag version. Mine is the taller ag version.

Paul

DaleK · #14 04/08/14, 09:36 AM

Couple of guys here run the older soft-core New Idea/Case balers with 35 hp, 4 round x 5 long. You pretty much need either 2 outlets or one and a good reliable electrical system with electric tie.

Ramblin Wreck · #15 04/08/14, 03:58 PM

Can you put hydraulic remotes on that tractor? If so, you could probably go slow and get it done.

FarmboyBill · #16 04/08/14, 05:52 PM

RW, Who you talkin to??

FarmboyBill · #17 04/08/14, 06:55 PM

When opnes talkin bout using 30/40hp tractors to run a round bailer, Wouldn't a WD-45 be a good one to have with the 2 clutches?? I have a WD AC setting here that's my boys that the guy it was bought from said it had been bored out to 40hp. Would the 2 clutches on it make it more favorable than an H or a M

sammyd · #18 04/09/14, 03:21 AM

A super m has over 10 more ponies than a 300. A wd bored over a bit or a wd45 would be an ok small square baling tractor. A bit on the light side compared to an m but a vast improvement overall to an h.
Personally I'd find a 400. live power 50 ponies 3hyds on most and usually cheaper than a super mta which is what it replaced. Sems anything with an m on it is valued very highly.

Ramblin Wreck · #19 04/09/14, 03:22 PM

I guess I was asking you FB if you could put hydraulic remotes on an M tractor.

As an aside, a few years ago at an auction I saw a 4x4 German made round baler that didn't require hydraulics. It electronically controlled everything. Given the problems I've seen with VW's and their electronics, I kinda' shied away from bidding. Still, it was a neat looking baler.

sammyd · #20 04/10/14, 12:17 AM

Some M's had hyds built in. I have pto driven on mine for a loader.