|
Missouri | There are diminishing returns with each further section width reduction. Take a 16 row for example. Half width disconnects are a massive savings. From that splitting the planter in quarters saves half again as much, and 2 row sections are half that again. Each time you cut your section width in half, the returns are fewer. I'd estimate the returns on 30" sections vs 60" sections in the tenths of a percent range in terms of overlap reduction. Planting maps I've looked at with a two row sections 16 row planter show the mapped coverage on planting is less than 1% over the the FSA acreage for that field. These same fields showed about about 107% of actual area on a map when they were planted without shutoffs.
It's almost a "free gain" to use the full capacity of the CCM module that is there, but to get fully down to 1 row sections requires another CCM. I can understand it when guys want single row sections, but I don't think that when pencil is put to paper, it actually pays off.
I like single row shutoffs. On a 12 row, it's a no brainer. On a 16 I'm not convinced it would ever justify the cost of the second CCM. | |
|
Ag Leader clutches, 16 row planter in 12 sections
