|
|
Rivers, MB | Was checking for serial numbers on a bunch of our older equipment and found that the model number the serial number tag for our 930 is acutally model: 932.
Never heard of that. Tractordata.com doesn't list that as a model.
Any insight??
|
|
| |
|
wahpeton, nd | it appears to be a Western Special or standard or wheatland.
http://www.ytmag.com/case/messages/25130.html |
|
| |
|
Central Saskatchewan Canada | We had a 930 with the 932 stamped on the tag. I believe the tag was under the steering wheel area if a remember right??? |
|
| |
|
| The 931 and 932 designations referred to the Wheatland model (square fenders, no 3 pt. hitch) and the General Purpose (or row-crop) models with small fenders, longer wheelbase with adjustable axles and 3-pt hitch. They all fall under the umbrella 930 designation. In the earliest 930's, that had the fuel tank ahead of the driver (pre-Comfort King) the sub-series was 930 for the diesels and 940 for the LP-gas. Again they were all under the 930 designation. I think this was true of the other models such as the 730, 830 and 1030.
|
|
| |
|
S.E. Sask. | 932 Western special was the most common 930 here in Western Canada. Big fenders, no 3 point and the early ones had non adjstable front axle.
http://hotimg23.fotki.com/p/a/142_165/25_187/932SpecialandGP.jpg
 (932 Special and GP.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 932 Special and GP.jpg (57KB - 1032 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Central Saskatchewan Canada | My dad says he did summerfallow when he was 14, using a 730 gas pulling 10 feet of cultivator going over 5 quarters. He says the tractor hardly ever stopped. Then a couple years later they bought a 930 and pulled 16 feet. He said it was like night and day. We had that 930 until a few years ago when i blew a piston. It was a decent tractor for the hell it was put through. |
|
| |
|
S.E. Sask. | Yes, there was a major difference between the 7 and 930. Over 25 hp. and more weight. Both good tractors and I still have an older 730. (Wishing for the 930 again).
 (930 and 730.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
930 and 730.jpg (68KB - 964 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
SW Saskatchewan | "You said that you was high class"
If anything was comfort, it wasn't on those front mount Cases!
The 1030 designation was the same except a neighbour claimed they were all 10-33,
CB lingo for "big trouble over here"!
"You ain't nuthin but a hound dog
And you ain't no friend of mine"
How did Elvis ever get around to singing about Case Tractors? |
|
| |
|
Brazilton KS | Trying to remember from reading some time ago.....wasn't the standard 930 a completely different tractor from the row crop?
|
|
| |
|
| There were so many variations in the 930 over the ten years it was produced it seems odd now that Case used the same model designation. The earliest ones were 6-speed with roller chain drive, later ones were 8-speed gear drive. I believe all row-crop models were 8-speed, I'm not sure when the switch was made in the Western models. Over the years the engines stayed the same but the later ones were speeded-up a bit for another 10 pto horsepower. The last ones went to spin-on oil and fuel filters vs. the old cartridge style, some versions had a hand clutch while others used a foot clutch. The 930 came out in 1960, and had the fuel tank ahead of the driver, then in 1963 they moved the operator platform ahead and higher and placed a much larger fuel tank at the back. These were the Comfort Kings but as pointed out that was a bit of a misnomer. The longer wheelbase row crop models probably rode a bit better, I've never had the chance to drive one of those.
|
|
| |
|
Brazilton KS | IIRC the 930 RC was pretty much a turned up 830, whereas the 930 wheatland was actually a stronger tractor. I have a book here somewhere which covered it....not sure which one, probably JI CASE 1956-1994
|
|
| |
|
| I've heard a similar story but only a comparison of the parts books would prove that one way or another. The 830 had a 4-cylinder motor while the 930 and 1030 had the 6. Basic design of the 4's and 6's was similar with parts like the heads being interchangeable (that doesn't make sense unless you know Case used multiple heads - 3 on the 6 cyl, 2 on the 4's). The old 6-spd chain drives were almost indestructable - I read once each chain would handle over 100 hp, 2 chains behind 83 pto hp.
|
|
| |
|
SW Saskatchewan | Where I was bad-mouthing the 1030 had a discussion on the row-crop-wheatland differences.
Never had a 930-had an 830 with the case-o-matic. Interesting arrangement but not extremely useful. Wore the poor little sucker right out, farmed mucho acres with it when I was young and stupid, including running it for years on an IH pull combine.... and then turned around and broke a 1000 acres of sod one summer-got smart enough and got a 1030 for the following year when it all had to be seeded!
Nothing worse than the 1030, never did a parts check but the rear end couldn't take the torque, the radiator was too small for the engine and the tin can cab(my first) was a pos.
After 3 yrs we traded it off on a versatile d-145 and discovered the pleasures of finally having enough horsepower(till we got a bigger cult and then the race was on!
Supposedly the 930 and 1030 rowcrops used a common chassis with the 830. Don't know if it was so but that was what I was told. |
|
| |
what's the difference between a Case 930 and 932?
