|
|
South central KS | LOOKING AT 1992 9230 JUST WOUNDERING ABOUT THE POWER SHIFT AND TRACTOR IN GENERAL THANKS |
|
| |
|
MID NORTH DAKOTA | Strong powershifts. The row-crop version's steering can be a little funky. Some people just bolt the pivoting front axle solid if it causes problems. Cummins engines. These tractors are not the power houses that the 70 and 80 series are, but they have their place. It would probably be great for pulling a cart, big drill, or 24 row planter. |
|
| |
|
Hopkinsville KY | how many hours? pay close attension to the trans, we had one with 5000hrs that the clutch facings came off and chocked up the screen in the bottom of the trans, had it putting out about 230 pto hp |
|
| |
|
| Had one for a few years. Used for planter drill and cart. Good for those apps. Front steer worked well with autosteer (outback), but is jerky on ends - just turned it off to turn. Went to a 9220jd to pull larger disk also.
|
|
| |
|
| At one time we had both a CIH 9230 & a NH Versatile 9282, which lso used the 8.3 Cummins emgine like what's in the 9230. 9230 was rated 245 hp & the 9282 was rated 265 or 275 hp. We had head problems with both tractors but more so with the 9230 though later we found out it had been turned up to about 300 hp by the previous owner, the 82 was pretty much stock. The 245 - 265 hp is pretty much max for this engine then cooling becomes a problem.
Other thing with the 9230 is the weight distribution is poor for heavy tillage. We had lots of wheel hop problems till we built a weight bracket for the back & put on 1,600# of weights. Powershift tranny is a strong trans, same as used in the bigger size CIH 4wds of the time. However, it can be expensive to repair. IIRC a rebuild was about $29,000. There is a big hesitation between 6th & 7th, the 2 most common ground working gears. We learned to use the deaccelerator on the ends instead of downshifting.
Of the two tractors, if I were going to buy one again I'd go with the 9282. Much quieter cab, and better ride & weight distribution because of the longer wheelbase. 9230s have very short wheelbases. |
|
| |
|
Sucker brook, NY | you really gotta bring the rpms down and lessen your load when pulling the stick back outa 7th. |
|
| |
|
south central kansas | I wouldn't buy one of those pieces of junk. They wont work for you. I would buy one of these. lol
 (100_2734.jpg)
 (100_2749.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 100_2734.jpg (68KB - 905 downloads)
100_2749.jpg (62KB - 873 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
thumb of michigan | only buy one of those green gems from Illinois if you want to have to split it to do an overhaul or want to wipe out the crank when the frame/engine flexes a little bit. |
|
| |
|
Salina, Kansas | We have a 9230 that we use exclusively for planting and drilling. Couldn't be happier with it in that role. My opinion, for what its worth, is that it might have been the best tractor for that of its time. As, or more maneuverable than most FWAs and you sit much higher and can see better. As someone said the rowcrop steering can be useful from time to time but works best it turned off to make tight turns. As with all older tractors, I do not know if the hydraulics would keep up with some of the latest hydraulic hungry air drills and planters. We run a 7200 vac planter and a great plains drill with active down pressure and it works perfect for those.
We have only pulled ours hard a couple of times but it is hard to make to many judgements in that role since ours has no weight added and consequently is a little light for that.
Never had a bit of power train problems with ours but only has about 6000hrs. We have had other sizes for pulling, 50, 70, and they have been pretty much trouble free also although a 50 had a transmission problem at 9000. Other than that we have been happy with our red stiegers. |
|
| |
|
Brookston, IN | We had a 9130 RCS and now a 9330 RCS. I agree with ethe comments on the jerky steering on the ends with the RCS turned on. We sidress with ours and used to run a 7 shank ripper, both 3pt mount and didn't have the weight issues, We used it on the grain cart until we got a Magnum 275 and got along fine. We had no transmission issues with either one. The 93 shifted better between 6 and 7 than the 91 did. |
|
| |
|
Mid-Michigan | I have a 9230 that I use for planting with a john deere 30 foot 1890. Has a power shift and works very well. Have not used it on any heavy work to any extent. |
|
| |
|
thumb of michigan | i used mine this year for knifing nh3 and really liked it. mainly use it to pull an 8 row strip till machine although i have used it on a 34 foot cultivator. no problems with power but could use a bit of weight if used a lot on cultivator. pinned the front axle steering out and it works real well with an ez steer system. got to lay off reading a book in smaller fields though... |
|
| |
|
NW Ohio | Used to have a 1992 9230. Bought it with around 5500 hrs and sold it with around 6800 hrs. Over all, we really liked it. No engine or transmission issues. Seemed to have high fuel consumption under heavy pulling. Pulled a 32 foot disk a few times in hoyteville and clay soils at around 5 mph. Had the power, but others are right about maybe needing more weight for heavy work. But, keep in mind that the "Row Crop Special" wasn't really designed for the heavy tillage work. We could go plenty fast with our other 24 foot equipment and used less fuel. The hydraulics were enough to run our 12/24 JD1790 VAC and CCS planter with no issues. The steering is a little jerky. Look it up on Tractordata.com for all the specs. We replaced it with a MX220 with low hrs that seemed to pull things about the same. |
|
| |
CASE-IH 9230 GOOD OR BAD
