|
|
NW Indiana | have been looking for a tractor to put on feed mixer and found a 1855 not to far from me at a dealer, looks to be in good shape with a loader( really don't need) and cab, 2 remotes, diesel... do these tractors have 540 and 1000pto?? and r they good tractors? never been around them but it is close and price is right. thanks chadh |
|
| |
|
Flora IL | yes very good tractors.. if u want to trsctor pull on the side it does a mean job at that too.. |
|
| |
|
| I wouldn't say very good. They were an ok tractor. They were crude, meaning they had a non synchronized transmission, the hydraulics operate like a toggle switch and the steering is generally worn out if they moldboard plowed with it at all. That continuous turn to the left gets old after a while.
The 1855 diesel had the 310 Waukesha engine in them. If you do not know the prior history on the tractor plan on pulling it down to put the one piece wrist pin bushings in it, if you don't you will be soon enough. If you plan on working it hard make sure you have a spare head gasket around. The 1850 diesel was a much better tractor as it had the 6.354 perkins engine in it, but Oliver managed to screw those up with their own flywheel that breaks the centers out, and the perkins also had a tendency to push the camshaft out the side of the block the hard way. Not a real fan of Olivers for "work" tractors. After owning an 1850, I would pass on the 1855. |
|
| |
|
Elizabethtown,KY | We bought a new 1750 back in '69, one Ollie was enough for us, PTO clutch was weak, hydraulic oil would leak into the rear end, they were bad about breaking cranks and throwing rods, RUN, don't walk away if you are wanting a tractor to use! |
|
| |
|
USA | Yes are 540 and 1000 PTO, have to change Pto shaft and shift PTO from one speed to the other. Hydralics are not the best. |
|
| |
|
michigan | Run away. Speaking from real time experiance. |
|
| |
|
SE MN | Dad built his farm with a couple 1855s. Course he didn't have a lot of money and with those tractors, you are making a tradeoff- durability and knuckle skin for money.
I can't say that they were bad tractors for their day, but there are better options out there. If you want something dirt cheap that you can work on yourself and you are just going to use it on the mixer, they will work. But go into it knowing that you will pay for the low price in other ways. |
|
| |
|
Flora IL | just sayin..
read below on wow parts prices thread..
Edited by CaseFarmer 1/5/2012 21:39
|
|
| |
|
Martinsville, Ohio | If it is still alive it must have been replaced with the better webbed 1955 engine. All the 18's I knew of threw a rod out the side, sometimes destroying the injection pump or whatever else was bolted to the block. I still love driving those tractors with Over Under Hydraul Shift but yes the hydraulics are not Deere.
I wouldn't be afraid of it if it is still alive, it's a survivor.
Ed |
|
| |
|
NW Indiana | thanks guys, this is what i like about this site, found an 856 IH for the same money tonight on the web, and i know alot more about them. chadh |
|
| |
|
Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND | chadh - 1/6/2012 21:12
thanks guys, this is what i like about this site, found an 856 IH for the same money tonight on the web, and i know alot more about them. chadh
If the 856 has the dual shaft pto, that is a great feature if you need to swich between 540/ 1000 pto often.
We rebuilt an 856 last winter to use as a grain vac / auger / mower tractor. |
|
| |
|
. | Had one we called the money pit. Everybody told us what a great looking tractor it was; the engine was the only thing that didn't go wrong. Steering shaft broke, clutch went out, new turbo & injectors, hydraulic pump. Didn't cry when that one left the farm. |
|
| |
|
Centerburg Ohio | WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am surprised to hear all the neg about Oliver’s. My family has been using them for literally generations, and we love them!!! Still got a 1950-T, 1850, 1855 amongst the family members, also had a 2150 MFWD, and a White 4-210, but my great uncle sold them off when he retired. My uncles and great uncle farmed with them back in the day, and love telling the story of how they would lap their neighbor and his John Deere of supposedly the same hp rating while plowing in the same field. To say the least, we think their the best.
Edited by Beanman94 1/6/2012 01:06
|
|
| |
|
SC- Minnesota | I'd Run FAST!! That 856 run cicles around that 1855 if it anything like POS 1755 we had!! |
|
| |
|
| Listen, reality is somewhere between the extremes that you've been given for responses thus far. It is not fair (or entirely accurate) to judge the 1855 too harshly for what it was 40-some years ago when it was introduced. Yes, they did have the version of 310 Oliver diesel (jointly manufactured with Waukesha) which was initially most prone to failure, but if you research this in more detail you will find that many 1855s were updated in the field with an improved version of this engine and are running just fine today. There was a run of weak blocks that plagued them, but again, if a tractor is running fine today chances are pretty good that you've got a good one that will hold up just fine. Then again, this is judging a tractor on just one component, so let's assume that this one has a decent engine in it if it's made it to still being in service after 40 years whether or not it's the original engine or not. Behind that, these generally had a 3 speed Over/Under Hydraul Shift which is great and a rugged rear-end and trans. Closed center hydraulics made these an easy-handling tractor. These went head-to-head with Deere's 4020, and yes, while the 4020 wasn't plagued with the engine problems of the 1855 in its early days, the 1855 will easily outwork it and do it on less fuel. In this day and age with the updates to the engines that this 18 has likely had, I'd take it any day over a 4020, and also an 856. Granted, the IH engine is a tough one to beat, but give me the Oliver for sure from bell housing back over the IH. If the dealer that you're working with is familiar with these, ask them some questions or the previous owner of its history and if things generally check out kosher, go for it - they are a good tractor. That said, I would peel off the loader if you don't need it and most of these had 2 speed PTO, but it was an option. You can check the rear diff cover to see if there is a shifting spool with 2 positions to it that enables the 540 to 1000 range shift. If you want to judge it on what it was 40 years ago and not take into account the updates/improvements that Oliver released on these, go ahead, but you're likely missing out on a nice, handy tractor for the jobs you have in mind for it. Go over to the Yesterdays Tractors website to the Oliver section over there and do more research on your own - plenty of good info over there on the history of these and what to know on them. |
|
| |
|
Flora IL | great post.. i strongly disagree on this being a terrible trsctor.. |
|
| |
|
N.C. IA | Feel free to post more often, we need more level headed thought out posts on here. |
|
| |
|
| I agree. The engine while not great is likely fine if it is still running today. The rest of the tractor is good. White continued to build the same tractor for many years with a 354 Perkins in it and sold it as the 2-85 and 2-105. Later they became the 2-88 and 2-110. I would likely pass on an 1855 but only because I would look for a 2-105 with a cab and preferably factory air. |
|
| |
|
North Central North Dakota | CaseFarmer - 1/5/2012 20:37
just sayin..
read below on wow parts prices thread.. Of course the resale value won't be near as much as the deere either, just sayin... |
|
| |
|
Flora IL | so true |
|
| |
|
western iowa,by Denison | We had one brand new to replace the 1850 perkins-as we did a lot of plowing back then,the 1855 would plow in 3rd over the 1850 3rd direct,it had a lot more snap,was more fun to drive,and ran a lot cheaper on fuel,I think the motor was ahead of its time and they basicly didnt do enough research,it felt like driving a souped up 1655,my brother now has a 1955 with a cummins,pulling 150hp-the 1855 was still snapper! |
|
| |
|
WC MN & Valley of the Sun, AZ | If the 856 is still running a few years from now, it will be worth more than you paid for it |
|
| |
|
| Schuerman Farms - 1/7/2012 09:25 If the 856 is still running a few years from now, it will be worth more than you paid for it That will be true of almost every tractor out there that is more than 10 yrs old. That is a sign of inflation, nothing else. |
|
| |
|
Dallas Center IA 515-720-2463 | If I had my choice of running a 856 for 10 years and having it double in value.
Or
Running A Oliver 1855 for 10 and selling it to the yard for iron price.
I would go with the 1855.
 (2010_07280092.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 2010_07280092.jpg (74KB - 939 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| We had the 1855, with the 310 in it. At the time it was well known that at 1,300 hrs, it would throw at rod. Well it did, and did no other damage to the engine when it happened. This would have been about 1981 or so. We got it fixed right - so we thought, then a head gasket let go. In it when again, and this time it really did get fixed right as others have described on this site. My folks got out of farming and we had that tractor until 1991. It was sold to a diary outfit about 50 miles away and they had it for years. I've moved away from the area 20 years ago, so I don't know where it is now.
I always liked the sound of the 310 turbo'd. I also thought for it's time that the Oliver transmission was just great with the over/under. The rear end was bullet proof too. I'd like to know why Oliver went from the Perkins in 1850, then back to it in the White 2-105. Was it a supply and/or contractual issue(s)? Maybe someone knows.
One things for sure: given the passage of time, any existing 1855's with that engine has been updated, treated, and maintained right by now. I have seen these repowered with a Cummins 5.9, and guys liek them even better.
One more thing: IH 856 vs Oliver 1855......: The 856 any day of the week, for many reasons!!!! Sorry, but you can't compare the JD 4020 or the 1855 to the IH 856. The 856 was a direct descendent of the 806, but had upgrades to it, including the IH 407 engine. IH made the 826 (with 358 engine), which was a "slimmed down" 856 to compete with the JD 4020, etc. The 826 was priced about $1,000 cheaper - again reflecting the market it was designed to complete in, such as the 4020. I'd argue that 826 - 1855 - 4020 are closer to being on the same 'plain'. |
|
| |
|
| Duke_76 - 1/8/2012 19:05 One more thing: IH 856 vs Oliver 1855......: The 856 any day of the week, for many reasons!!!! Other than maybe the engine what else do you think is better about an 856? I'd say nothing but I've never been a fan of anything IH prior to the 88 series. |
|
| |
|
| The reason for the engine change, as it was explained to me, was that Oliver made a deal with Massey Ferguson - Not Perkins - for the engine. Oilver got the 6.354 from Massey in exchange for the 320 Waukesha engine that was used in the 1100. As you know Massey and Oliver had dealings in the past such as the 98 Massey/Oliver Super 99GM. After a short production run Massey realized that they were getting the short end of the stick because Oliver was getting a decent engine and selling a fair number of them and Massey was getting that problematic 320 - and with the declining sales of gas tractors decided it was not in their best economic interest to continue with that deal any longer. Once WFE was formed and the white 2-105 went back to using the Perkins engine there were being directly sourced from Perkins engine company. |
|
| |
|
| I'll have to agree here with kooiker, Go find yourself a good 2-105 white much better tractor with that 354 perkins heck off a little tractor I own one &I'll tell ya its the little tractor that could! Excellent chorin tractor feed wagon, grinder mixer, excellent hayin tractor small square baler, side delivery rake, V-rake, 10ft disk mower, in the fall augers, gravity wagons the list goes on&on wouldn't give that little 105 up fer nuthin! my 16 yr old boy would kill me if I did. That old 1855, well, to many bad experiences years ago guys, that 310 waukesha just wasn't reliable at all, had to be a seasoned mechanic just to own one, wasn't meant to be turbo charged or ran at high rpms either they would just scatter! Alot of them old olivers were just money pits it seemed like. And this is coming from a die-hard WFE guy! oliver had a serious brain fart with these ole 55 series tractors! run away unless you want to be fixin all the time instead of workin' out in the field or around the barn yard like you should be! ya you could by it cheap but as a mechanic away from farmin' steer clear pal, reliability is an issue with alot of these old oli's |
|
| |
1855 oliver
