|
|
Grabill, Indiana | We decided we need to add a combine to our farm. Our current custom harvester has done a great job, but we need to have the flexibility to do our own ground and add the option of custom harvesting on our own. We want either a Gleaner or Cashe IH, leaning toward a red machine. Our mechanic gave us his thoughts on the Case IH versus Gleaner, he leans towards the Axial Flows due to the fewer moving parts and the design compared to the Gleaners.
We want to have a 6 row head and 20/25 head since we have smaller fields and actually have small gates to deal with for some landlords. What are your thoughts comparing the Case-IH and Gleaners for a small farm as a first machine?
Jim |
|
| |
|
NW Iowa | can't go wrong with a CIH! How many acres? how new? I'd guess a 2166 or a 2366 if you want a 6row head!! |
|
| |
|
Northeast of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | definately a case combine easy to maintain and less moving parts i think. We had a 2388 and it ran great for us for seven years just traded it on a 9120 hopefully just as good if not a better machine. Last year we had a custom combiner with a gleaner and it was always broke down and did not do as good of a job as the two cases we had mind you that could happen to any machine if not taken care of but i like how the case is set up better for ease of maintaining the machine |
|
| |
|
NE Indiana | Between the two I would go with the CaseIH. If your doing amish patches I would try to find a 16' or 18' head. It will be able to be driven into more fields than a 20' or 25'. I'm just south of you in adams county and I have quit doing amish patches because it is such a pain to put on and take off the head for their fields. I have a 25' grain head. |
|
| |
|
Pittstown, NJ | I take it the bishops allow custom harvesting there? I don't see much Amish small grain in the part of PA I visit most frequently, just corn, alfalfa, pasture and the occasional tobaccy patch, or they're into fresh produce. The few acres of small grain I have seen are still done with binder and thresher. |
|
| |
|
NE Indiana | Yes. Soybeans and oats if they are to heavy for the binder. Northwest of me about 6mi they can rent out their ground. |
|
| |
|
Missouri | The Gleaner is less complex and easier to fix by yourself. 90% of almost any repairs can be made without leaving the ground. Not to mention they were always a little easier on the fuel and weigh less. Depending on dealer, I'd say go with a Gleaner. |
|
| |
|
Northern NE Panhandle | 9500 JD |
|
| |
|
Southern Ontario | DRYLAND hit the nail on the head with the 9500. Very simple to operate, and lasts forever it seems... We ran one for 15 years before trading it in on a 6088 Case IH.
If you go with a brand new combine I would get a 6088 and a 25' 3020 head. That would work quite well in the smaller fields. Our setup work awesome last year. Cant believe we went so long without a "contour master" type feederhouse. |
|
| |
|
| The gleaner is simpler then a deere, but not CaseIH. |
|
| |
|
| Pofarmer - 4/20/2012 06:42
The gleaner is simpler then a deere, but not CaseIH.
Chad it might be simpler than a CIH, I don't know but the message is awful slow to spread. Can't tell you where there is one around with a dealer as close as CIH. |
|
| |
|
Iowa | Normally I agree with most things you say, but everything drives from the side on a Gleaner. There is the extra feederhouse chain and two accelator rolls, but there are ZERO lengthwise augers and lengthwise rotors with the associated drives. The crop feeds directly to the rotor from the feederhouse chain on a gleaner just like a conventional machine. Most Gleaners unload without the turret auger system and associated gearbox. Every drive that would need to be fixed on a Gleaner is accessable from the side. I've never had to replace a gearbox on a Gleaner. They don't have many. The Gleaner also has easy access to the engine and rotor.
I'm not knocking the CIH machines, and they are simple comapred to most others. They are fine machines and many people use them with much success. Heck, I know people who are even able to get their crops out every year with green combines.:) I do envy the older green beanheads compared to what other brands had in years past, but I'd hire someone else to do a lot of the repairs if I owned a green combine.
I've done most of my own r&m work on my own machines for 25 years now, and there is no question a Gleaner is what I'd rather have to work on. I guess we live on a different planet in these regards.
It's not my intention to start a color war. Normally I don't say anything in these types of threads for that reason. It was just looking to me like this thead was lacking an opinion (edit: explaination) from the other side.
It still comes down to dealer support to some degree, especially if one does not do their own repairs.
Edited by tigger 4/20/2012 09:21
|
|
| |
|
N.W. Illinois | Some guys have issues with Axial Flows chewing up the straw to much to bale. I never had a problem baling straw from a Axial Flow and it actually was a much better straw for bedding and it absorbed liquids much better for barn cleaners. However I had a good baler with a excellent pickup. Just be aware this could certainly be a problem.
Edited by mounder 4/20/2012 09:07
|
|
| |
|
Southern Middle Tennessee | I'd go with the Gleaner. Take a look at prices on tractorhouse between a Gleaner R62 and a Case 2388. There is no comparison after checking prices. The Case combine is at least 30,000 more than a Gleaner both with low hours. We're swapping from a Case to a Gleaner this year... |
|
| |
|
Agent Orange: Friendly fire that keeps on burning. | If you fix your own stuff, I don't know how relevant the closeness of a dealer is. UPS and FedEx go by here every weekday so there's little difference for me in that aspect. I buy the stuff that gets the job done the best. For my crops and operations the Gleaner transverse rotor comes in way ahead of everything else so that's what I run.
Dealer is 220 miles away. I run Cat tractors and the dealer for those is 290 miles down the road. Call by 3 in the afternoon and parts are here by noon the next day. |
|
| |
|
| Well, my personal experience is comparing N5's N6's, and an R62 to a 14/1680. Our old 1480 with 5000 hrs was more reliable at the time than an R 62 with less than half the hours. The only belts on the IH that are a bit of a pain are the rotor drive, and the hydraulic pump, unloader drive. The auger gearboxes really don't give much trouble. I only know what I've seen, and I won't fight about it very much, but, I'd rather stay CaseIH in the older machines. If you want to get up into the R65's and newer and the 23's then I'm not sure. |
|
| |
|
EC IA | What kinds of dollars are you talking, or what kind of acres? If you're looking at 500 acres, a well maintained 1480 could easily do the job. But if you're looking at 5000 acres, then a 21/2388 would be more fit for your operation. We just sold a 1480 with a number of updates for $18k, bought a 1688 with a bunch of updates for a little over $30k. You start looking at 2388 might as well add $100k to that price. But from the 1480 to a 2388 they are all basically the same machine. We ran a 20' with the 1480, it needed a 25' because we had to drive too fast with the 20' for it to thresh well, but we didn't have the field tracker. We now run a 30' on the 1688 with no problems. |
|
| |
|
Central ND | They do get the job done......But,The little access door under a Gleaner to work on the second feeder chain looks like it could be about the biggest drawback to fixing on one of these. You have to be small and flexable to fit up in that compartment to fix in that area..Anyone that doesn't run / own a gleaner doesn't even know that door is even down there.
Edited by School Of Hard Knock 4/20/2012 09:47
|
|
| |
|
NE MT | This is in reply to Ed's post.
Williston & Glasgow are a lot closer to Wolf Point than 220 miles.
Are you going to Havre or ? |
|
| |
|
Agent Orange: Friendly fire that keeps on burning. | Galen hasn't sold a Gleaner for some time now. Seems he's been pushing the NH on the combines and big oil leases in the northeast part of his territory have pushed prices up for guys that haven't gotten any of those dollars yet.
Williston farm equipment stores have been ruined by the patch. Poor service and sky high prices so we go elsewhere. |
|
| |
|
Iowa | Simplicity helps, but does not equal reliability by itself. Things still have to be done right. CIH has done a lot of things right with the axial machines over the years. I like the 62/72 series Gleaners (with the cummins) on up, but would prefer a red one over an N5-7 or R5-7. Some of the tricks of taking a Gleaner to higher hours with few problems involve little things like making sure the main shaft is tightened with enough of torque annually. You don't really need a dealer to do this stuff, but it does help to know what to look for and make sure the little things are done along the way. I've got no doubt a well maintained red one can also be reliable after several thousand huors. |
|
| |
|
Traverse City MI | Planning on putting another 700 acres through our 1460 again this year. I had less than $8k in it by the time I had it hauled 700 miles home. There a simple and reliable machine to run and work on. 99% of the downtime last fall was because of the corn head. |
|
| |
|
Macon, IL | I don't know why the 9400/9500/9600 get such a bad rap on maintnenance. I had a 4400 and 7700, they weren't that bad either except belts under that darn seat. Don't wish that on anyone.
The 9500 elimninated that headache. I am med low to average mechanic and not much I can't do on that machine. Nothing against IH or Gleaner, but biggest thing for me is dealer location/capacity to get parts for older machine quickly. My dealer has been great and lots of parts available everywhere-shoup, etc.
|
|
| |
|
Gary , SD | I really prefer the engineering and design of the Gleaners , but have to say a decent 1600 series CIH can be bought for about half the price of an R52-62 in these parts ....same for the heads
so the advantage for the intitial start up money goes to the CIH in my book |
|
| |
|
CO, NE | pbutler - 4/20/2012 08:33
I don't know why the 9400/9500/9600 get such a bad rap on maintnenance. I had a 4400 and 7700, they weren't that bad either except belts under that darn seat. Don't wish that on anyone.
The 9500 elimninated that headache. I am med low to average mechanic and not much I can't do on that machine. Nothing against IH or Gleaner, but biggest thing for me is dealer location/capacity to get parts for older machine quickly. My dealer has been great and lots of parts available everywhere-shoup, etc.
I feel your pain on the belts and hyd pump under the seat, still running a 6600. the worst was the unloading auger belt. I think that belt is a weak point of the machine, too small and not enough throw in the lever. Although, I do have one of the early 6600's. I ended up making an extension for the lever where the cable attaches, no need to jump out and tighten up the cable slack before unloading now.
I'm always impresed by parts availability for the 6600, but I think JD used a lot of common parts over the years. |
|
| |
|
Zabcikville, TX | I would go with the IH/CaseIH. Gleaners are good (not great) machines. They are only a cylinder machine with twistes bars that they call a "rotor". In my experience, they are built very light. Auger troughs will wear twice as fast as any other machine. Neighbors had 2, went to trade for green ones, dealer wouldn't take them. They were R72s, so not old machines. Just worn out before their time.
|
|
| |
|
| The orginal question was about the two different machines, which I took to mean that those were the only two he was asking about, and he had already factored in, or at least was aware of the values, parts, and service in his area. By their own admission, the red machines limit horsepower to avoid overstressing the drivelines. They also use the turret unloaders, are know to have roping issues, and do not do as well in wet conditions (crop and soil). Some machines also have problems chopping and spreading. Many people feel that they do better in soybeans (assuming the two major crops are corn and beans). The Gleaners will usually have more power, which does cause more bearing and shaft failures. The will also have more of a true frame, are real hogs in corn, use the angled unloading auger which uses less power and incurs few problems, but can cause some clearance issues. The tranverse rotor is way less likely to become un-balanced and rock the machine. The Gleaner also have a far better reverser. The air cooler engine has not proved to desired or popular, and I would avoid it. Clearly both machines will do the jobs, and people will like one and maybe not the other.
Have had and run both, as well as working on both. I feel the Gleaner is easier to work on, has fewer dumb designs, It would be my choice. If time were available, running both might be wise. |
|
| |
|
Cambridge, southwestern Nebraska | Either one is good. Not sure why your mechanic thought the Gleaner had more parts? I would say they could be equal or fewer on the Gleaner if you go with a 2 series or newer Gleaner which go back 20 years.
If you have hillsides you might want to lean toward a Gleaner.
DEALER SUPPORT IS #1 |
|
| |
|
Eastern Ont | +1. Your mechanic has not run a gleaner R 2series before because theres no way the CIH axial is a simpler machine. I've run both and the CIH axial is a good machine but I'd rather have a Gleaner R |
|
| |
|
SK.. in Frozen Cold Western Canada | Agreed on the Gleaners, around this farm for sure.. We always were able to do 90% of our Basic Repairs, and it is a pretty easy machine to set up, and keep going.. Happily..
Here's a quick link to out 'trusted old 1996 R52' that I had a Deposit on last year, but gave back since the fellow had a 'crop failure' and just couldn't afford it.. I guess I'll post an AD again soon, hoping to find it a good home.. Nicest condition you could ever find, regardless of the year, I think!!
https://picasaweb.google.com/bob.yxe/GleanerR52SN56038?authuser=0&au... |
|
| |
|
| This is an interesting discussion - don't fall prey to confusing familiarity with perceived simplicity. If something is familiar to you, it will probably seem simple. If something is unfamiliar, it is going to appear complex until you really commit yourself to learning it. You also cannot directly correlate fewer moving parts with higher reliability necessarily. I'll second what many say in that you can find things on both to appreciate, but ultimately in this comparison I'd choose a Cummins powered Gleaner as an ideal smaller machine for do-it-yourself repairs and easy accessibility. |
|
| |
Combines - First One Gleaner or Cash IH?
