AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (82) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> Machinery TalkMessage format
 
School Of Hard Knock
Posted 12/30/2008 16:40 (#551394)
Subject: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


just a tish NE of central ND
This snow has got me thinking about a MFWA tractor. Is a 6400 mfwa a useful tractor for loader work, feeding cattle, lifting bales from a 535 JD baler and filling bale feeders. And mostly, shoveling this darn snow......How about dependability? Leaks?? good / bad points? The loader woud be a 640 jd loader.Can I reach and lift as well with it as I do with a 158 JD loader?
Will the tractor run my 535 baler with enough power? My other loader tractor is getting tired and Id like a cab in this weather.
TIA for replys
Top of the page Bottom of the page
eddiedry
Posted 12/30/2008 19:39 (#551602 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



Wheatley, Arkansas
IMO, a JD 6400 has no good side, just bad and ugly. They are German imports and a PITA to work on, and we worked on the one we had a lot. The 6410 and 6420 aren't much different. Maybe we just expect too much from them.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Grizz
Posted 12/30/2008 20:14 (#551668 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



Central Minnesota
I was looking at a 1995 6300 MFWD with loader @2300 hours.

Almost bought but turning radius is very WIIIDDDEEE!! I would have to back out of alot of spaces instead of turn around & drive out forward.

Ended up buying a new Zetor cab MFWD loader etc. New about $10K less than used Deere. Turns tight enough to do a 180 in the woods.

Very thrifty on fuel.

Just got in from blowing a fresh foot of snow @ -2F and cab is very cozy - not as plush as the Deere but gets the work done & parts are much cheaper. A rock took out rear window 2 summers ago was ~$200, Deere utility neighbors was ~$700.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
DaleK
Posted 12/30/2008 20:20 (#551684 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: RE: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


East-Central Ontario
We put 18,000 hours on ours, mostly loader work (open station though). Never touched the transmission or engine, they both started getting a bit rough about 16,000 hrs but we'd already decided we were just going to run it into the ground at that point. Loader's reasonable. Front ends tend to go out a lot and they're pricy to fix. Some of them (maybe more than some) didn't have enough cooling to go with the engine. Ours tended to overheat right from the dealer, they tried different things but we always had to watch it a lot closer than other tractors.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
bullhauler
Posted 12/30/2008 20:37 (#551719 - in reply to #551684)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


Denhoff,ND right in the center of the State
I heard they tend to start on FIRE, electrical problems, didnt your neighbors start on fire, My BILs cousin had a JD 6400 and it went up in flames with a new JD baler attached to it, some thing in the cab started it on fire.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
frank ks
Posted 12/30/2008 20:52 (#551744 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: RE: I may be the odd man out!


edgerton ks.
But I had one for 12 years and really liked mine. Put around 8600 hours on it with no horrible problems. Used it for every thing you listed and more. Had one clutch pack go out[3rd gear]. As the tractor got older the a/c was a little weak on hot day's. If your not going to rack up alot of hour's on one they should fit your job description well. They are however getting a little age on them though. Our's was a 93 model. Just traded a year ago for a new 6430.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Oliver
Posted 12/30/2008 21:38 (#551829 - in reply to #551719)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



Shaftsbury, Vermont (SW VT)
Biggest wiring problems I've dealt with concern the wiring harness under the starter on the right side. Not too much room there to begin with, and if the motor mounts get soft, or the bolts fall out (can you say vibration?), the harness rubs through. Fix we have used is to run the repaired harness over top of the mount and up along the engine. Protect it from chafing while you're at it. Had an awful time doing that on a low profile 6200L. Everything is lower on that dash!
Vibration on the four cylinder tractors seems to eat up the mufflers, too. I don't know of a fix for that, but I think someone on here had one a while back. Oliver Durand
Top of the page Bottom of the page
School Of Hard Knock
Posted 12/30/2008 22:14 (#551899 - in reply to #551719)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


just a tish NE of central ND
bullhauler - 12/30/2008 20:37

I heard they tend to start on FIRE, electrical problems, didnt your neighbors start on fire, My BILs cousin had a JD 6400 and it went up in flames with a new JD baler attached to it, some thing in the cab started it on fire.

Yea,I was there as well as your Uncle Ron and many neighbors. If I could post a photo with ease, Id show you just what we saw at that fire where the whole dam shop and tools /tractors feeder wagon and grinder,fourwheeler and just about every small item that fits into a shop burned to scrap iron. It was sad. The 6400 was certainaly the item that started the fire, But, I really feel it was the block heater or the junction box between the olo heeter/ block heeter connection that did it, but we will never know for sure.One never knows with fires. My 4320 burned in the dash area one night this summer after sitting for about 48 hours in a heavy lightning storm....We feel lightning did it, but , no real proof.

Edited by School Of Hard Knock 12/30/2008 22:19
Top of the page Bottom of the page
School Of Hard Knock
Posted 12/30/2008 22:23 (#551907 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: RE: 6400 JD WHATS a better CHOICE?


just a tish NE of central ND
OK guys, what would be a better suggestion to fit the bill of a 6400 than a 6400 and not be a pain to work on and burn up or made in Germany. Must still fit in that price range or there abouts.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
eddiedry
Posted 12/30/2008 22:33 (#551922 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



Wheatley, Arkansas
I to would like to hear options to a 64XX, I know from experience that Kubota isn't the answer. We have a 7420 Mfwd that's doing pretty good, but it's a larger framed tractor and more $$$$.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Plow79
Posted 12/30/2008 22:40 (#551935 - in reply to #551907)
Subject: RE: 6400 JD WHATS a better CHOICE?



Chilliwack BC
I'll just say that the Deere 64X0 were by far the most popular choice of loader tractor around here. All dairies, and there were as many of them or more than everything else combined. Anyone that had one replaced it with a newer series. They'll rattle some but must not have been that bad.

I wish we had one.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
JLynn
Posted 12/30/2008 22:53 (#551960 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


NW VA
We have 3 6410's, one with a loader. Overall, we really like these, all ours are in the 3500-5500 hr. range. Have had some repairs on em, don't know what to expect as they get more hrs. though. Use ours alot on a 430, and now a 466 round baler, pulls em just fine.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
yeller
Posted 12/30/2008 23:07 (#551980 - in reply to #551960)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



Baled hay with a 6400 for several days for a friend, seemed very nice. he was not happy with it, lots of repairs. I have had very good luck with my Case MX 110 but I think a Magnum 7120 would perhaps be better if you can find one with low hours
Top of the page Bottom of the page
RodInNS
Posted 12/30/2008 23:40 (#552021 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: RE: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


I don't know.... I don't have one, but I didn't think there was too much wrong with them.
I know people that had them and electrical gremlins were the biggest complaint, and that's true of anything of that vintage that has comparable features.
Personally I'd go for a Ford/NH 7740 or preferably a TS110 in that class, but I like Ford. I'll tell you it's a better tractor, but I'm biased.

The bottom line is that anything in that class is built in Europe. They're all proper pricks to work on because you can only cram so much junk in one little trunk, and that's life.
Get one that's in good shape that you can afford.

Rod
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Kooiker
Posted 12/30/2008 23:51 (#552037 - in reply to #552021)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



One problem with a New Holland TS110 is that the hyd are painfully slow for a tractor that's relatively new.

That is especially apparent while doing loader work.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
RodInNS
Posted 12/31/2008 08:48 (#552220 - in reply to #552037)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


I doubt that...

The basic system on them was 18 gpm and the CCLS system was 21 gpm I believe. The Deere might have a couple more, but I don't think it's much more.
If you have a TS that's painfully slow, turn the flow knobs to fast, or you have a serious system problem.

Rod
Top of the page Bottom of the page
TORQUE
Posted 12/31/2008 09:28 (#552256 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: RE: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


SC Iowa
Mostly the 6400 is OK but they are very hard to work on.The loader is good. Do you have a McCormick dealer? The earler McCormicks should be in about the same price range, maybe a little more, will have a bigger cab and easy to get under the hood, good tractors. TORQUE
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Kooiker
Posted 12/31/2008 09:28 (#552257 - in reply to #552220)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



It's a neighbors tractor. The knobs are turned to fast, turn them the other way and it gets worse.

I really had no idea what its suppose to flow, all I know is that we have 30 yr old tractors with faster hyd.

21 GPM really isn't much though for a tractor that is likely to see loader work and was built in the past 10 yrs.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
RodInNS
Posted 12/31/2008 11:00 (#552349 - in reply to #552257)
Subject: Re: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?


As far as I know everything in that power class today is in the 18-25 gallon range. I haven't looked at the Deere specs in a long time but I don't think they really flow much more than that at the pump.
I do know that the Rexroth valves on the TS are rated to flow 16 each... so mabey that's holding up the show. I dunno.
I have a TS90 that is supposed to have the same basic hydraulics system as my 7710 and the 10 will outflow it too. It may be a restriction issue in the newer valves. I don't know... but I know that on paper, the TS system is fairly comparable to any in their class.

Rod
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Bleedsgreen
Posted 12/31/2008 20:42 (#552961 - in reply to #551394)
Subject: RE: 6400 JD MFWA Good/ bad/ Ugly?



Brown City, Michigan
Nice tractor to drive, awesome with a loader. However, Deere could have done a better job with the quality of the cab. Cheaply built air seat mechanism wore out less than 4000 hours. Electrical problems, mine caught on fire sitting in the yard, unfortunately it did not burn to the ground. Fire started near the engines starter. Caught the fire quickly. Insurance company tried to cut every corner with the repair job. Wouldn't even authorize repainting the engine block! Just curious, Tell me more about the frequency of these fires with the 6400s. I didn't even get an explanation of what started the fire from the dealer!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)