|
|
| In a thread about a page back started by pgscasedave titled Gleaner L2, mention was made of the L4 Gleaner. Here's a copy of the brochure and a covering letter that tells a bit about the L4.
 (L4CombineLetter.jpg)
 (L4CombinePage1.jpg)
 (L4CombinePage2.jpg)
 (L4CombinePage3.jpg)
 (L4CombinePage4.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 L4CombineLetter.jpg (26KB - 682 downloads)
L4CombinePage1.jpg (30KB - 715 downloads)
L4CombinePage2.jpg (35KB - 620 downloads)
L4CombinePage3.jpg (31KB - 677 downloads)
L4CombinePage4.jpg (22KB - 575 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Devils Lake, ND | My only question is, Why? The L4 was way behind a 9500. |
|
| |
|
| Not too sure what makes you think that. I know for a fact that an L3 easily outperformed a 9400 - only stands to reason that the L4 would hold its own against a 9500. |
|
| |
|
Denhoff,ND right in the center of the State | The L3 was not behind the JD, I think JD actually copied Gleaner with the electric of hydralics. The L3 Gleaner were actually the simplest combine ever built, few moveing parts and easy to service and work on. Lots of custom cutters used them, and still are around here. A L3 in good shape will do as good or better than 9500, half of the cleaning is done 2 foot in the feeder house of the machine, the walkers and sieves do the rest, will get you the cleanest sample out there even on hard threshing varieties like Glenn. I had JD combine before the Gleaner would never go back. Terry |
|
| |
|
| You must have a better L3 than we had, because we HAD a green strip L3 and that was the biggest peice of junk Gleaner ever built in my opnion we had other Gleaners before that were OK so I not complaining about all Gleaner combines, we went to 9500 and that was combine it so far and ahead of the L3 that your can't even compare them, had a 20' Flex head (green strip also) on the L3 and a 925 on the Deere and could easily cut over twice the acres of beans in any given day spent the better part of 2 weeks (had pretty good going even) to cut 300 acres of beans one year 35-40 acres a day was pretty good granted this was before RR and we had some weeks but we would continusly plug the cylinder where with the JD you just slowed down from 4mph to 2-2.5 and kept right on going. Dennis SEND
Edited by Dennis SEND 2/15/2010 13:51
|
|
| |
|
Denhoff,ND right in the center of the State | Then that sucker was worn out, if you were plugging the cylinder your bars or concave was shot, on a Gleaner you must have good bars, because they dont have a feeder chain, the bars is what makes it suck the crop in. I like my Gleaner, we drop alot of straw for livestock, on the JD we had you had to take that heavy chopper off all the time, takes 3 good men. On the L3 just take a few bolts out and slide ahead, can do this in 5 minuetes myself, think JD is maybe that way too now. I cant complain about plugging the cyliner on mine, if it is really tough will plug the return if crop is on the green side or lots of weeds, but then shouldnt be combineing anyway. Terry |
|
| |
|
NW ND | We had a n L4 for several years before we outgrew it. Very nice machine. With the 5.9 cummins, that thing could eat some grain. Never knew the full potential because dad had the choice of either a bat reel or air reel and unfortunately he chose the air reel. If you went too fast it would skip in the middle because it wasn't pushing it in fast enough. The only down fall of them was they were put together in the wrong country. The welds were very poor. The pan under the sieves fell apart, but other than that, It was a good machine. |
|
| |
|
| There is a reason L3's bring $2500 around here-that is what they are worth for scrap! |
|
| |
|
Devils Lake, ND | Dennis SEND - 2/14/2010 23:52
...we HAD a green strip L3 and that was the biggest peice of junk Gleaner ever built in my opnion...
You couldn't be more wrong. The N's were the biggest pieces of junk Gleaner ever built. |
|
| |
L4 Gleaner combine
