Near Intersection of I-35 & I-90 Southern Mn. | We have three tractors that have IMS (8310, 8120, 7830). I find the concept useful but it has limitations.
I find it somewhat difficult to get the timing exactly correct for multiple functions. For the planting tractor I usually setup Sequence 1 for entering a pass. That is Shift up progressively and then engage the Diff. lock. Sequence 2 is the opposite. I find it counterproductive to attempt to integrate hydraulic functions into the sequence due to the difficulty of timing. I find it more precise to actually raise/lower the planter myself at the desired point.
The Deere system does not allow the operator to go in and fine tune an individual step if the timing is slightly off. If the Deere sequences are close but not quite what you want as far as timing goes, you must "teach" the sequence from scratch. You can't go in and make minor adjustments. To some this may seem like nit picking but I find it annoying. For this reason, my sequences are generally fairly simple.
Sometimes my sequences only deal with engaging the Diff lock. I find it easier to use my fingers on the IMS switch than hitting the floor button which gets hung up in the floor mat at times.
It would also be handy to be able to save and name these sequences for future use. For example, once I got the sequences for the planter set properly it would be nice to be able to recall them in the future.
We run into this with the 8310. This tractor is used for tillage and manure operations. The manure rig is fairly complex and an IMS sequence for the hydraulic functions is handy.
Heres what happens - the manure operator finally gets the sequences set the way he wants them. Then we pull the tractor off and go do tillage. Here I might want a different set of sequences. If I change the sequences to my liking for tillage, the other operator has to go through the "teaching" process once the tractor returns to the manure operation. In this situation, I generally don't use the IMS potential since I don't want to erase the current sequences to mess up the other operator.
With all the computer power available today, it would seem that it would not be too difficult to have a scheme where the sequences could be edited and or saved either by a number or better yet a name.
Other competitors possibly have this in place already.
Edited by tedbear 12/13/2007 03:08
|
IMS on Deere tractors?
