Pull-Type Grain Combines

 
 
Subscribe to our free E-Newsletter, "Agri-News" (formerly RTW This Week)Agri-News
This Week
 
 
 
 25 International Harvester 914 Pull-Type Combine | 26 John Deere 6601 Pull-Type combine | 54 White 8650 Pull-Type Combine | 190 John Deere 7721 Pull-Type Combine | 191 Massey Ferguson 751 Pull-Type Combine | 226 Co-op Implements 9600 Pull-Type Combine | 532 Versatile Trans-Axial 2000 Pull-Type Combine | 596 Cereal Implements 9850 Pull-Type Combine-Series 64005 | 600 Case IH 1682 Pull-Type Combine

Summary of International Harvester 914 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.48 MB)

Functional performance: Functional performance of the International Harvester 914 pull-type combine was very good in dry grain and oilseed crops. Functional performance was good to fair in tough and damp crops.

Capacity: The MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss varied from 8.30 t/h (305 lb/min) in 3.36 t/ha (50 bu/ac) Neepawa wheat to 5.65 t/h (208 lb/min) in 3.56 t/ha (66 bu/ac) Bonanza barley. The capacity of the IH 914 was greater than the capacity of the PAMI reference combine for a similar total grain loss. Straw walker loss limited the capacity of the IH 914 in most crops. A reduction in grain loss over the straw walkers would have permitted higher combining rates. Cylinder and shoe losses usually were small, in comparison to straw walker loss.

Engine and fuel consumption: In dry wheat, at rated capacity, average pto power requirements were 45 kW (60 hp). Although the manufacturer recommends a minimum 67 kW (90 hp) tractor, a minimum 82 kW (110 hp) was needed when combining damp crops in soft or hilly fields. Fuel consumption, when powered with an International Hydro 100 tractor, varied from 20 to 25.4 L/h (4.5 to 5.5 Imp. gal/h).

Ease of operation and adjustment: The IH 914 was very maneuverable. It was easier to pick corners, formed by self-propelled windrowers, with the IH 914 than with most self-propelled combines. Header visibility and handling depended upon the type of tractor used while feedrate control depended upon the type of tractor transmission and its available range of ground speeds. For example, when using the IH Hydro 100 tractor, header visibility was restricted by the rear corner post of the tractor cab but feedrate control was excellent. The infinitely variable hydrostatic transmission was ideally suited for controlling a pull-type combine. The IH Hydro 100 was slightly underpowered when using a straw chopper in damp heavy crops.

All controls were very convenient to operate from the tractor seat. Grain tank visibility was good as the front of the tank contained two windows to indicate grain level. The unloading auger had sufficient reach for efficient unloading on-the-go. As is common with pull-type combines, modern tractor cabs create a better environment for the operator than most cabs on self-propelled combines but, as a resuIt, operator feel for combine performance is eliminated and suitable monitoring instruments become more important.

The IH 914 was easy to adjust for specific field conditions if a second person was available. As is normal with pull-type combines, adjusting by one person was more difficult. Return tailings were easy to inspect. Changing cylinder speed was inconvenient since it necessitated changing sprockets on either the cylinder or beater shaft. Adjusting the shoe was hazardous, especially when windrowing straw, due to the exposed rotor on the straw chopper. Ease of servicing was very good. All grease fittings were accessible and identified with decals indicating location and frequency of lubrication.

The table auger, feeder and cylinder all had excellent capacity and plugging was infrequent. Both the cylinder and table auger were equipped with rocking hubs for easy unplugging. Cylinder access was relatively inconvenient.

The stone trap stopped most stones before they entered the cylinder and was fairly accessible. The stone trap door sometimes was difficult to open or close as the locking chains jammed in their retainers.

The pickup had poor feeding characteristics in all crops, delivering the windrow into the centre of the table auger rather than under it. Running the pickup flat with the ground resulted in good feeding but this was not possible in stony fields.

The hitch was convenient to swing into transport or field position. It was difficult to secure the grain auger in field position as there was no suitable place to stand when locking the hand wheel.

The IH 914 transported well at speeds up to 32 km/h (20 mph). Transport width was narrow enough for safe and easy movement on most roads. Due to its high centre of gravity, the IH 914 was unstable with a full grain tank. The hitch load became negative when travelling up slopes greater than 4 degrees. Caution had to be exercised when travelling with a full grain tank or when attempting to completely fill the grain tank in hilly fields.

Except for the exposed straw chopper rotor, when windrowing straw, no serious safety hazards were encountered when operating according to manufacturer's recommended procedures. The operator's manual was clear and well illustrated, containing much useful information on servicing and adjustments for most crops.

Mechanical history: No major durability problems occurred during the test, although problems were experienced with the pickup drive.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of John Deere 6601 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.45 MB)

Functional performance: Functional performance of the John Deere 6601 pull-type combine was very good in dry wheat, oats, barley and flax, and was fair in rapeseed. Functional performance was good to fair in tough and damp crops.

Capacity: The MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss varied from 8.15 t/ha (300 lb/min) in 3.44 t/ha (51 bu/ac) Neepawa wheat to 5.15 t/h (189 lb/min) in 3.90 t/ha (73 bu/ac) Bonanza Barley. The capacity of the JD 6601 was similar to the capacity of the PAMI reference combine for a similar total grain loss. Straw walker loss limited the capacity of the JD 6601 in dry grain crops while in bunchy rapeseed and in tough to damp grain crops, capacity was limited by choking of the table auger and feeder and by cylinder backfeeding. A reduction in grain loss over the straw walkers would have permitted higher combining rates. Cylinder and shoe losses usually were small, in comparison to straw walker loss.

Engine and fuel consumption: In dry wheat, at rated capacity, average pto power requirements were 37 kW (50 hp). Although the manufacturer recommends a minimum 63 kW (85 hp) tractor, a minimum 75 kW (100 hp) tractor was needed when combining damp crops in soft or hilly fields. Fuel consumption, when powered with a John Deere 4430 tractor, varied from 18 to 25 t/h (4 to 5.5 Imp. gal/h).

Ease of operation and adjustment: The JD 6601 was very maneuverable. It was easier to pick corners, formed by self-propelled windrowers, with the JD 6601 than with most self-propelled combines. Header visibility and handling depended upon the type of tractor used while feedrate control depended upon the type of tractor transmission and its available range of ground speeds. For example, when using the John Deere 4430 tractor, handling and header visibility were excellent but feedrate control was poor because, although the tractor could be shifted on-the-go, only two of the eight available forward speeds were suitable for most crops.

All controls were very convenient to operate from the tractor seat. Grain tank visibility was only fair as the front of the tank contained no windows to indicate grain level. The unloading auger had sufficient reach for efficient unloading on-the-go. As is common with pull-type combines, modern tractor cabs create a better environment for the operator than most cabs on self-propelled combines but, as a result, operator feel for combine performance is eliminated and suitable monitoring instruments become more important.

The John Deere 6601 was easy to adjust for specific field conditions if a second person was available. As is normal with pull-type combines, adjusting by one person was more difficult. Although return tailings could be examined by a second person, through the upper tailings inspection door, this was somewhat hazardous as the person had to stand on the hitch in front of the wheel, while supporting himself on the grain tank. Ease of servicing was good. Six grease fittings were difficult to reach.

The table auger, feeder and cylinder had very good capacity in dry grain crops and plugging was infrequent. Capacity was reduced in heavy, bunchy rapeseed and in damp grain crops due to choking and plugging of the table auger and feeder and backfeeding at the cylinder. Cylinder plugging seldom occurred. Cylinder access was relatively convenient.

The stone trap stopped most stones before they entered the cylinder and was fairly easy to clean.

The pickup had excellent feeding characteristics in all grain crops. In rapeseed the windguard had to be removed to eliminate plugging between the pickup and the table auger. Plugging occurred between the rear pickup roller and the stripper bar in tough, short straw barley.

The hitch was convenient to swing into transport or field position. Caution had to be observed when pinning the hitch in field position to avoid pinching the hand between the main drive gear box and the locking pin. It was difficult for one person to place the unloading auger in field position as there was no suitable place to stand when securing the over-centre latch. The JD 6601 transported well at speeds up to 32 km/h (20 mph). Transport width was narrow enough for safe and easy movement on most roads.

Operator safety: Except for the location of the tailings inspection door and the hitch locking pin, no serious safety hazards were encountered when operated according to the manufacturer's recommended procedures.

Operators manual: The operator's manuals were well illustrated and contained much useful information on servicing and adjustments for most crops. Suggested settings for rapeseed were not included in the combine operator's manual.

Mechanical history: No major durability problems occurred during the test, although recurring problems were experienced with the power take-off drive line, and the tailings elevator drive. Fifty-three pickup teeth broke during the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of White 8650 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.51 MB)

Functional performance: Functional performance of the White 8650 pull-type combine was very good in dry grain and oilseed crops. Functional performance was good to fair in tough and damp crops.

Capacity: The MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss varied from 9.7 t/h (356 lb/min) in 3.28 t/ha (49 bu/ac) Neepawa Wheat to 7.6 t/h (279 lb/min) in 3.14 t/ha (58 bu/ac) Betzes barley. The capacity of the White 8650 was similar to the capacity of the PAMI reference combine for a similar total grain loss. Straw walker loss limited capacity in most crops. A reduction in grain loss over the straw walkers would have permitted higher combining rates. Cylinder and shoe losses usually were small, in comparison to straw walker loss. Significant shoe losses in rapeseed were reduced by adding optional fan doors to reduce the air blast.

Engine and fuel consumption: At a 3% total grain loss, average power requirements were 30 kW (40 hp) in wheat and 21 kW (28 hp) in barley. Although the manufacturer recommends a minimum 75 kW (100) hp tractor, a 90 kW (120 hp) was needed when combining damp crops in soft or hilly fields.

Ease of operation and adjustment: The White 8650 was very maneuverable. Header visibility and handling depended on the tractor used while feedrate control depended upon the type of tractor transmission and its available range of ground speeds.

All controls were conveniently operated from the tractor seat. Grain tank visibility was good as the front of the tank contained a window. The unloading auger had sufficient reach for efficient unloading on-the-go. As is common with pull-type combines, modern tractor cabs create a quieter operator environment than most self-propelled combine cabs. As a result, operator feel for combine performance is reduced and suitable monitoring instruments are important. The nine channel monitor, which is supplied as standard equipment, monitored shaft speeds and also contained a digital tachometer to alternately indicate cylinder, cleaning fan and power take-off speed.

The White 8650 was easy to adjust for a specific field condition if a second person was available. Return tailings were easy to inspect. Setting the cylinder speed was inconvenient since the cylinder sprocket had to be changed. Ease of servicing was very good. All grease fittings were accessible.

The table auger, and feeder had very good capacity in dry grain crops and plugging was infrequent. Capacity was reduced in heavy bunchy rapeseed and in damp grain crops due to choking and plugging of the table auger and feeder. Cylinder plugging never occurred during the test. Cylinder access was relatively inconvenient.

The stone trap stopped most stones before they entered the cylinder. The stone trap was easy to service.

The pickup had good feeding characteristics in all crops. In rapeseed the wind guard had to be removed to prevent plugging between the pickup and the table auger.

The hitch was convenient to swing into transport or field position. It was difficult to secure the unloading auger support in field position as there was no suitable place to stand. The White 8650 transported well at speeds of up to 32 km/h (20 mph). Transport width was narrow enough for safe and easy movement on most roads.

Operator safety: No serious safety hazards were noticed when operated according to the manufacturer's recommended procedures.

Operators manual: The operator's manuals were well illustrated and contained useful information on servicing and adjustments for most crops.

Mechanical history: Durability problems occurred with the power take-off drive line and the feeder conveyor drive.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of John Deere 7721 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.64 MB)

Functional performance: Functional performance of the John Deere 7721 pull-type combine was very good in dry grain and oil seed crops and good in tough grain and oil seed crops.

Capacity: The MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss varied from 16.3 t/h (600 lb/min) in 2.7 t/ha (40 bu/ac) Neepawa wheat to 8.1 t/h (300 lb/min) in 3.7 t/ha (68 bu/ac) Klages barley.

The capacity of the John Deere 7721 was much greater in wheat and somewhat greater in barley than the capacity of the PAMI reference combine for a similar total grain loss. Straw walker loss limited capacity in most crops. A reduction in grain loss over the straw walkers would have permitted higher combining rates. In easy-to-thresh crops, on level ground, cylinder and shoe losses usually were insignificant.

Engine and fuel consumption: At a 3% total grain loss, average power requirements were 53 kW (71 hp) in wheat and 33 kW (44 hp) in barley. Although the manufacturer recommends a minimum 93 kW (125 hp) tractor, a 112 kW (150 hp) tractor was required when combining in hilly fields.

Ease of operation and adjustment: The John Deere 7721 was very maneuverable and was easily changed from transport to field position. Header visibility, ease of handling and control convenience depended on the tractor used. Feed rate control depended on the range of ground speeds provided by the tractor.

Grain level visibility was very good. Combine lighting provided good night visibility when supplemented by tractor lights. The unloading auger had ample reach and clearance for unloading on-the-go.

The combine control box provided the operator with very good warning of component malfunction. It also gave finger tip control of important functions.

The John Deere 7721 was very easy to adjust for specific field conditions. The pickup speed and cylinder speed were adjusted from the tractor while the concave, fan and shoe adjustments were located on the combine. Inspection of return tailings was both hazardous and inconvenient.

Ease of servicing was very good as hard-to-reach fittings were located by lubrication banks.

The table auger and feeder had very good capacity in all crops and plugging was infrequent. Cylinder plugging occurred occasionally. Cylinder access was poor.

The stone trap stopped most stones and roots before they entered the cylinder and was easy to clean.

The pickup had good picking and very good feeding characteristics in all crops.

The John Deere 7721 transported well at speeds up to 30 km/h (20 mph). Transport width required extra caution when operating on most roads. Rear visibility was restricted.

Operator safety: Some minor safety hazards were encountered during operation.

Operators manual: The operator's manual was well illustrated and clearly written providing much useful information on service and adjustments.

Mechanical history: Several minor durability problems occurred during the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of Massey Ferguson 751 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.61 MB)

Functional performance: Functional performance of the Massey Ferguson 751 pull-type combine was good in dry and tough grain and oilseed crops.

Capacity: The MOG Feedrate* at 3% total grain loss varied from 12.1 t/h (445 lb/min) in a field of 3.4 t/ha (51 bu/ac) Neepawa wheat to 7.9 t/h (290 lb/min) in 3.3 t/ha (61 bu/ac) Fergus barley.

The capacity of the Massey Ferguson 751 was somewhat greater than the capacity of the PAMI reference combine for a similar total grain loss. Straw walker or shoe loss limited capacity in most crops. A reduction in grain loss over the straw walkers and shoe would have permitted higher combining rates. Cylinder losses were insignificant in most crops. In dry crops with high straw breakup, high shoe losses resulted from an erratic fan blast caused by fan speed variation. In crops with low straw breakup, sieve loading was not as severe and shoe losses were acceptable.

Engine and fuel consumption: At a 3% total grain loss, average power requirements were 35 kW (47 hp) in wheat and 25 kW (34 hp) in barley. Although the manufacturer recommends a 75 kW (100 hp) tractor, a 100 kW (135 hp) tractor was required when combining in hilly fields.

Ease of operation and adjustment: The Massey Ferguson 751 was fairly maneuverable. Changing from transport to field position required caution. Header visibility, ease of handling and control convenience depended on the tractor used. Feedrate control depended upon the range of ground speeds provided by the tractor.

Grain level visibility was good. Combine lighting provided good night visibility when supplemented by tractor lights. The unloading auger was too short for easy unloading on-the-go, although vertical clearance between the auger and most truck boxes was sufficient.

The combine was not equipped with full speed monitoring equipment, although the rethresher and straw chopper were protected with a warning horn.

The Massey Ferguson 751 was fairly easy to adjust, for specific field conditions. Pickup speed could not be adjusted on-the-go. Cylinder speed, concave fan and shoe adjustments were located on the combine. The shoe was difficult to set as fan speed variation caused a pulsating air blast. There was no provision to safely and quickly inspect the return tailings.

Ease of servicing was very good as most grease fittings were accessible and located in lubrication banks.

The table auger and feeder had good capacity in dry cereal and oilseed crops. Auger backfeeding often occurred due to auger out-of-round. Cylinder plugging seldom occurred. Cylinder access was fair.

The stone trap stopped most stones and roots before they entered the cylinder. The stone trap was convenient to service.

The pickup had poor feeding characteristics in most crops, and many problems were experienced with the pickup throughout the test.

The Massey Ferguson 751 transported well at speeds up to 30 km/h (20 mph). Transport width was narrow enough for easy movement on most roads, but the right side of the table protruded far over the shoulder and caution was required. Rear visibility was restricted.

Operator safety: Some safety hazards were encountered during operation.

Operators manual: The operator's manual was well written and clearly illustrated, providing much useful information on operation and adjustment.

Mechanical history: Several minor durability problems occurred during the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of Co-op Implements 9600 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.55MB)

Functional performance: Functional performance of the Co-op Implements 9600 pull-type combine was very good in dry and tough grain crops and good in dry and tough oil seed crops.

Capacity: The MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss varied from 10.5 t/h (386 lb/min) in 3.0 t/ha (44 bu/ac) Neepawa wheat to 5.0 t/h (184 lb/min) in 1.6 t/ha (29 bu/ac) Candle canola.

The capacity of the Co-op Implements 9600 was similar to the capacity of the PAMI reference combine for a similar total grain loss. While straw walker loss was the most significant factor affecting capacity in barley, walker and shoe losses were nearly balanced in wheat. Shoe loss did not limit capacity in grain crops. Cylinder losses usually were small in comparison to straw walker loss.

Engine and fuel consumption: Average power take-off requirements at 3% total grain loss were 31 kW (42 hp) in wheat and 22 kW (29 hp) in barley. The manufacturer recommends use of a 90 kW (120 hp) tractor.

Ease of operation and adjustment: The Co-op Implements 9600 was very maneuverable and was easily changed from transport to field position. Header visibility, ease of handling and control convenience depended on the tractor used. Feedrate control depended upon the range of ground speeds provided by the tractor.

Grain tank visibility was good. Combine lighting provided good night visibility when supplemented by tractor lights. The unloading auger had sufficient reach for easy unloading on-the-go, but clearance between the auger and most truck boxes was marginal.

The combine electronic monitor/control box provided the operator with excellent combine performance information and finger tip control of important functions.

The CI 9600 was easy to adjust for crop conditions. The pickup speed and cylinder speed could be adjusted from the tractor. The concave was inconvenient to adjust while the shoe and fan were easily adjusted. The return tailings were easy to inspect.

The pickup had very good feeding characteristics in all crops. The windguard had to be removed to prevent bunching in rapeseed.

The table auger and feeder had very good capacity in dry cereal and oil seed crops and plugging was infrequent. Cylinder plugging occurred occasionally. Cylinder access was fair.

The stone trap stopped most stones and roots before they entered the cylinder. The stone trap was inconvenient to service.

Ease of servicing was very good as all grease fittings were accessible.

The CI 9600 transported well at speeds up to 32 km/h (20 mph). Transport width was narrow enough for easy movement on most roads, but rear visibility was restricted.

Operator safety: No safety hazards were encountered when operating with normal caution.

Operators manual: The operator's manual was clearly written and adequately illustrated.

Mechanical history: Some minor durability problems occurred during the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of Versatile Trans-Axial 2000 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.59 MB)

Capacity: In capacity tests MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss was 485 lb/min (13.2 t/h) in Harrington barley, and ranged from 790 lb/min (21.6 t/h) in Columbus wheat to 915 lb/min (25 t/h) in Katepwa wheat.

At 3% total grain loss, the Versatile Trans-Axial 2000 had about 1.15 times the capacity of the PAMI Reference II combine in barley and 1.20 to 1.40 times the Reference II combine's capacity in wheat.

Quality of work: Pickup performance was good in all crops. It picked cleanly and delivered the material smoothly under the table auger. Feeding was good. The feeder was very aggressive which caused some grain loss. Stone protection was good. The stone trap prevented hard objects from entering the cylinder.

Threshing was very good. In all crops and conditions encountered unthreshed loss was low over the entire operating range. Grain damage was also low.

Separation of grain from straw was good. However, crop did not feed smoothly into the rotors until modifications were made by the manufacturer. In barley, rotor loss was high even at low feedrates. In wheat, rotor loss was high at low feed rates, but remained about the same or decreased at high feedrates. The high rotor loss at low feedrates in both wheat and barley made it impossible to harvest at a total loss less than 1%.

Cleaning shoe performance was fair. Shoe loss limited combine capacity in all crops. Although shoe loss was low at low feedrates in wheat and barley, loss increased rapidly at high feed rates. In canola and flax crops shoe loss was high even at low feedrates. The grain sample was clean in all crops. The return overloaded in canola and flax crops when trying to minimize shoe loss.

Grain handling was good. The 215 Imp bu (7.8 m) grain tank filled evenly and completely in all crops. Positioning the unloading auger was convenient. Unloading was slow taking 190 seconds to unload a full tank. The grain tank did not clean out completely.

Straw spreading was fair. Straw was spread over about 20 ft (6.1 m) with more straw thrown in the center.

Ease of operation and adjustment: Ease of hitching to the Versatile Trans-Axial 2000 was good. The comfort, visibility and convenience of operating depended on the tractor used. The Versatile 856 used in the tests was well suited to the Trans-Axial 2000.

Combine lighting was poor. Additional lighting from the tractor was required. Also, the light for unloading was insufficient and no light was provided for inside the grain tank.

Handling was good. The combine was easy to place in transport or field position with the aid of tractor hydraulics. The combine towed well at speeds up to 20 mph (32 km/h).

Ease of machine cleaning was poor. Chaff lodged in hard to-clean places in the combine and large amounts of chaff collected on the exterior of the combine. Cleaning the combine was time consuming.

Ease of lubrication was fair. Many fittings required daily service. Some fittings were difficult to reach. Ease of maintenance was good.

Power requirements: The manufacturer recommended a minimum tractor size of 130 PTO hp (97 kW). Power-take-off input power alone was 125 hp (93.3 kW) when operating at capacity in Columbus wheat. Much more power would be required for harder threshing conditions and for pulling a loaded combine uphills. PAMI suggests that a tractor with at least 175 PTO hp (130.5 kW) is required for most harvesting conditions.

Operator safety: The operator's manual emphasized operator safety. All moving parts were well shielded. The Versatile Trans-Axial 2000 was safe to operate if normal safety precautions were followed.

Operator's manual: The operator's manual was good. It contained useful information on safety, servicing, lubrication, setting and specifications.

Mechanical history: Several mechanical problems occurred throughout the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of Cereal Implements 9850 Pull-Type Combine - Series 64005 (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.65 MB)

Capacity: In the capacity tests, the MOG feed rate* at 3% total grain loss was 490 lb/rain (13.3 t/h) in Argyle barley and 345 lb/min (9.4 t/h)in Harrington barley. In Katepwa wheat, combine capacity was 445 and 610 lb/min (12.2 and 16.6 t/h) at 3% total grain loss.

The capacity of the Cereal Implements 9850 at 3% loss was about 1.2 times the capacity of the Reference II combine in Argyle barley, about 0.9 times its capacity in Harrington barley, and 0.9 and 1.1 times its capacity in the two Katepwa wheat crops.

Quality of work: Pickup performance was very good in all crops. It picked cleanly at speeds up to 6 mph (9.6 km/h) and moved material smoothly to the table auger. Feeding was very good in most crops and conditions. The table auger was aggressive and seldom plugged. However, in tough flax, the table auger frequently wrapped.

The stone trap provided good stone protection. Objects up to 3 in (75 mm) in diameter were emptied from the trap. A few small stones went through the combine and caused minor concave damage.

Threshing was good. Unthreshed loss was very low in easy-to thresh crops, but very aggressive cylinder and concave settings were required to minimize unthreshed loss in hard-to-thresh crops. The concave blanks helped reduce unthreshed loss and "white caps" in the clean grain sample. Grain damage was low in all crops.

Separation of grain from straw was good, although, in both barley and wheat, grain loss over the straw walkers limited capacity.

Cleaning shoe performance was very good. In barley and wheat, shoe loss was usually very low over the entire operating range. The chaffer and cleaning sieves tended to "spear" with straw. In all crops, the grain tank sample was very clean.

Grain handling was good. The 225 Imp bu (8.2 m) grain tank filled evenly in most crops. Unloading a full tank of dry wheat took about 130 seconds. The unloading auger had ample clearance for unloading into all trucks and trailers encountered. The high discharge resulted in some loss when unloading in windy conditions.

Straw spreading was good. Straw was spread up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in a fairly uniform pattern. Converting the chopper to drop straw was very quick and convenient.

Ease of operation and adjustment: Ease of hitching was fair. Initial hookup took one person about one day. A three-point hitch adapter had to be attached to the tractor drawbar and the combine PTO shaft had to be cut to fit. Operator comfort and visibility depended on the tractor used.

Instrumentation was good. The digital display indicated cylinder and fan speed. Warning to indicate a slowdown of critical shafts was clearly shown on the control console. The controls were fair. The control switches were difficult to identify and operate while harvesting. The optional remote header control kit greatly improved the ease of operating the header controls.

The loss monitor was fair. Full width loss sensors were located under the end of the straw walkers and at the back of the chaffer sieve. Like most loss monitors, the reading was meaningful only if compared to actual loss. However, in some conditions, the monitor adjustment did not provide an adequate response for normal loss levels.

Lighting supplied by the combine for nighttime harvesting was good. Additional light from the tractor was required for proper lighting.

Handling was very good. The unique hitch of the Cereal Implements 9850 enabled very sharp cornering without PTO vibration. The hydraulic hitch-pole positioning made it very easy to switch to field or transport position.

Ease of adjusting the combine components was very good. All components were easy to adjust. Ease of setting to suit crop conditions was very good. After initial adjustments, some fine tuning was usually required. This was easy as the effect of adjustments was easy to see and check.

Ease of unplugging was good. The feeder reverser backed out most table auger and feeder obstructions. Severe feeder plugging had to be cleared by hand. A plugged cylinder could usually be cleared by lowering the concave fully and powering the slug through. The tailings return plugged frequently when operating in weedy conditions or damp flax. Ease of complete cleaning was good. The grain tank retained very little grain, however, the sump door was difficult to open. Cleanout doors were provided for the clean grain and return elevator cross augers.

Ease of lubrication was very good. The few daily grease points made lubrication quick and easy. Ease of performing routine maintenance was good. Most drives were easily accessed for checking and adjusting. Main power belt tension was easily checked, but adjustment took about 10 minutes and required large wrenches.

Power requirements: The manufacturer's recommended optimum tractor size of 165 PTO hp (123 kW) was suitable. Measured input power in Katepwa wheat was 105 hp (78 kW) at capacity. Extra power was required to pull the combine and for auxiliary functions.

Operator safety: The operator's manual emphasized operator safety. No safety hazards were apparent on the Cereal Implements 9850. However, normal safety precautions were required and warnings had to be heeded.

Operator's manual: The operator's manual was fair. Information was vague and often incomplete. Different names were used for the same component from one reference to another, and some information was incorrect.

Mechanical history: Several mechanical problems occurred throughout the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

Summary of Case IH 1682 Pull-Type Combine (Evaluation Report - PDF - 0.67 MB)

Capacity: In the capacity tests, the MOG feedrate* at 3% total grain loss in Ellice barley was 710 lb/min (19.4 t/h) in wheat, capacity ranged from 700 lb/min (19.1 t/h) at just under 2% total grain loss in the Katepwa "A" crop to 850 lb/min (23.2 t/h) at 3% total grain loss in the Katepwa "B" crop.

In the barley test, the Case IH 1682 had approximately 1.8 times the capacity of the PAMI Reference II combine when compared at 3% total grain loss. In the wheat tests, the capacity of the Case IH 1682 was 1.5 and 1.3 times the capacity of the PAMI Reference II combine.

Quality of work: Pickup performance was good. In well supported windrows, crops were picked cleanly. However, in short barley crops, plugging frequently occurred between the drapers and the pickup stripper. Feeding was very good in most crops and conditions. The table auger and feeder were aggressive and seldom plugged.

The stone trap provided good stone protection. Objects up to 4 in (101 mm) in diameter were emptied from the trap. Some hard objects went through the rotor, but didn't cause any noticeable concave or rotor damage.

Threshing was good. Unthreshed loss and grain damage were low in most crops, but in hard-to-thresh crops, rotor drive slippage limited the maximum attainable feedrate. Using less aggressive settings reduced the slippage, but resulted in increased unthreshed loss.

Separation of grain from straw was very good. In all crops, rotor loss was low over the normal operating range.

Cleaning shoe performance was fair. Shoe loss was acceptable in wheat and oil seeds, but in barley where wider chaffer settings were used, airflow problems caused chaffer plugging and grain loss.

Grain handling was good. The 245 Imp bu (8.7 m) grain tank filled evenly in all crops. Unloading a full tank of dry wheat took about 135 seconds. The optional longer unloading auger provided ample clearance for unloading into all trucks and trailers encountered. However, in windy conditions, the extra height of the discharge when the unloader was fully extended resulted in some scattering and loss.

Straw spreading was fair. The straw was spread only over 15 to 20 ft (4.6 to 6.1 m) and was concentrated more on the right side.

Ease of operation and adjustment: Ease of hitching was good. Initial hookup took one person about one day. Some tractors may require a "zero" pressure return for the hydraulic pickup drive motor. Operator comfort and visibility depended on the tractor used.

Instrumentation was good. All important functions were monitored but only one could be displayed at a time. The controls were good. The controls utilized three of the tractor's remote hydraulics and the tractor's PTO clutch. The other combine controls were located in the cab mounted control console. The touch sensitive key pads on the control console were convenient to operate and provided a clear "beep" each time they were activated.

The loss monitor was good. Shoe loss, rotor loss or both could be monitored. The loss reading was useful only if compared to actual loss.

Lighting supplied by the combine for nighttime harvesting was good. Most functional areas were adequately lit, but additional tractor lights were required for proper lighting of the windrow and header.

Handling was good. Changing between field and transport position took about 5 min. The combine was very stable in the field, even with a full grain tank.

Ease of adjusting the combine components was good. All components were easy to adjust, but response of the fan speed and rotor speed adjustments was slow, and changing concaves was inconvenient. Ease of setting the components to suit crop conditions was good. Once familiar with the rotor and shoe behavior, optimum settings could usually be determined quickly.

Ease of unplugging was good. The electric feeder reverser worked well, and was easy to use for unplugging the table auger and feeder. A plugged rotor could usually be cleared by lowering the concave and powering the slug through. Ease of complete cleaning was fair. Cleaning the grain tank sump and rotor cage was time consuming and laborious.

Ease of lubrication was very good. Daily lubrication was quick and easy. Performing general maintenance was very good as most belts and chains were easily accessed.

Power requirements: The manufacturer recommended an optimum tractor size of 160 to 220 PTO hp (119 to 164 kW). Power take off input power alone was 150 hp (112 kW) when operating at capacity in Katepwa wheat. Additional power would be required for harder threshing conditions and for pulling a loaded combine in hills. PAMI suggests that a tractor with at least 180 hp (134 kW) is required for most harvesting conditions.

Operator safety: No safety hazards were apparent on the Case IH 1682. However, normal safety precautions were required and warnings had to be heeded. The operator's manual emphasized operator safety.

Operator's manual: The operator's manual was good. It was clearly written but sometimes incomplete. It contained useful information on safety, controls, trouble shooting, and machine specifications.

Mechanical history: A few mechanical problems occurred during the test.

*MOG Feedrate (Material-Other-than-Grain) is the mass of straw and chaff passing through the combine per unit of time.

 
 
 
 

Other Documents in the Series

 
  Pull-Type Grain Combines - Current Document
Self-Propelled Grain Combines
Grain Combine Accessories and Attachments
 
 
 
 
For more information about the content of this document, contact Lawrence Papworth.
This document is maintained by Marlene Friesen.
This information published to the web on December 22, 2003.
Last Reviewed/Revised on December 13, 2012.