1950's Allis Chalmers Movie How Heavy Should A Tractor Be? D-17
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 07. 2020
- 1950's Allis Chalmers 16mm film "How Heavy Should A Tractor Be?" Featuring the D-17 Tractor and also a Case O Matic Tractor. Showing you how the D-17 with its traction booster can do more work than the heavier Caseomatic tractor. Also show some old footage of the Advance Rumely Oil Pull Tractors.
- Auta a dopravní prostředky
The thumbnail attached to this video got my attention. When I was about 6, my dad and his best friend Herbie had a tractor to tractor pull off between my dad's Super W6 and Herbie's WD45. I think the only thing they actually resolved was that those two tractors fighting each other could really tear up the road in front of our house. The two of them spent quite awhile shoveling the dirt back into the ruts they had made.
Thanks for posting this video... I spent many an hour, a very long time ago, on a D17 gas and always enjoyed the ride... That was after WD's and WD 45's... Lot of good memories...
That sure sounds like the great voice of Paul Harvey... Good day
It does
I am 78 so I was a kid at this time without any hands on experience with the mounted plows. We used pull plows as used older pull plows were cheap and our older tractors without 3 point hitch could still be used.
Man I wish it was back in them days right now! Great video!
Oh yeah...No damn 10,000 acre farmers everyone has 40-160 and the little towns were all kicking good..
@@davehughesfarm7983 And farmers were still working themselves to death and going broke. I don't like the 10,000 acre government supported corporate farms either. But those WEREN'T the good old days if you were doing the farm work. I've had more than my share of plowing at 2am to beat the rain, or winter corn picking.
Love your videos, keep up the good work as in Allis Chalmers farmer myself this helps all of your videos help thank you
⁰But
IMO, it is telling to me during that drawbar hook up pull test that the Case has more power here. They did weigh the same, but the AC got to that weight by putting it all on the rear wheels, which is a big advantage for weight distribution.
Not to take away from the draft system on this AC, or the concept in general- I am sure many farmers were sold on the way a mounted implement, or semi mount even, had major advantages compared to the old trailer style. And that is important, I grew up farming, and for every farmer that was ambitious about new technology and willing to try it, there were many more that sat back and waited for the tech to be tested before buying in. A video like this makes a draft system hard to deny.
Spent a fair amount of time on a D17 in 94-98. Mostly haying and feeding cows. Ripped into the the 2speed transmission twice. Once we had the farmhand F11 off I could split the tractor in 2 in 4 hours. As a high school boy.
What was wrong that you needed to get into the Power Director twice? They usually can go thousands of hours with little more than an adjustment or two.
Excellent comparisons
My grandfather always said a Case couldn't pull the skin off a rice pudding.
Dad used to rent a Case 930 diesel. It was a good puller and he thought it could out pull a 4020 but when he bought his own 190XT he said the XT would outwork the 930. Dad owned a VAC too and he said that too was a good lugging tractor. The Case tractors for Dad were kinda clumbsy and the 930 was a very hard starting tractor. Dad grew up on Case and IH but he loves Allis Chalmers especially after he bought his WD45 in the late 1960's.
Another 😎 Vintage AC video!!.. Keep up the great work Bud!!
My dad sold Allis and I drove many an hour on D-17's. We had a Case 800 series that Pop took in on a trade. We used it to disc the fields. The Case was a diesel and it would use 1/3 less fuel than the power crater D-17 gasser. When we plowed in the fall those D17's would turn the manifold cherry red at night. We could only pull 3-16's here in NC with our red clay. They were really good tractors but drank fuel like a drunken sailor. In a day I could pull 2 tanks plowing. The traction booster was AC's version of draft control and worked well. Thanks for the videos.
Yup, once you get past about 40 HP in the Gas tractors (no matter what brand) they really got thirsty. Once Allis went to diesel things got better. Our 170 used about 2-1/2 - 3 gallons an hour pulling the 3-16's. The tank of fuel outlasted my butt every day!
Diesel fuel has much more energy per gallon than gasoline. Your observation would hold true for any comparison of a diesel tractor to an equivalent gasoline tractor.
Diesels always win the fuel usage battle. We plowed with a Super W6 gas pulling a 4x16 plow until I replaced it with an Oliver 2050 diesel pulling a 6x16 plow. The 2050 plowed more than 1 mile and hour faster, turnover 50% more ground per pass and used 60% less fuel than the SW6. And the fuel was much cheaper. The 2050 was so much cheaper to operate it was unbelievable. But that is 15 years newer technology also.
@@cdjhyoung Good day from Ontario. We has SW-6 with 3 =12's & had a heck of time pulling it in sod & on dry landon hills. Thanks
There is no better example of the difference in that era between gas and diesel than the John Deere 730. The John Deere Diesel 730 set an all time Nebraska test with 18 Horsepower hours per gallon, but the gas only got about 9 hp hours per gallon. Same tractor, different fuel. And it ran cherry red at night.
I 😍LOVE💘these old videos!
You guys who claim the test is rigged have totally missed the point. This is 60+ years ago when the weight distribution system being advertised was a new concept. The fact that the “automatic” three-point equalizing mechanism shifts weight from the implement to the drive wheels IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE VIDEO!
kinda like a John Deere M.. the connection point for the hitch is to the front of the rear tires.. thus pulling the rear down. Our M can out pull the 20hp 4100 with filled tires and 4wd on..and wheel weights...
The weight shifting idea is even older than this video. Ac system was an attempt to get around Ferguson patient. Ever one had theirs attempts to get around the patient.
Brian Patrick Yes, of course. (I’m sure you meant “patent,” not “patient.”) It’s the reverse of an equalizing hitch for towing trailers on the highway. The highway device lifts at the hitch to transfer weight to the steering axle and the trailer wheels. The farm tractor devices do the opposite; push down in the vicinity of the drive wheels and hitch, transferring the weight from the steering axle and the implement.
Waste of time on drawbar work, although Massey had a solid hitch set to the draft control that would transfer weight. I was a kid then so don’t remember enough about it
Three point to drawbar not a fair comparison
"How would you like to spend a 10 hour day on this outfit?" He says - as they show an Advance Rumely Oil Pull , later owned by Allis!
I wonder why they didn't go up against a John Deere 702 Diesel? The 720 is only 58 hp. & pulls 4-16" everywhere & 5-16" under most conditions at 7" or 8" deep. I have a 720 Diesel & pull 4-16" all day for about 10 hrs. on 16 gals. of fuel. The tires are not loaded, just 2 wheel weights on each rear wheel. All the Company's built great Farm Tractors for that time, it just depends on how the farmer took care of his investment & how close the Dealer of a Brand was. I grew up with John Deere & still use the Equipment that was bought new by my Grandfather & Dad. We had neighbors all around us who used all the different brands & they all farmed very well! Keep up the good work with the videos as they are an important part of the past.
As the owner of both a 720 diesel and a D17 I can tell you first hand the D17 will make the 720 look foolish out in the field. Unless you were in sand a 720 can't swing 5-16 it has its hands full with 4-16 and 3-16 at depth is what it really likes.
The D17 will get more work done on less fuel then the 720
Neighbor had a 720 diesel, electric start. It was alway parked on the barn bank, and was definitely broke to lead.
@@RJ1999x well said,,, thank you,,,
@@RJ1999x so why do you have the 720 then?
@@J-1410 Was my grandpa's, along with a 60 gas, I bought them for sentimental reasons
All I remember is granddad sayin CASE..... means Can’t Afford Something Else! He loved his Allis Charmers
Wasn't allis less than case though?
@@J-1410 Allis Chalmers were not sold on price, they were sold on performance
@@RJ1999x so I take that as a yes, AC was cheaper than a JIC.
Everything is sold on performance.
@@J-1410 As a past salesman for farm equipment I can tell you feature for feature all tractors, combines etc are dollar for dollar, cheaper meant fewer options, .
@@RJ1999x what ever you say
This does better at demonstrating a bigger engine uses more fuel than making any other point.
That was not a fair contest when the Case was pulling a trail type plow with no weight transfer system available. It needed to be a semi-mounted plow like the Allis had to be an apples to apples comparison. I'm neither a Case nor an Allis guy.
I agree, not a fair test!
Agree, that's an Eagle hitch 800. If they'd used a mounted plow they could have set it a 10" walked right past the D17. I like AC and love their promotional videos, but the Case isn't being used fairly at all.
Sure I see your point, but I think the whole point of the film was to point out that having traction booster was better than not having it. I believe Case, John Deere, and Farmall all eventually had their own system that had a similar function. But when this came out on the WD series it was pretty ground breaking (pun intended!)
Also, when the WD came out, one of it's big criticisms was that it was so light. It was really 1500 lbs lighter than a similar horse power Case. This was really great for all purpose use, but many though it was too light for "serious" pulling. The traction booster made it possible to have a lighter more manageable tractor and still be able to pull the plow with ease. and that was the point of the film.
@@kirbymurdstone4925 Didn't Ford have this same tech on the 8n?
Very interesting explanation of traction comparison. And this was back in the 50s. And up against Case's finest; a case-o-matic 800.
Only problem I see Allis is using a mounted plow and the case is using a trailer type plow big difference!!!
No shit there's a big difference. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT! Jesus these comments make my brain hurt.
@@jfdb59 Your comment makes MY brain hurt. If they really wanted to show the benefits fairly, then it should have been both the same Model AC tractor, one with traction booster and one without, BOTH with the same mounted plows. NOT two different types of plows and making the Case look bad doing the comparison. The way this was done it was more an opportunity to sh_t on the Case, sell theirs, than a true comparison. The Case appears to have a 3-point hitch on it, so why didn't it have a mounted plow as well? Did Case have their own system as well? I see from the comments Ferguson had a patent that pre-dated AC.
@@KStewart-th4sk "If they really wanted to show the benefits fairly, then it should have been both the same Model AC tractor, one with traction booster and one without, BOTH with the same mounted plows." That is a valid point for sure. But they didn't. Can you blame them? Which has more impact? "Look at our new system that is slightly better than our other one." Or "Look at how much better our new system is than these guys." It's how any marketing works. They're going to use it against their primary competitor not themselves.
@@jfdb59 The point was to show how the competition built in so much unnecessary weight into their tractor when a D17 pulling a mounted or semi-mounted plow can do the same amount of work and even more .
I drove a series 1 D17 a lot when I was a kid, it would plow as much as a 730 gas tractor but it would not use as much fuel as the John Deere. I know the 730 Diesel held a record for years but I also drove a 720 gas and it used more fuel. The biggest problem with the AC was it has extremely slow hydraulics, the John Deere was so much faster. The 3 point on the AC was fine if the implement was on concrete but when it was on dirt and the front got out of level or sagged down in the front it was an aggravation. I left the farm in 1964 and all the farmers were going to the John Deere 4010s and 20s and it wasn't long before the used tractor lots had a bunch of other brands and old 2 cylinder John Deere tractors.
I still have a series I D17 but I'm not sure I understand your aggravation. I pulled a 4x14 fully mounted plow and could easily out plow a 730. And if you use Allis cylinders the hydraulics are fine. My aggravation was that my D17 didn't have power steering.
John Deere really took a jump ahead of every other tractor maker with the 3010 and 4010 tractors. They took over the sales lead from IH and never trailed again. You're right, in the early 60's any farmer that could get one bought a 4010 or 4020 to do their tillage work. Many of them were using a semi mount plow for the first time.
Nothing new in traction control Harry Fergusson built tractors in the 1940's with automatic traction control. I operated tractors in the 1950's with no traction control so by constantly juggling with the ammount of weight on the hydraulic lift arms could use some of weight of the plough to maintain minimum wheel slip.
Except the traction booster system was far superior
Last fall I was waiting in the tractor (1986 8010) with the grain cart I noticed a yellow lever near the floor and I it was a traction booster
Would anyone take a vid of these d17 traction booster hitches? I'm not sure of the engineering which allows for this. Very cool!
I think this video explains it: czcams.com/video/36CUlZ0Ypl0/video.html
Nice
This test is a "rigged" at best. Use mounted for both or pull type for both.
How did you not figure out during this video that that was the whole point of the comparison? They literally said they were using trailed on one and 3 pt mounted on the the other to compare the two systems.
I realize they were trying to prove a point about weight transfer on a mounted implement vs drawbar pulled. But in the end they really needed to throw a 4 bottom eagle hitch plow on that 730 to compare the traction booster to a three point apples to apples.
Oliver66FarmBoy what in the world are you doing watching AC videos? Like to see real equipment at work 🤣😂🤣😂🤣
That's a 700 not a 730 to tell ya, it's got no stickers on the hood, 700-800 had chrome pieces that said Case and 700 or 800, in this case a 700. You were very close and they are hard to tell apart due to early 730s having low tin like the 700.
This video was pre- 3pt for allis tractors. The best comparison would be a d17 series 4 with snap coupler and one with 3 point. Hook the mounted plows up and go. It has been done and the snap coupler wins every time. Problem is when you get into bigger tractors, removing the drawbar gets to be a chore.
@@drewschipper1 my neighbor had Allis and still has a series 3 d17 with a 3 bottom plow and a sickle bar that must be snap coupler by the looks of it, and she has a d14, yah I don't know much bout ac except the 7000 series cabs look like death traps compared to a case 70 or 90 series.
It wouldn't have mattered, the Case draft control sucked, and if they both had the mounted plow the guy would have been working the levers constantly to keep plowing. The traction booster system had no equal until the electronic controls came into being
Notice they did not test the Case with an Eagle Hitch fully mounted plow. Where did they get that trailer plow, a museum?
It is a comparison of draft control and weight transfer, not which is a better tractor. Lighter tractor, less compaction, lower fuel consumption when the extra weight is not needed, using weight of the equipment to add weight and increase traction when needed. That's all it is showing.
The video is as much a dig at case as about AC system. They could have used two of the same AC tractors and made it apple to apples.
@@brianpatrick8787 not really, an Allis Chalmers won't dog it on purpose, they were made to run!😁
To be a fair test, the Allis should have been pulling the same trailer plow as the Case or, the Case should have had a semi mounted plow also! Not at all a fair test and yes I like Allis and Case!
Did you think you were watching a tractor nameplate test? What gave you that idea. It’s a hitch system test! That’d be pretty tough with identical hitch systems, doncha think? 🤦🏻♂️🙄🤯
Was actually very fair test, even with a semi mount plow the case draft o magic was about useless in comparison to a traction booster
So essentially it's AC's take on the Ferguson 3 point attached load principle but avoiding the patent...
They should have put the trailer plow behind the D17 and weighted it to pull it then ran the distance course. I'm thinking the Case burns more fuel to begin with but weigh that 17 down to make it pull that trailer plow and then compare the distance on the same quart of fuel.
If any of this is true and not just marketing botching then that's a pretty crazy technique to compare the two.
That looks like a 700 due to tin, but 700s never had case-o-matic, so it could be a very early 730 maybe or a test machine
An 800, 811B if gas which I think it was. And I couldn't see if it was in COM or direct drive. Likely AC used COM instead of locking it in.
@@Bret4207 it said Com on it, yah the was my second answer was a 800
@@Bret4207 doubtful
Is it just me or is the soil less 'clumpy' than it really is? If so, that ground back then must have been quite soft because today (2020) it is somewhat semi-compact and hard to turn over. When I usually plow it comes out as 'clumpy' but sometimes not always. Just kindly commenting btw.
Ground conditions are different all over even in the same field. Wet clay soils will turn over in one long slab. Dry clay will be large lumps.
The ground was worked several different ways every year. Count the trips back then from harvest to harvest. At least 10. The 60s and 70s was maybe 7.
This is SE Wisconsin the AC test fields and some of the best loam in the world... Jet black 10 or so feet thick fertile and the consistency of potting mix... It's also hard to pull on as it has no bite and no bottom you really spin the tires and you're heavy you will bury the machine... Watched an IH nose tractor when I was young in the 80s spin out pulling a chisel or something took an excavator and a D6 to pull it out and I recall it wasnt really wet the ground is pure topsoil and doesn't really compact... Go North of there 100ish miles it becomes sandy loam that's a whole new challenge...
I think this only works when hooked up to the arms, and not to the draw bar only? We have a D 15 II with this set up,, but not one single peice of equipment for it! Lol
Regarding the fuel test, It would have been far more accurate to have weighted the D17 down and set the traction booster to do nothing. I'm not 100% sure as I know nothing about case, but I think that case had a bigger engine than the D17 had. A good example of the difference between marketing and actual engineering.
do the test with the same tractor, one trip with traction booster one with out, this test is useless
I will have to look up more about this. The mounted plows had the advantage of a hitch system that put more down force on the rear wheels. But everyone's so called draft control just raised the depth of the plow to not plow so deep when a spot of heavy clay ground was encountered.
In reality if you wanted to plow the "hard spots" at the same depth as the rest you needed to use a smaller plow. These draft control systems were a form of "cheating". My dad's opinion on this was if the shallower plowing was good enough for the tough spots then just set the plow shallower for everything. Keep it simple.
A b.s. test . The Case had eagle hitch 3 point so why not the appropriate plow to match the Allis ?
I agree, the eagle hitch being used would really even the match out
Because the draft control on a case only worked if you had your hand on the lever all day, the Allis Chalmers was automatic
👍👍
I've got a D17 in the garage and I don't even know how to start it.
@Hunter Jacobs ya you say that but I don't know if it's in gear or what the knobs and levers do. I'm liable to kill myself
@@MatthewHolevinski : So then you open your mouth and ask someone who knows. Even better yet, buy an Owner's/Operator's Manual and READ it.
You'll most likely learn more about the tractor than by just asking someone.
Not being afraid to READ is how "smart guys" like me know so much. Lifetime self-education is just as important as a good public education when you're a youngster. Honestly, maybe even more so. 👍
@@turbodiesel4709 Ya agreed, I'll get around to that when I get around to that, it'll still be there.
Find a local farmer to come and help. Some of them love to look at and help with old tractors.
Its not difficult, but its always safer to get some in person help.
@@fhuber7507 I need to learn some hydraulics first. The 2 cylinders hooked up to the front attachment thing are leaking really bad. I'm looking forward to tearing into them to replace all the rings and seals. Gotta get some calipers and stuff to take some measurements first.
I grew up primarily on AC tractors..and l never had a traction gauge that worked on any of our tractors, l asked an old Allis dealer about it, he laughed and said the gauge was basically a novelty and most didn't work properly..
FYI, I wrote a song a few years ago that mentions Allis Chalmers and has a photo in the video. Check it out here if you're interested. czcams.com/video/jeOhX60fbGo/video.html
Same applies to our lives
You can still buy a brand new Case, what about an Allis?
Although, It has gone through a few Iterations, The Challenger tractors are a direct descendant of Allis Chalmers. It is certainly unfortunate that the Farming bust of the late 70's Killed many fine tractor companies. Farming as a whole had some awful growing pains in those years.
This is..... grabbing at straws at best. Case was bought by Tenneco before AC merged with, well, everything haha. J.I. Case kept most of it's traits after the merger with DB, but beyond that Tenneco and the IH merger changed most everything about the company and tractors, in much the same way as AC got folded into the mix with all the other AGCO brands.
And I am a Case guy, I grew up with a 1030 and a DB 1200, we rented a 1590 for two tillage seasons, neighbor had a 70 series crab steer he did custom work with, etc. BUt once "the red ones" came around, they were still great tractors but it wasn't really a Case anymore, it was a Case IH and had traits of both.
A lot of the innovations from AC's last series were implemented into the AGCO tractors that came after, along with White(Oliver/Moline) as well.
I have brand loyalty too, but I save my cheering for the antique tractor pulls.
my father worked at a Case dealer and owned an Allis
No you cant. It has the case name. But the Case IH tractors are actually a design from IH, it's all an IH except for the case name and motor
@@CheeseMiser To be fair, the motor is kind of an important part of a tractor. But yeah, I agree Case stopped being Case when they dropped the J.I. part when Tenneco bought them. Even the Case/DB tractors still were built like an old Case. Globalist garbage ruins everything.
Lighter and more fuel efficient,and with traction boost pulled a plow fine.But 1500 pounds lighter it lost a lot of stability vs the Case.I guess it really depends on the ground and what you are doing,but I will take extra weight any day.
Especially pulling loaded forage boxes down steep hills ,I want weight and good tires
@@scottydog62 Exactly.I have ran old heavy 2 wheel drives that would hold back better than some of these new "improved" lightweight 4x4s
Instead of using the Case tractor along with the Allis, they should have used a heavier Allis-Chalmers tractor with the same style hitch for the experiment.
Ideally 2 identical tractors should have been used, one with a lot more additional ballast weight, and the "traction booster" draft system disabled on the heavier tractor.
That would be a lot more telling of the actual usefulness of the "traction booster" draft control and a more reasonable apples-to-apples comparison.
But, it was a good advertisement to slam on their competitors, in this particular example, J.I. Case.
You completely missed the point
I love this old stuff but these videos are always biased (of course it's and advertisement) case had draft-o-matic witch essentially did the same and as for the 800 in this video if the case-o-matic is used properly it shouldn't spin at all it was designed to slip the converter not the tires
Is that Paul Harvey narrating?
Uhhh..no.
I’d take the diesel case just like that one any day over the allis
Give me a OLD Massey Ferguson any day in the 50 hp. Range will get most average jobs done with aplomb.
You obviously never owned a D17
@@RJ1999x you are right I never did own a Allis except when very young I had a WC however a friend and his family were Allis Chalmers on their farm.
This is pointless- a draft control hitch will of course pull more than a fixed drawbar pull. This Case has a torque converter transmission which of course uses more fuel than a direct drive trans- think auto vs manual in car terms.
They were in direct for testing
So happened at 456? The AC let off its throttle(doesn't look like it) or the Case-o-Matic's Torque converter coming around? Also wouldn't the torque converter throw off the fuel test? Shouldn't it have been done against a non Case-o-matic 730?
Case o matic had a lock up
@@RJ1999x and?
@@J-1410 And it's apples to apples then the case would be in the lock up mode.
The reason Allis Chalmers used the case o matic is case was using that feature in their demonstrations, so Allis Chalmers showed it was little to no advantage
@@RJ1999x see 456, looks exactly like how it works not in lockup, like how case advertised.
Also where did they say "used in lockup"?
312 here, even pulling an allis backwards
czcams.com/video/B0Pk76WHA0s/video.html
@@J-1410 I've seen that demonstration already, and it's a marketing gimmick . My uncle owned an 830 case o matic they were nothing to write home about, few are left because of all the problems they had, dealers refused to take one on trade, my uncle traded his in on a silo, the dealer never came to pick it up, ended up selling it at his uncle's auction. My uncle did have an 830 comfort king, that was a nice tractor, gear transmission
Grandpa said the competitors referred to those Case-o-matics as "gas-o-matics." :-)
Wouldn't a bulldozer type torque converter in gearbox or on drive shaft do same thing. Ie. When wheel goes to slip the oil in converter leaks and slows the back half of the drive shaft thus slippage is zilch. Then oil adjusts on run to when power good so accelerates speed again by a fraction to normal speed until tough again???
Explained in more detail: there's and oil clutch between the front and back of drive shaft. When wheel slips the front has more power so pumps oil into an accumulator on drive shaft so front and back spin same thus more power goes to drive -> accumulator pushes oil back in once relief to do so is found???
The case had that, and it couldn't hang with the power director
Mounted plows pull easier than pull type plows, only way you can get an allis to pull anything is with lightweight mounted equipment 😂😂😂
The CASE WILL CLEAN THAT D 17 ANY DAY ! I HAVE OWNED BOTH
What a joke this demo. is, That Case would kill that Allis any time any place !!
@@mikecarr1378 in both your dreams
Another example of how junk science can be used in a attempt to mislead and sell a product. Every farmer will notice a three point hitch mounted implement vs one on wheels pulled by the drawbar.
Shud use the same tractor one without the weight transfer!!!! I don’t think this fooled to many farmers. That case was really the better tractor.
AC trying to justify it's light duty design and engineering. Just heavy enough to get by.
Yea, "light duty" D17. Out lasted a lot of other tractors. 😩
@@randymagnum143 more like outlasted them all
I understand AC was trying to sell the perceived benefit of a traction control system. However, the explanation on the video was poorly done. The word "automatically" was used repeatedly. There is nothing "automatic" about what was happening. Also, the words of "added weight to the tractor" was used a few times. The traction control system was not explained. Some form of linkages between the drawbar and the tractor redistributed weight associated with pulling power. There was nothing "automatic," rather a rational explanation about added down force because of linkages. There was no "weight added." There was no external source of adding weight to the tractor.
Nice sales try, but engineering-wise, an explanation failure.
So Technically there was no weight added to the tractor, however there was more weight load added to the tires. And this done automatically. There is a torsion bar in the 3 point hitch that sensed how hard the plow was pulling, as it pulled harder, the Hydraulics would lift the plow slightly to transfer some of that draft (Lateral force) load to the downward force of the tires when the draft lessened the hydraulics would relax the lift. and this was done automatically. There was a lever that adjusted the aggressiveness of the action, but the hitch was constantly making tiny adjustments to the plow. It was really quite a effective system. Some would say that it was all just lifting the plow so it pulled easier, but the actual movement of the plow was very little, usually less than an inch, Typically about a quarter to a half an inch. And yes this was a sales film, not an engineering explanation. But it did a fair job of showing how and why the system is effective.. Also it made me laugh, cause Case tractors were notorious fuel hogs, so the economy probably had little to do with the traction booster.
@@kirbymurdstone4925 Thanks. You do confirm there was nothing automatic about what was happening. The action was activated by forces in the pulling system, and hydraulic adjustments were made. The outcome was all determined by the position and loads on the components. The total weight of the tractor and plow is a zero-sum matter. Nothing external was adding weight. It may have been effective. If so, it was not a market-changer. The effectiveness was managed through mechanical and hydraulic actions.
The fuel usage was an attempt to make some objective measure of effectiveness. AC couldn't offer anything objective regarding the action of the mechanism. Their words were subjective. As you point out the fuel use had little, or nothing, to do with effectiveness of the AC feature. If they would have had two identical AC tractors, one equipped with the feature, the other not, fuel measurements could have provided an objective measure. But, that was not done. Comparing AC to Case was a failure.
Also, they had no measure of wheel slip on identical AC tractors. That too could have been some objective measure.
The tug-of-war part of the film was of no use.
Thanks.
@@rightsideofthegrass8114 I guess it depends on how you define automatic. The system makes adjustments based in constantly varying conditions without input from the operator. I think that is a reasonable definition of automatic.
You are correct the total weight didn't change, it only changed how much of that total weight was on the drive tires. But the point of the system was to be able to capitalize the total weight of system (plow and tractor) in order to have the weight of just the tractor lower, which make it more versatile tractor. and it did this very well.
Most other tractor manufactures came up with some system that did a similar thing, AC was just the first to do it.
BTW, There is another video out there the compares plowing with traction booster on and off, to show that the added traction did boost efficiency.
Don't know how you can say it wasn't automatic, the driver of the D17 only had to dial in the sensitivity, and the rest is done automatically. You just drive and the tractor booster took care of the varying loads automatically, with in reason
Rightsideofthegrass There is a difference between "automatic" and "magic"
Comparing apples to oranges, full pull type verses semi mounted BULLSHIT AD
Sorry weight has nothing to do with traction. Traction is based on axle height to hitch height. To prove the point I pull an 11 foot disk harrow with a farmall 200 . Yes this video is rigged, as my cousin who is probably one of the best drivers in the world will tell you, the brand and model of tractor is only 20 percent of the tractors pulling ability, and the driver is 80 percent. He will also tell you that he's backed B trains drunk more miles than anyone else will drive forward sober.
What the hell are you talking about
You're very wrong my friend.
@@jakesvids3467 oh if I'm so wrong then why is it that I could pull a 16 foot offset disk up a very steep hill in 2wd with an 1896 case and my brother couldn't do it in 4wd ?. By the way my cousin made it up a mountain on black ice with a B train when all the other trucks were jackknifed or in the ditch. Don't tell me that I don't know how much the driver effects the pulling ability
@@leslieholman3121 Lay off the pot my friend. Traction has everything to do with weight. The relation of the hitch to the implement affects the amount of weight put on the drawbar and therefore the tires.
🤦♂️
Thanks for posting this video... I spent many an hour, a very long time ago, on a D17 gas and always enjoyed the ride... That was after WD's and WD 45's... Lot of good memories...
What size disc did you pull with your gas D 17
@@granch4211 I'm thinking maybe 8 or 10 feet...
@@herbhouston5378 ok when i was a kid we had a case 830 and a ih 756 we had 12 foot disc i just didn't know on the allis them was the good old days i thought we was poor but we raised hogs and chickens and always had a big garden we ate ok
@@granch4211 The farmer who owned the Allis and the small disc was 82 years old and had the disc for years... When he got the bigger tractor... he had intended to get a bigger disc, but he ran out of time... By far, most of what he raised was used to sustain the family... He did milk about a dozen cows... and would sell a hog sometimes... The grains and hay and straw were all used on the farm... They had a huge garden... Bigger than I had ever seen... I remember we would take ear corn to a local mill and grind corn and cob meal for the cows... When we got back home we would mix everything on the u-shaped concrete floor inside the stanchions... by shoveling from one pile to another till everything was well mixed... Lord... that brings back memories...
@@granch4211 Sorry for butting in but I used to farm with a D19 and D17 and when plowing with the D19 I followed up with my D17 and a 13-1/2 foot Allis Disk. It was a load but it pulled it about 3 mph. The only thing the D17 needed was power steering. It was a 1958 model and power steering was an option and not standard equipment until 1959.