could not resist! HHO

[large_ghostman]

Likely has tier 3 or higher emissions compliance.

Hmm there was me thinking it had something to do with having a 6.6ltr engine, actually for the size they are efficient. the fuel tank is too small and the engine too big! But it was part of a clearance deal so ended up being swapped for some land we wanted to get rid of.

Only reason I keep it is because when i got it there was a chance i was going to do contacting full time, that and it gets through the peat bog.

Never had the emissions checked on any of our tractors. Runs better on Bio Diesel than normal red diesel, and runs better with EGR on rather than off, our old ford was other way around.

There you go found the reason, they have power matching on them. So it alters engine power according to load so its entirely constant for speed or PTO load.

So typical massey fuel drinker, but really nice to drive in winter. Its way more tractor than i need, but next year when we fell 12acres of woodland it will be used for hauling the trees out as we are leaving the sides of the woods in tact as a wind break.

The replant will be all native hard woods for copice.

 

[tcmtech]

There are a lot of factors as to why one engine model gets better or worse fuel numbers than its equivalents made to another spec. Around here most anything made by John Deere Or General Motors industrial line alway had a bad rep for using fuel while very few things with older International, Perkins or ever got talked bad about. I know Ford/New Holland owners have always had an odd love hate reputation for being one extreme or the other. Either yours was good or you hated it.

Here in the US the newest emissions regs are at the top of the list for know an proven factors in taking once solid reliable fuel efficient engine models and crippling them on all counts. Ifit has EGR and or DEF your being screwed on fuel efficiency and operating costs big time plus you will likely never see the service life that same base engine had either.

In the trucking and heavy construction equipment industry refitting newer units with older non emission compliant engines is becoming big business since there are loopholes in the regulations that allow for that to be done. I don't know the full details but I have met enough people who have done it or work directly with people who have and they all say the fuel efficiency and power gains while still having far lower operating cost involved are well worth it.

When I worked inte oil fields I met a pair of guys who ran newer trucks (~2010?) with early 1990's drive trains (first drive by wire engines that were the nearest plug and play compatible) retrofitted into them just because they can't cost justify replacing the emission compliant engines that they had when they went to bits. The new stuff just doesn't hold up well with the emissions crap on it and everyone knows it.

I've personally work on and with older equipment with all mechanical fuel injection that had 20 - 25+K running hours on all original engines that have never had major work done to them (water pump, turbos, gaskets not counting) while I have yet to meet anyone with a Tier 2 or newer diesel that made it half that far before going to bits internally. Tier 3 or newer seem to be at half that numbers where anyone who sees 4 - 5 K hours on a engine without major malfunction taking them out is damn lucky (or lieing).

It's pretty sad when the latest and greatest manufacturing technology and processes can't make 'a good engine' that lasts as long as any 'junk' by old school standards ones did.

 

[rjenkinsgb]

You could be describing the English "Gardner" diesels from the 50s - 80s.

They have a reputation of literally running forever. A lot of English double-decker busses used them and it was not unusual for them to have over a million miles on when taken out of service...

And they were extremely fuel efficient.

https://www.aronline.co.uk/facts-and-figures/essays/best-of-british-gardner-6lx-diesel-engine/

 

[tcmtech]

You could be describing the English "Gardner" diesels from the 50s - 80s.

They have a reputation of literally running forever. A lot of English double-decker busses used them and it was not unusual for them to have over a million miles on when taken out of service...

And they were extremely fuel efficient.

https://www.aronline.co.uk/facts-and-figures/essays/best-of-british-gardner-6lx-diesel-engine/

Yep. Back in the day it was common to see engines advertised by their Horsepower Hours (Kilowatt Hours) per Gallon of fuel used up until the time the emissions regulations came into play. After that listing those numbers became anything but a bragging point on a sale because too many people would have went ape poop over seeing how bad the regulations hurt those types of engines in the area people care most about, fuel costs for actual work done.

If it was a small 1 - 2 cyl air cooled engine and you weren't topping 8 Hph/Gal you were nobody and if you were a gasoline farm tractor you had to be at least above 10 Hph/gal to be in the game and at least 14+Hph/gal for diesel to even be worth talking about.

https://www.farmindustrynews.com/more-horsepower-gallon

https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/content/dam/pubs_ext_vt_edu/442/442-073/442-073_pdf.pdf

https://books.google.com/books?id=xhtPAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA179&lpg=PA179&dq=most+HP+hours/gallon+advertisements&source=bl&ots=wQOD7d4fLk&sig=rBoQHmc6zWRJ6LmGBiSTrXDa7Jc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwidl_bg_p3bAhVM54MKHTbaAykQ6AEIdjAI#v=onepage&q=most HP hours/gallon advertisements&f=false

https://www.researchgate.net/public...WITH_TILLAGE_IMPLEMENTS_MATERIALS_AND_METHODS

2006 John Deere sets operating RPM Hph/gal record at 18.65 (Trying to make up for too many other models being some of the worst.)
https://www.deltafarmpress.com/equi...or-sets-record-fuel-efficiency-nebraska-tests

Case tells them to pound sand with a score of 20.28 Hph/gal 'doing actual work'.

(How the better late 90's to early 2000's tractors compared.)

https://www.farmindustrynews.com/tractors/most-fuel-efficient-tractors

Up to around the early 2000's the trend was for most tillage (tractors) farm machinery to be gaining on the Hph/gal numbers (high efficiency drivelines and far better management of high power demand secondary systems loads such as hydraulics had a lot to do with it) but as the newer emissions regs hit the industry the real world number claims have started dropping (much like real world driving numbers never come close to a new vehicles as advertised fuel mileage numbers) and have become well known to have gotten worse ever since while operating costs related just to emission system issues have dramatically added to the bottom line bills for it.

The fact that regenerating exhaust filters now takes 1 - 2% more fuel to do nothing productive and that DEF ($6 - $8+ a gallon) is used at a rate of 2 - 5% of the fuel consumption, plus general short service life of emissions related components is expensive, the bottom dollar numbers do not help the views of what the new regulations cost a person beyond just fuel consumption.

From ~2010 and forward here's where a lot of Tier 3 and 4 tractors are now sitting. 11 - 15 Hph/gal

**broken link removed**

**broken link removed**

To add insult to injury International Harvester was doing those numbers in the late 1970's with zero engine computers and all mechanical fuel injection plus the average person could work on thing when it did break!

https://books.google.com/books?id=Rf6Ar3CGkXAC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=wisconsin+engine+most+hp+hours+/gallon+ratings&source=bl&ots=ik1zZjrifi&sig=f3JHCd2CPbMdExUaBYiKF71qu7c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiWt4qYjJ7bAhWm54MKHXdkDdgQ6AEIaTAH#v=onepage&q=wisconsin engine most hp hours /gallon ratings&f=false

 

[large_ghostman]

Why you so against emission tests? California is one place where its benefited no end.

https://www.arb.ca.gov/knowzone/history.htm

Yes you might pay more but health rises which reduces costs in health care.

 

[tcmtech]

Why you so against emission tests? California is one place where its benefited no end.

Against testing or against over regulation that does not fit a situation that warrants it? As far as I am concerned where air pollution is actually bad they can test everything they want to make sure it's up to spec.

The thing is, california has air pollution issues in a few of its larger cities due to their excessive populations plus geographical and local atmospheric uniqueness that tends to trap the localized air in them for too long thus allowing the pollutants to over accumulate to where they do become a problem. There that level of regulation is more than justified.

https://www.citylab.com/environment/2011/09/behind-pollution-californias-central-valley/207/

https://qz.com/963089/california-is...ties-in-america-where-air-pollution-is-worst/

However, where I live we do not have that combination of high population and atmospheric stagnation problems (2nd cleanest air in the country!) and thusly that level of regulation and enforcement of vehicles, farming, or heavy construction equipment emissions systems is unwarranted here. AFAIK, heavy commercial trucks are the only thing randomly spot checked to any degree here and even then they are pretty light in the amount of checking they do plus most people who do get checked over and fail simply get a 'fix it' ticket warning telling them to take care of their malfunctions.

Unless you got caught 'rolling coal' in a obviously modified heavy commercial rig multiple times the odds are you wont get much of a ticket here.

So, as I have stated many times in our discussions. I am not against reasonable environmental protection policies and actions where they can be proven to be truly justified in a specific area. I'm against heavy handed obvious power/greed driven blanket policies that over restrict people's actions, in the wrong locations at the wrong times, or that do not warrant the regulation to the levels forced on them without fair and justified cause based on various local conditions at the time.

Rather like speed limits. There's a reason that residential areas have them set a 15 - 25 MPH and some places less, yet open interstate is 75 - 80 MPH standard One location justifies the far lower standards (for multiple reasons) that the other does not.

Where I live is environmentally largely the equivalent of the interstate (wide open spaces with high natural airflow, large vegetation footprint and low population) regarding air pollution. We cant run unlimited here but we can run pretty light on the regulation simply because the environment and us people in it are capable of easily handling it.

That's why I am a strong advocate for local control of environmental regulation and strongly against federal level blanket type regulations based almost entirely on blind to reality based - worst case/what if - scenario situations that the bulk of the the nation does not have to deal with, or likely ever will have to deal with, themselves.

 

[large_ghostman]

Easier to do rules for the many not the few, you could argue its ok to drink drive in a small rural area, because few others around. But its better to simply to ban drink driving on the entire scale, other wise people will always come up with why the rules dont apply to them.

If only the world worked your way it would all be fine wouldnt it . But it dosnt, some of your enviro rules seem stricter than ours, some of the more dangerous ones however are not as tough. But then thats why you have world summits to sort things out on a bigger scale, you got a reprieve from Paris at the moment, but that wont last. From the house of reps thing i read, seems like many places there will kind of go it alone.

No real idea exactly how your systems works, so cant comment much on it and hard to judge the news there as its highly polar. But if China are starting to sort itself out, and Saudi also.......it wont be long before your kind of isolated, the other strange thing i came across was the growing number of alternative energy and enviro services companies that are setting up to service the home market instead of focusing on export. In the past most have been export lead.

Good indicator of change when your home market is growing, buy yourself a bunker and declare independence!

 

[unclejed613]

Easier to do rules for the many not the few

unfortunately, we've had too many politicians that think this way. politicians whose whole attitude is that of a kindergarten teacher (Johnny can't play nice with his toys, so nobody can have them). in fact, from 1988 until 2016 we had presidents that had this attitude. in my opinion, this last election boils down to "candidate A" talked to the public as if they were little children, and "candidate A" knows what's best for you whether you like it or not. "candidate B" treats the public like adults who can make up their own minds what's best for them. the public got tired of being treated like children.

 

[tcmtech]

Easier to do rules for the many not the few, you could argue its ok to drink drive in a small rural area, because few others around. But its better to simply to ban drink driving on the entire scale, other wise people will always come up with why the rules dont apply to them.

Sort of yes sometimes but in most cases no. On certain topics a one rule covers all is valid and justified but in the vast majority of subjects and situations that is wrong and does nothing but create problems.
Not everything in life can be reduced down to a binary all or nothing everything's fair and equal validation/justification. It's just not how reality works and anyone who thinks it can or should is dangerously foolish in their beliefs and understandings of reality or has very bad intentions (greed, lust for power and such) for what they want to happen down the line in mind.

If only the world worked your way it would all be fine wouldnt it . But it dosnt, some of your enviro rules seem stricter than ours, some of the more dangerous ones however are not as tough. But then thats why you have world summits to sort things out on a bigger scale, you got a reprieve from Paris at the moment, but that wont last. From the house of reps thing i read, seems like many places there will kind of go it alone.

The world I live in largely does work my way and much of it is and always has been great for it. It's how we became one the most powerful and free countries in the world. We do not place undue regulation on ourselves until its well warranted. Now you can claim our country is crappy and bad but how many other countries have major problems with people wanting in at all costs and rather than wanting out? Not very many and there's a lot of very obvious reasons why.

Some of our rules are stricter because they need to be that way here for what we have going on that you don't and some are now way over regulated for no real justified reasons due to special interest and idealists agendas having worked their way into the system. The exact same situation you have going where you live as well.

Your problems are not exactly the same as ours and vice versa. To each his own to regulate and control. Which is how life should be with the majority of problems.

As far as 'paris' we don't care. Too much of what they were after ws pur greed an scam based plus Its not like they can do crap to us on any level we care about. They want us to play then they had better come up with more realistic fair and workable reasons for us to play with them. Until then we will do what we feel is best for our interests and they can go and over regulate you guys some more since you want to play with them by their rules whether they add up or not.

No real idea exactly how your systems works, so cant comment much on it and hard to judge the news there as its highly polar. But if China are starting to sort itself out, and Saudi also.......it wont be long before your kind of isolated,

Don't trust the main news on who is supposedly doing what wrong here. Odds are it more propaganda and lies based than reality based. The soudi are starting to work more with us as is china on a lot of things but not all. People and countries of vastly different socio political views are never going to be in 100% agreement on every topic or want but as long as both are willing to talk and try to find common equitable ground things for both will improve.

The MSM seems to only want to show the negative parts not all the good parts which is largely why they and the sects of society that buy into it are losing power so rapidly. Nobody wants to feel that they are being lied to ena manipulated for reason that do not serve them well. Even more so that people do not like having someone else proclaim they know what's best for them when every action they have made shows they likely don't.

You don't like having your life over regulated by others views of what's best for you and neither do we. Find common workable ground or go your separate ways until you can.

 

[large_ghostman]

Don't trust the main news on who is supposedly doing what wrong here. Odds are it more propaganda and lies based than reality based.

I couldnt possibly comment on any of that. I go by what i see and what is done

The world I live in largely does work my way and much of it is and always has been great for it. It's how we became one the most powerful and free countries in the world.

For someone who lives in a world that supposedly works the way they want it to, you dont half moan alot about it.

Any chance you could try and get back on topic, you seem to like to go off course a bit.

We were talking about where HHO pops up, i am sure you got views on that

Personal name removed at the members request. Moderator.

 

[tcmtech]

For someone who lives in a world that supposedly works the way they want it to, you dont half moan alot about it.

Any chance you could try and get back on topic, you seem to like to go off course a bit.

You're right. I don't moan about it much because most of its pretty good where I sit!

My only real issues are with those who make bold claims they can't factually to support or that play dumb and deflect topics away from areas they can't support or when they're shows that something is be is much closer to the polar opposite than they can understand or simply care to deal with.

Same general feeling with those who read things to be the total opposite of what has been presented just so that they can claim false superiority or justify unwarranted ad hominem attacks over nothing real. Not my favorite type of people there being I don't care to play the fake half wit/moral superiority low man's game.

As for relevance. All of this seems relevant to me. After all it's your comments about your tractor and everything else you brung up since that took it to where it's at now and pretty much all of my posts have been relevant to either tractors and related heavy equipment or the things you deflected the thread away from and into for who knows why.

If you don't want your threads going off into la la land then don't deflect things away from the primary topics by adding pointless strawman arguments and deflections to things by your own actions.

 

[JimB]

Any chance you could try and get back on topic, you seem to like to go off course a bit.

That is a bit rich coming from you.
You were the one who turned the discussion to farm vehicles and fuel economy with respect to their diesel engines.
Others just continued the discussion in that direction.

JimB

 

[large_ghostman]

That is a bit rich coming from you.
You were the one who turned the discussion to farm vehicles and fuel economy with respect to their diesel engines.
Others just continued the discussion in that direction.

JimB

It was my thread