Questions on High Crop type tractors.

[ebinmaine 67,483]

I've seen a few High Crops of various brands over the years but they're not super common in my realm.

 

I understand what they're for. I also understand that by general nature something that is taller than standard such as these would be inherently less stable but where do you draw the line?

 

How much taller are they than standard? I assume that varies based on maker or desired use?

 

If you have a farm tractor that is five or six feet wide or whatever and you are increasing the height 6 or 10" is there any sort of noticeable decrease in stability?

 

Whatever experiences or impressions you could share would be appreciated.

 

[Pullstart 62,851]

EB I’m no farmer or scientist or engineer, but I imagine a high crop is built so heavy and stout, the extra height is negligible at reasonable work speeds.  They also look like an old gasser, so they must be awesome!

[seuadr 488]

44 minutes ago, pullstart said:

EB I’m no farmer or scientist or engineer, but I imagine a high crop is built so heavy and stout, the extra height is negligible at reasonable work speeds.  They also look like an old gasser, so they must be awesome!

this has been my limited experience. 

 

for instance, i have an oliver 550 - which is a compact tractor before there were compact tractors as a category, it is similar in size to my buddy's John Deere 1010 Row Crop - my tractor is a little bigger than his, and built STOUT and comes in at 3700 pounds (these are similar in size to like a for N series) his tractor comes in at 4200 pounds, and he doesn't actually have the row crop accoutrements attached, nor wheel weights/fluid in the tires, etc.

[953 nut 55,220]

High Crop tractors were used for cultivation and were primarily used by flatlanders so stability wasn't that big of a concern. As a kid I cultivated corn and potatoes with a 1949 Case SC much like the one pictured below. The taller rear wheels and  narrow front made it less stable than a high crop would probably be but we had no problem.

[Achto 27,571]

As stated, high crops were generally used on flat land. Just like the row crops with a narrow front end, high crops could be very dangerous when used on the side of a  hill. I knew people who were killed when their narrow front tractor tipped over sideways on them when they were using it on the side of a hill.

Most high crop tractors were nothing more than a row crop jacked up in the air so they don't really weigh much more than the row crop does. You will  seldom see a high crop with a narrow front end as these extremely dangerous. In short, YES you had to be careful with a high crop. Rolling them on their side was always a present danger. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Achto

[squonk 41,104]

 

 

[WHX?? 48,815]

We see ones like this barreling down the road quite frequently and they do have a road gear. 

[DennisThornton 4,769]

Similar down the road from me:

[JCM 9,161]

This Super A is sort of row cropish, very stable especially when you adjust the axle width. 

[squonk 41,104]

48 minutes ago, WHX24 said:

We see ones like this barreling down the road quite frequently and they do have a road gear. 

My house is about 15 ft off a main route but in the village. If one travels north there is a rt turn about 50 yrds. further down the road. The Mennonites

drive these things blasting by my house and somehow make the corner. It's like being invaded by aliens! 

[ebinmaine 67,483]

14 minutes ago, JCM said:

This Super A is sort of row cropish, very stable especially when you adjust the axle width. 

 

Love that tractor Jim.

 

If it had a front end loader Trina would have already bought it but if I come up with even half an excuse you and I are going to have to talk!!

[Achto 27,571]

47 minutes ago, JCM said:

This Super A is sort of row cropish

 

All of the letter series Farmall's (A,B,C,H,M and the Cub) were considered row crop tractors. They had adjustable widths and more ground clearance and were labeled Farmall. The high crop versions of the Farmall's would have the letter V after the first letter. Like this MV for example.

 

 

During that time the W series (W4,W6,W9,) were considered standard tractors. The W4 had the same engine as the H. The W6 had the same engine as the M. The W9 stood alone and had the largest engine for IH at the time. These were mainly tillage tractors, they did not have adjustable widths and were labeled as McCormick's.

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Achto

[WHX?? 48,815]

I like that tractor Plunger didn't you do a resto thread on it? 

[JCM 9,161]

No thread on that one Jimbo.

[Pullstart 62,851]

3 hours ago, WHX24 said:

We see ones like this barreling down the road quite frequently and they do have a road gear. 

 

I’ve been very tempted while riding motorcycle to cruise under one of those!  I am pretty sure I’d fit, but not looking forward to being the splat on the bottom side of one!

[Achto 27,571]

15 minutes ago, pullstart said:

I’ve been very tempted while riding motorcycle to cruise under one of those!  

 

Had that very thought myself.

[bc.gold 3,403]

If you owned a tree farm then you would want one of these.

 

[8ntruck 6,999]

2 hours ago, pullstart said:

 

I’ve been very tempted while riding motorcycle to cruise under one of those!  I am pretty sure I’d fit, but not looking forward to being the splat on the bottom side of one!

Yup.  I've had the thought when seeing one of these on the road that I could have passed it with the Trimuph Spitfire I used to have without having to go into the oncoming traffic lane.

[ebinmaine 67,483]

Bandit would be proud of you boys

[Zeek 2,286]

I think John Deere started making Hi-Crops in 1955 with the JD 60 that replaced the A in 1952. They made it for corn, flowers and sugar cane crops. It was 32" clearance. It looked pretty beefy to me, I doubt stability would be an issue, although I have never driven one.

Edited March 3, 2021 by Zeek

[8ntruck 6,999]

Interesting, the tractor in the front view has braces betwen the lower end of the spindles, while the tractor in the side view does not. 

[T-Mo-(Moderator) 4,496]

Right now, if you watch Mecum's Gone Farming auctions, original from the factory Hi-Crops bring good money now, more than the standard row crop tractors.  So much so that people are now modifying standard row crops to hi-crops.  These don't bring as much money at the auctions from what I've seen, but they do get some attention.

[seuadr 488]

6 hours ago, T-Mo said:

Right now, if you watch Mecum's Gone Farming auctions, original from the factory Hi-Crops bring good money now, more than the standard row crop tractors.  So much so that people are now modifying standard row crops to hi-crops.  These don't bring as much money at the auctions from what I've seen, but they do get some attention.

Yeah my buddy picked his up for 2k, not knowing it was special (nor the guy selling it) and sent it to a shop to get some clutch work done - the owner gave him a list of 5 people that wanted to buy it just as it was split on the shop floor. One guy offered 6k as is where is. My buddy was flabbergasted.

 

He kept it though, he really likes it.

 

It is a cool little machine.

[ebinmaine 67,483]

What prompted the question in the first place is that I've been thinking about giving Colossus a little bit of the high crop treatment..

 I think it'll be a really neat look for that. 6" wider rear, maybe a little more in the front. I think 16" longer? And the height increase will be maybe 4 rear, 6 or 7 front?

 

Seems to me with these dimensions and the fact that I have four weighted tires it should still remain quite stable. 

 

[Zeek 2,286]

Here's one that used to be at the WHCC Show now and then. I don't recall who owned it, but I think the brothers had a few modified tractors like an articulated and narrow front. This was from 2013. The articulated one is in the background.

 

 

I found two more on the interweb . . .

Edited March 4, 2021 by Zeek