. AGRIMOTOR NOTES.
Page 23
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Tractor of the Future?
THE ROUGH and ready type of tractor has now practically run, its course M.this-.comitry and, whatever type predominates' in the future, there can be no doubt that neatness and compactness of construction will be feature S of all new -machines: As to the actual type of machine, it has been. said in these columns that the following spedifieation will be found to be one to which the bulk of the tractors of 1920-21 will conform.:Four-oylinders engine,, 30 h.p., governed nominal spied SW of 000 r.p.m: ; disc clutch of extra large -dithensions3. throe-speed gearbox, giving speeds of li, 21–and. Vi .miles .per Lour, final drive by double JednetiOn gears,to '11, fully floating rear axle ; Wheel dimensions: rear, 4 ft.. diameter by 10 ins. wide; -front, 3. ft. -diarneter by 5 ins. wide ; sprung fro.nt-And rear with some simple method of putting the rear Springsout of 'action when used on the soil; fitted with two efficient brakes or probably three, two of them being -disposed one to each rear -road wheel, which arrangement is particu larly useful as an aid to sharp turns. The drive will be taken through the rear wheels..
The weight will probably be not less than 35 cwt., nor more than 40 cwt. complete: .. The steering and control will be modelled on car practice. The driver will be provided with a much more comfortable seat than is, at present, customary, and with ithe..control will be embodied a lever or pedal for operating the self-lift plough. There is no reason for not believing that, in the main, this type will be the most widely used in the future. But one cannot dogmatize, for the simple reason that farmers themselves are now corning forward and, in a degree, say what they want. Therefore, it would not surprise me to find, when these demands are made known, that the machine most sought after will be smaller than the one indicated by the specification above.
That machine -certainly strikes a happy Eicdimn between the light machine costing . about £300 and the heavy .ones costing 2600 or 2700. One has tO remember that, the heavy machine has its special functions: it is required to work where 'the lighter 'Machine would be--useless. -The' question for the heavy-la,nd_ farmer. is not whether he conic' get two .snialler tractors for the price of one large one, but Whether the tractor, say at 2000. will replace his horses. ' Because the outlay.on horses and-implements fort working heavy land isvery Much, Areater than for medium. and light..land-, se chat 2600 expended on -power: 'would be viewed as no more than a lightland farmer would View 2300 or 2400 simply because it never has cost_ thelatter so much to till his land. Sc, thais.while.a. medium machine may prevail, it will .never be able:tntake the place of the heavy tractor specially constructed for dealing with heavy land
and, at 2400, it will be coming very near to the pre , sent price of heavy ones.
.Now, what of the other extreme—the machines that are smaller than our medium machine already spoken of 1 And would it be surpriSing to fmd, that now farmers are beginning to make known their own minds onthe matter, that, for land not being heavy land, the small tractor is most in demand—machines of the Fordson, International,' Austin, Glasgow' Garner, etc., type? All these makes come near to the specification for the medium tractor, but recent tendencies certainly indicate that the greatest call during the next two years at, any rate will be made upon the type' of which -the Fordson is a specimen. A machine like this should not cost more than .2300 to 2325, which is a sum that almost any farmer in a fair line of business would be prepared to expend. We .know the cost of materials And labour is constantly going up and that one cannot pretend to say, what the price really will be.
Neatness and compactness of construction will be necessary in all machines and the greatest possible
protection from dust and should be provided in new models. All minor improvements in this way will add value to the machine. , 'And, now, may I put forward a modified specification based on the opinions expressed by farmers who are now fairly well conversant with the farm tractor ? The brief specification would be somewhat as follows :—Four-cylinder engine, 20 h.p. to 25 h.p., disc clutch with ample dimensions; three-speed gear of IL or lie 2-4 and 4 or 5 miles per hour ; weight up to 35 cwt., with the remainder as per previous specification, and the price should not be above £330 or £350 at the highest, ' Some reasons must now be advanced as a basis for the assumption that the smaller tractor will be the more popular. In the first place, it may be said that the farmer prefers a 'small machine to a large one, where the former will answer his purpose and where. it.suits his land. A small machine is supposed to be easy to manage; it is light in weight and genet ally has a high-speed gear, which can be utilized when the tractor is not too heavily loaded. Also, the small-wheeled tractor will knock about and do any thing on the farm—which is what the farmer wants Tractors of the Burford-Cleveland type are in de mend for work in the hop and fruit plantations, but apart from this, Machines having two wide rear wheels—ten or twelve inches wide are preferred. A complaint made by the agriculturist, against the American machines is that the :front-wheels are too over the three-wheeled tractor, providing narrow and often eat int.) soft ground, thus retarding speed and using up extra power. Otherwise, there appears to be no preference for the four-wheeled its weigh is not too great. Although it can easily be demonstrated that three horses are as heavy as a medium-sized tractor, .et the farmer does not readily accept the fact, partieularly when such a tractor, working on a piece of ploughed land, has left a wheel mark behind. Generally speaking, the medium-land farmer would rather drop a gang from his plough for the sake of a light tractor. Lightness of weight and speed are both essential to the traator of the future, more -so than ability to pull a four-furrow plough. In fact, some farmers prefer two furrows to even three. A light tractor pulling a -two-furrow plough, travelling at, say, four miles per hour, is spoken of more highly than a heavier tractor drawing a four-furrow plough at l or even Q miles per hour by those who have used both. lo more fuel is used arid, though the tractor must pass over the ground several times more, it is a light machine and its pressure on the soil does not matter, and better work is done by two .furrows, particularly if the land happens to be hilly or uneven. Besides, as a large farmer said to me the other aday, " One such machine would take the .place of ten horses and, at the price, two could be had if the farm was large enough." The above observations are the result of investi,gations made among farmers who are using tractors in different parts of the country, and altogether the ideas put forward are sensible enough and, certainly, appear to point the way for future developments in tractor design. Inquiry as to whether a machine running on two wheels in the furrow was preferred, the answer was almost invariably "yes." AGRTMOT.