Advice on Tractors.
Page 14
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By S. F. Edge.
The Useful Nature of the Advice by Mr. Edge is So Manifest That We Make No Apology For Giving it This Prominence.
IAM RECEIVING a great many letters at home asking about the capabilities of various kinds of tractors. Unfortunately at present I have not time to reply to these letters, owing to my whole time being given to Government work ; therefore, I thought possibly if I gave you the following general and rather concentrated report on the different types of tractors which I have had in use on my farms in Sussex, it might answer many questions I have been asked, and at the same time be useful to those who may wish to know, but have not asked me questions.
There Are Four Types of Tractors.
Firstly, I think one must divide tractors into two types, chain track and wheeled, and then again subdivide them into the light type of tractor (by which I mean something under 30 cwt.) and the heavier type of about twice this weight. Among the heavier wheeled types which stand out at the present time are the relatively slow-running, two-cylinder-engined types like the 20 h.p. Titan (probably the most popular American tractor in this country), the 25 h.p. Mogul, and the 20 h.p. Saunderson, all three machines being full of practical, sensible-points. All three have been used very largely in this country, and are capable of drawing three furrows really deep on the heaviest land, and on a great deal of land four furrows. They can pull a heavy roller, a cultivatar, and a fine-tooth harrow simultaneously. They can do work on a field with a loose top and yet really hard underneath. They can do useful road haulage and first-rate work with a threshing machine, etc. Speaking generally, they are successful farm tractors of robust design, run well on paraffin, and would do practically any work they are asked to do under reasonable soil and climatic conditions.
We then have the heavy type of chain-track tractor like the Clayton-Shuttleworth, the original Caterpillar, and the Bullock. Those which I have seen so far will pull almost up to the same extent as the previously-mentioned types, but have the advantage of being able to work on steep hillsides, where the wheel tractor is very difficult to deal with and hold up to its work. They can also be used where the land is not really suitable for the wheeled tractor, and, therefore, can be operated some days when the wheel tractor would be better standing in its shed. Up to the present, however, it has not been proved whether the cost of upkeep for the tracks and the many extra bearings. that require attention will not militate a little against their undoubted advantages, by the fact that they require a rather more skilled person to look after them and keep them in running order.
The Two Lighter Types.
We then have the lighter type of tractor, such as the M.O.M. wheel type and the Burford-Cleveland chain track. In use both give approximately the same pull, and are able' to pull a two-furrow plough i
well n medium soil. As a rule, they travel quicker than the before-mentioned types and put their best work in when not too heavily loahed. The light type of wheeled tractor, if used on land broken up with a hard pan underneath, quickly shows the disadvantages of the lightweight, as the wheels spin round, and unless cleverly driven soon dig themselves in. This disadvantage is absent from the light-chain-track type, and there is no doubt lightness of weight is an advantage, because it enables •one even to do the seeding with a tractor, for which the heavier type is not suited. At present the fact that the light wheeled tyre can be quickly stalled if asked to do heavy work c46 with a loose top surface is a disadvantage that re= quires getting over. The chain-track type overcomes this, but at present the cost of replacing and keeping up the tracks is not well defined in this country. I am certain that the chain track is a permanent type that has come to stay, but it must be a long fight between the chain track and the simple wheel as to which is generally all round the better. There is another description of motor plough typified by the Fowler-Wyles, Crawley and Moline— all fine ploughing machines—which will work anywhere, on almosianyskind of field, and charm the osdinary farmer with their, small headlands and ease of manoeuvring.
We then have a third type of heavy tractor with one driving wheel only, thus getting rid of the expense and disadvantages of the differential gear, which is well set out in the two types the Bates Steel Mule with a chain track, and the IveI-Hart with a wheel of open spaces which allows it as it were to key ittelf to the ground. Both these machines do good work, are very powerful, but do not like ploughing on the side of a steep hill. For all work except this they are very good and successful. The Ivel-Hart combines with it a two-cylinder, two-cycle valveless engine, which gives a wonderfully smooth torque, and I should say it is the simplest engine on an e.gricultural.tractor in the country, having no valves and no carburetter in the ordinary sense of the word. think under farm use it would frequently be running well and satisfactorily when the poppet valve engine would be entirely -out of business. Neither of these types has been largely used over here vet, but both have considerable advantages in their favour.
The Driver the Malin Factor.
It must be generally accepted that all tractors are a, compromise. There is no one tractor that will do every kind of work equally successfully. All the tractors I have seen will do plenty of good work, but most want coupling up with an intelligent and reasonably sensitive operator. The worst of tractors with a, good man will do good work, but the best of tractors without a sympathetic driver will be quickly in trouble. I have never yet had on my farms a tractor that did not do good work when intelligently handled, but frequently the men expect the tractor to look after itself, and never have attention until it completely breaks down ; then tractors seem bad. The future of the tractor in agriculture, however, is absolutely certain, and no farmer who has any leaning towards mechanical things ought to rest a minute until he has got one and realized the enormous value to him—a value which, particularly on heavy land, will be quickly translated into vastly-increased crops, with the power the tractor gives him to cultivate the land as it should be cultivated.
There are, in addition, many ether practical, good machines like the Whiting-Bull, Wallis, Parrett, Case, etc., each of which has some special merit and must please a farmer to use if he will learn each type of machine's limitations and advantages. Tractors are like horses : you cannot have a hack, a Derby winner, and a shire all in one animal ; each is wanted in its proper place. • For discing, harrowing and light cultivating, the light type of tractor like the M.O.M. and the WeeksDungay stand in a class by themselves, and will do their work more expeditiously and cheaper than anything else. On big farms, certainly, one wants a big ploughing tractor and a light tractor.