Anyone have experience with 1948+ John Deer MC Crawler, wide track? I just read a thread about tracks on larger crawler and he was having track problems. If the tracks were in good shape it could make a reasonable tractor for small scale logging. Just continuing the possibilities. It is the tracks which push me away from this type of machine. It is a light machine and with the wide track may float on the soft ground better than most tractors.
Tim
Not that year/model. Had a '58 420c crawler for awhile. Regular tracks.
Moonhill , how far are you from Columbia Falls?
30 minutes.
Tim
The MC is a pretty light tractor, I would still give my eye teeth to have one though. Does it have a blade? The thing about MC's is they are agriculture crawlers, they didn't come factory with a blade most of the time. They are not built as heavy as the first industrial crawlers that Deere first came out with like the 440. the 440 had a 2 cyl. gas engine or a diesel and was introduced in the 50's. When you say wide track do you mean the width of the individual track or the width between the two tracks? The machine should make an okay light logger but just be careful what kind of load you put on it.
It is my understanding that the pads are wider, I don't know if this effects the whole width. A friend of mine is looking at one out of state, I have not seen it.
Tim
I don't see why a wide track would give you anymaore trouble than the standard model. Do you know any particular's on the tractor you know of that is having trouble? Deere did alot of testing back in those days before they released a product so most of the stuff was pretty sound. The only thing that I know of that didn't work out on machines of that era was an optional joystick control on the 440 crawler I mentioned earlier. It worked great when it actually worked. I don't recall the exact problem though. I would say as long as you give the tractor a good going over you shouldn't have any problem.
things to check are:
1. Steering clutches
2. final drives
3. undercarrige, this includes drive wheels, tracks, idlers and track tensioners.
On a tractor that old no matter how pretty it is if the undercarrige is shot it is a parts unit. The undercarrige just cannot be put back together economicly. On top of all that the usual engine, tranny, hydraulics system if so equipped and electrical system checks and that should tell you everything you need to know. Remember the M series was a popular tractor so parts aren't that hard to find and the MC is the same as a M wheel tractor so all parts interchange but the crawler parts are what are rare as hen's teeth sometimes. If you do end up with it you need to suscribe to Antique Power and Farm Collector magazines just for the parts sources. Old equipment is fun to run but just be ready to hunt parts and turn wrenches. Also as bad as I would hate to do this to an old crawler, ROPS and FOPS should be added for woods work.
Thanks, that confirms my suspicion. Not a direction I would normally choose. It would be one thing if I could go out and replace the undercarriage.
I replaced a couple of links and pins on my Cat 307. Not something I want to do often. The MC is a smaller scale, but similar.
Tim
I had one twenty years ago. The "bottom end" was shot. Timberfaller is exactly right.
The little tractor is still worth looking at even if it is not what you want for logging because if you can get it cheap enough there is still some money to be made on parts.
My buddy who is looking at may take it, I don't know yet.
Tim
Everything you could ever want or need to know about these can be found at: JDCrawlers.com
The only drawbacks of wide pads are #1 hard on pins and bushings when ran over limbs and chunks. #2 on side hill they make wonderful skis >:( >:(.. If you can keep skid roads clean you can make it work. My biggest worry would be finding parts. I have a 1953 IH TD-14 and without another one for parts you can run into problems.
But you got to remember ifn it moves some logger has tried to drag logs with it ;D ;D