If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wimp)   850HP John Deer Tractor vs 1800s era 18HP Steam Engine Tractor. Guess who wins?   (wimp.com) divider line 33
    More: Amusing, John Deere, tug-of-war, Adobe Flash  
•       •       •

5744 clicks; posted to Video » on 17 May 2014 at 8:31 PM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



33 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-17 05:42:23 PM
I'm inclined to think that the less powerful tractor had an advantage because it was geared lower and was a lot heavier.
 
2014-05-17 06:48:36 PM

itcamefromschenectady: I'm inclined to think that the less powerful tractor had an advantage because it was geared lower and was a lot heavier.


Yeah, weight, gearing, and torque will win the day over horsepower in that kind of challenge.  Steam engines make obscene amounts of torque at very low RPMs, combine that with all of the extra weight, and a set of tires that can get traction, and you get the result you see.
 
2014-05-17 08:42:31 PM
Torque = teh win
 
2014-05-17 08:43:21 PM
At the end of the day, which one is more efficient for it's power, based on fuel cost and production value?

/not snark, I'm actually curious about this
//and too lazy to do research
 
2014-05-17 08:44:58 PM
considering the hole the little one dug up, power was never a deciding factor.
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-05-17 08:48:50 PM
i192.photobucket.com

The stable.  The 400 has lost favor even for jobs for which it is more ideal because the Deere has air conditioning and a radi-uh.  For the record, I'm 90 miles from these guys - my uncle rides 'em.

There is a steam tractor at the edge of the lake, along with some very old implements.  The steam tractor won't ever be brought to life again, but it's cool to see it, it's like seeing a family member's coat and hat on the rack, even after they passed.
 
2014-05-17 08:49:21 PM

TuteTibiImperes: itcamefromschenectady: I'm inclined to think that the less powerful tractor had an advantage because it was geared lower and was a lot heavier.

Yeah, weight, gearing, and torque will win the day over horsepower in that kind of challenge.  Steam engines make obscene amounts of torque at very low RPMs, combine that with all of the extra weight, and a set of tires that can get traction, and you get the result you see.


I would like to see a pull off between that 19th century tractor and a much larger, 8 wheel John Deere tractor.  One weighing in more closely to the weight of the old tractor.  We may see a different result, I'm guessing.  And leave it stock, not like the racing tractor that had the higher gear ratio tranny.
 
2014-05-17 09:04:52 PM

Orion5k: At the end of the day, which one is more efficient for it's power, based on fuel cost and production value?

/not snark, I'm actually curious about this
//and too lazy to do research


Orion5k: At the end of the day, which one is more efficient for it's power, based on fuel cost and production value?

/not snark, I'm actually curious about this
//and too lazy to do research


Well, the steam tractor is almost certainly using coal for the hotbox, so it may seem more efficient, but you also have to factor in it probably takes an hour just to warm up to operating temperature.  But coal is also dirt cheap, so from a fuel cost perspective it's probably less.  However, steam engines require an incredible amount of maintenance, so overall you'll likely spend way more time and money on a steam tractor.
 
2014-05-17 09:16:44 PM
If you remove the cowl on the John Deere you would see just how much smaller that tractor is compared to the steam tractor. Factor in the weight difference and the gearing on the John Deere being set for speed that was no contest. At least your more likely to survive a roll over in the John Deere and it does not give the EPA an aneurysm every time you drive it.
 
2014-05-17 09:17:51 PM
media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com
 
2014-05-17 10:24:10 PM
The weight issue has already been addressed. Also look at the mount point on each tractor. The jD is attached very low and the steam tractor is much higher. This would tend to lift the rear of the JD and pull down on the steam tractor.
 
2014-05-17 10:30:35 PM
farking gear ratios, how do they work?

I'd like to see a straight pull. I think the steam tractor would still win
 
2014-05-17 10:37:53 PM

reveal101: Torque = teh win


pretty much why this also happened:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UFVI_MQPEQ
 
2014-05-17 10:44:35 PM
i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-05-17 10:53:44 PM

Lsherm: Well, the steam tractor is almost certainly using coal for the hotbox, so it may seem more efficient, but you also have to factor in it probably takes an hour just to warm up to operating temperature


That is fair.  Coal (without doing any research) is likely the fuel, however, certain woods might work, also.  Pine and "fatwood" are two that I can think would burn hot.  Cleaning the hotbox from pine would be an extra chore.  Whatever fatwood is, and I know it when I see it, that stuff goes up quickly, and it was used on the farm as tinder, even though it was split into small, footlong sections.

I expect that wood was used as fuel in many places that did not have the luxury of coal.  I'm almost comfortable to state that as fact, but I do not have the ability to back that up.  Steam engines are not always coal fired, that I do feel comfortable saying.  Additionally, hardship will make a man do anything.

I want to research this, but, eh, maybe later.
 
2014-05-17 11:06:19 PM

433: Lsherm: Well, the steam tractor is almost certainly using coal for the hotbox, so it may seem more efficient, but you also have to factor in it probably takes an hour just to warm up to operating temperature

That is fair.  Coal (without doing any research) is likely the fuel, however, certain woods might work, also.  Pine and "fatwood" are two that I can think would burn hot.  Cleaning the hotbox from pine would be an extra chore.  Whatever fatwood is, and I know it when I see it, that stuff goes up quickly, and it was used on the farm as tinder, even though it was split into small, footlong sections.

I expect that wood was used as fuel in many places that did not have the luxury of coal.  I'm almost comfortable to state that as fact, but I do not have the ability to back that up.  Steam engines are not always coal fired, that I do feel comfortable saying.  Additionally, hardship will make a man do anything.

I want to research this, but, eh, maybe later.


I was just thinking coal because even though wood would work ("www" HAHA!) there's obviously a space constraint, plus most mid to late 1800s steam engines were using coal because it was more efficient as a fuel.  A pound of burning wood doesn't give nearly as much energy as a pound of coal just because of the loss converting water in the wood to steam.  In a "small" steam engine like you'd put on a tractor, space is at a premium.  On something bigger like a locomotive, wood could be a viable fuel source.

Now that I think about it, since that steam tractor is a modern retrofit, it might be using gasoline or diesel to heat the boiler.
 
2014-05-17 11:11:49 PM
The old tractor looks like a small train that decided to retire to a farm.
 
2014-05-17 11:29:02 PM
If I remember correctly, that is only a 250 hp tractor, not 850hp.
 
2014-05-17 11:52:53 PM
Years ago at a steam implement show the boiler on one of them blew up and killed a number of people so that's a factor.
 
2014-05-18 12:49:28 AM
Farking Torque. How does it work?
 
2014-05-18 01:25:20 AM
Hey guys, I think I know what's going on here: the steam tractor has more torque and more advantageous gearing than the Deere. Whaddaya think?

/ slowpoke.jpg
 
2014-05-18 03:51:36 AM
The steam tractor could have over 3,000 lbs/ft of torque and very very low gearing to make that 250 rpm engine speed work.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhjTo0BpkCY
 
2014-05-18 06:43:13 AM
The one that weighs a bunch more and has the higher pull point. It would be stupid slow, but with enough gearing advantage you could win that with a 5hp Briggs for power.
 
2014-05-18 07:36:46 AM
I wonder if the lighter tracker had caterpillar tracks, would they make up enough for the weight advantage
 
2014-05-18 08:08:57 AM

mark_bert: The weight issue has already been addressed. Also look at the mount point on each tractor. The jD is attached very low and the steam tractor is much higher. This would tend to lift the rear of the JD and pull down on the steam tractor.


That's actually the opposite. The hitch should ideally be below the centerline of the axle for greatest pulling power.

Look for videos with rednecks having pulling competitions and the ones that are lifted, no matter how big, can lose to a smaller truck with the receiver much closer to the ground.
.
 
2014-05-18 08:20:23 AM

mark_bert: The weight issue has already been addressed. Also look at the mount point on each tractor. The jD is attached very low and the steam tractor is much higher. This would tend to lift the rear of the JD and pull down on the steam tractor.


Was I the only one cringing.... waiting for the tow strap to snap or the mounting point to give away and brain one of the goofballs in the steam tractor?

Not saying it was likely. But shait, not like it's never happened before.
 
2014-05-18 10:16:03 AM
too much free time causes this.
 
2014-05-18 10:33:50 AM
Reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQM_UmUsz_0 Dodge Cummins Pulls Chevy
 
2014-05-18 11:31:56 AM
They say there's a tractor in this picture

img37.imagefra.me
 
2014-05-18 06:10:00 PM
Great, now we'll be hearing about all of the hipster farmers that only use steam tractors.
 
2014-05-18 08:22:17 PM

Enormous-Schwanstucker: mark_bert: The weight issue has already been addressed. Also look at the mount point on each tractor. The jD is attached very low and the steam tractor is much higher. This would tend to lift the rear of the JD and pull down on the steam tractor.

That's actually the opposite. The hitch should ideally be below the centerline of the axle for greatest pulling power.

Look for videos with rednecks having pulling competitions and the ones that are lifted, no matter how big, can lose to a smaller truck with the receiver much closer to the ground.
.


It's because lifted => larger tires => loss of torque.

You want to be below your axle if the pull is horizontal. If you're being pulled up, it's doesn't matter if it's above or below the axle - you're farked.
 
2014-05-18 09:21:58 PM

fatbear: Enormous-Schwanstucker: mark_bert: The weight issue has already been addressed. Also look at the mount point on each tractor. The jD is attached very low and the steam tractor is much higher. This would tend to lift the rear of the JD and pull down on the steam tractor.

That's actually the opposite. The hitch should ideally be below the centerline of the axle for greatest pulling power.

Look for videos with rednecks having pulling competitions and the ones that are lifted, no matter how big, can lose to a smaller truck with the receiver much closer to the ground.
.

It's because lifted => larger tires => loss of torque.

You want to be below your axle if the pull is horizontal. If you're being pulled up, it's doesn't matter if it's above or below the axle - you're farked.


Not really. The location of the point of pulling makes a deciding factor if both vehicles are equally matched. Case in point, the 1800 HP tractor lost due to a few factors, chiefly lack of traction and overall weight but the hitch was a bit high though I doubt it would have made any difference. Too many other factors too, such as how the power is applied, torque multiplication, traction, etc etc. I'd bet that old tractor easily weighed twice that newer model. It has to have an absurdly low final drive to pull that much weight around.

My old F350 had just shy of 1000 ft/lbs of torque and with 36 inch tall tires it could easily spin all four of them on dry pavement from a dead stop. The size of the tires were never an issue.
 
2014-05-19 04:39:31 AM
Steam engines produce torque at zero RPM, something an internal combustion engine can't do.
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report