Fendt vs. Deere

[kiwi pom]

Yep. Fendt replace the deere. Both had same driver and same equipment over the combined 5000 hours in the same fields etc. Both were the only tractor on the farm at the time so did every job from a 3m topper to a 6m drill.

Its an interesting comparison but not really very accurate. As you ran one for a couple of years? Then swapped to the latest model of a different brand and did another couple of years.
Do you record fuel use at the pump along with job hours, or just off the screen? I'm not saying the Deere is more efficient, just that its not a very accurate test.
Not as bad as people who measure fuel consumption by what the gauge says on two tanks of different sizes. You'd be surprised how often that ones used.

 

[2wheels]

What about a Claas ……fighting them off with a stick hereView attachment 1023551

the scrapmen?

 

[Ben B]

Doesn't differ much if you read tests, driver and setup has much more to do with it i find.

Was a test awhile back in Dutch trade magazine where it was Fendt 724 versus New Holland T7.230 both cvt, same triple mower same field, Fendt used around 4 liters an hour more, that didn't sit well with some people

No wonder the new t7 230 comparable Fendt would be 718, not a 240!

 

[Down farmer]

No wonder the new t7 230 comparable Fendt would be 718, not a 240!

718 Fendt wouldn’t have a look in on comparison to the 230 on PTO work

 

[Ben B]

718 Fendt wouldn’t have a look in on comparison to the 230 on PTO work

A t7 230 is only 173hp at the shaft factory. A Fendt 718 is 180hp or thereabouts on the shaft. The new series of New Hollands shaft hp's are about 75% of their sticker hp's.

TractorData.com New Holland T7.230 tractor information

www.tractordata.com

* Note tested PTO hp's

 

[DrDunc]

Don't drive them anymore so I've no figures but Deere motors always seem to do very well in Profi's engine tests.
Deutz engines got a decent reputation for fuel at a time when all Fends were fitted with a vario transmission, while other brands were still mostly selling powershift boxes. Vario and all its engine controlling tech is more mainstream now, so the advantage has disappeared and Deutz are no longer considered number one in economy. They need to play catch up now.

Thank you for your insight, however flawed it may be. Deutz engines have indeed, as I indicated earlier, slipped to second place in the ranking of frugality behind FPT, though both are still far ahead of Deere. The Fendt CVT is actually less efficient than a fixed ratio transmission, something I would have thought you'd have known? The CVT advantage for economy lies in being able to match a speed ratio to a more economic engine operating RPM. On the other end of the spectrum from CVT, the latest Case/New Holland 24 fixed ratio dual clutch gearbox is perhaps the most efficient design. This is why when coupled to the FPT engine, it now sets the DLG test standard for economy. If does however, like Deeres own ill fated "direct drive" dual clutch offering, lack lower speed ratios, has large range overlaps resulting in few actual ratios, and suffers the associated fragility of synchro and baulk rings.

If you want to really suck diesel, try a Sisu engine turning a Finnish 8 ratio 'box, with a hydrostat thrown in to make it infinite..... Simply gorgeous to operate, torque levels Deere engines have only ever dreamed of, but at high RPM posses a throat almost as parched.

(To satisfy any latent skepticism by serious thinkers such as yourself @kiwi pom accurate "scientific" measurements and records have been taken )

 

[texelburger]

Neither make for me thanks.With our tractors I keep getting tangoed !!

 

[kiwi pom]

Thank you for your insight, however flawed it may be. Deutz engines have indeed, as I indicated earlier, slipped to second place in the ranking of frugality behind FPT, though both are still far ahead of Deere. The Fendt CVT is actually less efficient than a fixed ratio transmission, something I would have thought you'd have known? The CVT advantage for economy lies in being able to match a speed ratio to a more economic engine operating RPM. On the other end of the spectrum from CVT, the latest Case/New Holland 24 fixed ratio dual clutch gearbox is perhaps the most efficient design. This is why when coupled to the FPT engine, it now sets the DLG test standard for economy. If does however, like Deeres own ill fated "direct drive" dual clutch offering, lack lower speed ratios, has large range overlaps resulting in few actual ratios, and suffers the associated fragility of synchro and baulk rings.

If you want to really suck diesel, try a Sisu engine turning a Finnish 8 ratio 'box, with a hydrostat thrown in to make it infinite..... Simply gorgeous to operate, torque levels Deere engines have only ever dreamed of, but at high RPM posses a throat almost as parched.

(To satisfy any latent skepticism by serious thinkers such as yourself @kiwi pom accurate "scientific" measurements and records have been taken )

I know I read Profi and see their tests results, Deere always seem to do well perhaps they're lying?
Of course a throttled back IVT during transport would be better on fuel than a wide open powershift. Not on todays stuff maybe but go back a bit and you'll find that was one of Fendt's selling points.
You should read your own posts, you said an IVT Deutz was better than an (IVT) Fendt, Why not a powershift (or whatever Deutz call them)?

We get it you hate Deere's, (although it seems you've never run one) nobody cares.

 

[Frankzy]

A t7 230 is only 173hp at the shaft factory. A Fendt 718 is 180hp or thereabouts on the shaft. The new series of New Hollands shaft hp's are about 75% of their sticker hp's.

TractorData.com New Holland T7.230 tractor information

www.tractordata.com

* Note tested PTO hp's

173 hp is not true because that's omitting boost.
The T7.230 will give you ~200 shaft horsepower while boosting which it does on a mower.

Fendt 180hp on the shaft is also untrue. The 718 is 180 on the flywheel, that means the PTO power is more like 145hp..

 

[DrDunc]

I know I read Profi and see their tests results, Deere always seem to do well perhaps they're lying?
Of course a throttled back IVT during transport would be better on fuel than a wide open powershift. Not on todays stuff maybe but go back a bit and you'll find that was one of Fendt's selling points.
You should read your own posts, you said an IVT Deutz was better than an (IVT) Fendt, Why not a powershift (or whatever Deutz call them)?

We get it you hate Deere's, (although it seems you've never run one) nobody cares.

Despite your use of the plural pronoun, we feel you have a certain animosity towards criticism of inefficient American comfort biased engineering that hides it's built in obsolescence so well behind a veneer of marketing excellence?

We note that you've answered your own question regarding the efficiency of continuously variable Vs fixed ratio clutch pack driven transmissions; perhaps the query was rhetorical and not intended for response?

We also note your misapprehension concerning which brands of machinery have been owned and operated here in the beauty of the Scottish hills, but please don't become upset by this additional gap in your knowledge.

A Deere is undoubtedly a splendidly comfortable place to spend a day; far superior to, for example, the interior layout of a New Holland. The latter can surely only have been designed by a deformed video game addict deciding where to place identical ergonomically awful controls while suffering from particularly violent narcotic withdrawal?

Each brand performs their function, whatever the level of comfort, refinement, engineering strength, or logic of operation the design engineers and accountants have deemed acceptable for the product they sell.

However it remains a fact that in the course of a day, Fendt consumes less precious petrochemical than the equivalent Deere, which, rather than your personal crusade to undermine and debilitate information to this effect, was the query originally posted.

I hope this alleviates your heightened levels of animosity?

 

[fendtfiasco]

Did i not hear that John Deere are going into some partnership with Deutz to do with engines perhaps up to around 175 hp ?

Settings and the operator can make a huge difference on economy.

 

[DrDunc]

Did i not hear that John Deere are going into some partnership with Deutz to do with engines perhaps up to around 175 hp ?

Settings and the operator can make a huge difference on economy.

Shush now, you shouldn't go starting rumours like that! Think of the mental anguish and cruelty.....

John Deere Power Systems and DEUTZ announce engine collaboration

John Deere Power Systems and DEUTZ have announced plans to jointly develop and source components for a low horsepower range engine up to 130kW. Working together, the parties will be able to close a gap in the market by developing an engine that provides customers additional and exceptional...

www.deere.co.uk

 

[Finn farmer]

Shush now, you shouldn't go starting rumours like that! Think of the mental anguish and cruelty.....

John Deere Power Systems and DEUTZ announce engine collaboration

John Deere Power Systems and DEUTZ have announced plans to jointly develop and source components for a low horsepower range engine up to 130kW. Working together, the parties will be able to close a gap in the market by developing an engine that provides customers additional and exceptional...

www.deere.co.uk

Maybe let Deutz source the head gaskets?

 

[Farmer dyke]

No wonder the new t7 230 comparable Fendt would be 718, not a 240!

So your saying its not weird that at the same speed and same setup a tractor with 246hp uses more than one with 225hp? In my experience a tractor that is on its knees the entire time will use more than one that is at 80% load so to say. But maybe the New Holland has been 'finetuned' more for efficiency at max load.

This spring we got to use 'new' to us 6145R AP for slurry on the 10m3 tanker with 7,2meter trailing foot, the old 6610 had to really work for it to keep it at 12kph especially with the soft ground in the spring and used around 16litres an hour, new R while quite a bit overkill only used 13,5 litres an hour, didn't expect such a difference.

 

[Ben B]

So your saying its not weird that at the same speed and same setup a tractor with 246hp uses more than one with 225hp? In my experience a tractor that is on its knees the entire time will use more than one that is at 80% load so to say. But maybe the New Holland has been 'finetuned' more for efficiency at max load.

This spring we got to use 'new' to us 6145R AP for slurry on the 10m3 tanker with 7,2meter trailing foot, the old 6610 had to really work for it to keep it at 12kph especially with the soft ground in the spring and used around 16litres an hour, new R while quite a bit overkill only used 13,5 litres an hour, didn't expect such a difference.

https://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/010/6/2/10626-john-deere-7r-210.html

For reference that's deere to highlight how that data works. Deere claims the max engine output to be 231 hp at the flywheel but only sell the machine as 210hp? But when it's tested it only has 205 hp at the shaft thus 210 usable PTO hp's is a more reasonable number than claiming its 230hp's like New Holland does.

https://tractortestlab.unl.edu/New%20Holland%20T7.230-4.pdf

That's the test data for the New Holland t7 230 and after 1hr at 1800 engine rpm the max Hp achieved was 173hp at the shaft. So unless the new holland didn't engage its 'power boost' for the test which sounds daft its only 173 hp.

TractorData.com CaseIH Puma 185 tractor dimensions information

www.tractordata.com

I'm pretty sure that is the Red equivalent of a t7 230 and they sell that as 185hp boasting to 230hp of something. There are loads of other examples of this deere sells the 175r that boast to 183hp but only test at 175hp at the shaft or about that.

 

[Ben B]

https://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/010/6/2/10626-john-deere-7r-210.html

For reference that's deere to highlight how that data works. Deere claims the max engine output to be 231 hp at the flywheel but only sell the machine as 210hp? But when it's tested it only has 205 hp at the shaft thus 210 usable PTO hp's is a more reasonable number than claiming its 230hp's like New Holland does.

https://tractortestlab.unl.edu/New%20Holland%20T7.230-4.pdf

That's the test data for the New Holland t7 230 and after 1hr at 1800 engine rpm the max Hp achieved was 173hp at the shaft. So unless the new holland didn't engage its 'power boost' for the test which sounds daft its only 173 hp.

TractorData.com CaseIH Puma 185 tractor dimensions information

www.tractordata.com

I'm pretty sure that is the Red equivalent of a t7 230 and they sell that as 185hp boasting to 230hp of something. There are loads of other examples of this deere sells the 175r that boast to 183hp but only test at 175hp at the shaft or about that.

Just because I can add more food for thought

Review: Massey Ferguson 7720 Dyna-VT tractor

The Massey Ferguson 7720 Dyna-VT tractor has its fair share of supporters, and justifiably so, writes Brent Lilley. Representing excellent value for money, it impresses with its serviceability and many top-notch specs

www.tradefarmmachinery.com.au

Jerno from this article claims the Massey on boost will do 211 hp at the shaft (model 7720)

Test data say max hp reached the shaft was 199hp so unless the Massey also can't access its boost on a test like the New Hollands?

https://tractortestlab.unl.edu/Massey%20Ferguson%207720%20Dyna%206.pdf

 

[Frankzy]

https://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/010/6/2/10626-john-deere-7r-210.html

For reference that's deere to highlight how that data works. Deere claims the max engine output to be 231 hp at the flywheel but only sell the machine as 210hp? But when it's tested it only has 205 hp at the shaft thus 210 usable PTO hp's is a more reasonable number than claiming its 230hp's like New Holland does.

https://tractortestlab.unl.edu/New%20Holland%20T7.230-4.pdf

That's the test data for the New Holland t7 230 and after 1hr at 1800 engine rpm the max Hp achieved was 173hp at the shaft. So unless the new holland didn't engage its 'power boost' for the test which sounds daft its only 173 hp.

TractorData.com CaseIH Puma 185 tractor dimensions information

www.tractordata.com

I'm pretty sure that is the Red equivalent of a t7 230 and they sell that as 185hp boasting to 230hp of something. There are loads of other examples of this deere sells the 175r that boast to 183hp but only test at 175hp at the shaft or about that.

Guess I'll try to explain again...
Yes the NH did indeed not engage boost while stationary on the test stand, and no it's not daft because that's the whole point of boost! The force exerted on the transmission/powertrain increases the lower your speed is, this means that if your running gear is designed to cope with 200hp from a standstill, by the point you've reached 10km/h you could add on another 30 and still not have any higher torque through the components than you get with 200hp at 0km/h.

The JD 210 also didn't engage its boost, yes you read that right the JD also has boost. It will add another 30 horses on top of that standard 230hp figure turning it into a 250-260 hp tractor while on boost..

But to bring this back to the original point, no the Fendt 718 is not comparable, the NH is 200 hp on the shaft while running mowers. The Fendt meanwhile doesn't have boost at all so its always 180 on the flywheel, meaning it's more like 150 on the shaft.

 

[Ben B]

Guess I'll try to explain again...
Yes the NH did indeed not engage boost while stationary on the test stand, and no it's not daft because that's the whole point of boost! The force exerted on the transmission/powertrain increases the lower your speed is, this means that if your running gear is designed to cope with 200hp from a standstill, by the point you've reached 10km/h you could add on another 30 and still not have any higher torque through the components than you get with 200hp at 0km/h.

The JD 210 also didn't engage its boost, yes you read that right the JD also has boost. It will add another 30 horses on top of that standard 230hp figure turning it into a 250-260 hp tractor while on boost..

But to bring this back to the original point, no the Fendt 718 is not comparable, the NH is 200 hp on the shaft while running mowers. The Fendt meanwhile doesn't have boost at all so its always 180 on the flywheel, meaning it's more like 150 on the shaft.

With that theory then if I was to run stationary plant like dyno,pump, genator the tractor would only Max admit 173 hp then?

 

[Frankzy]

With that theory then if I was to run stationary plant like dyno,pump, genator the tractor would only Max admit 173 hp then?

Yes, it's not a theory just have a look in the brochure, without boost it's a 200hp engine.

 

[Ben B]

Yes, it's not a theory just have a look in the brochure, without boost it's a 200hp engine.

Do you believe everything a salesman's tells you?