MF 595 Mk2

[MF 1200]

I saw a MF 595 Mk2 for sale the other day and im considering buying it. It seems to be in very good condition and has 8000 hours on it. Apparently the PTO has never been used. Are they a reliable machine, and if not, what problems should I look out for?

Any help/ info would be appreciated.

 

[76masseyman]

Sadly, these tractors had a terrible reputation. It may be quicker to list the good points about them.
Hydraulic problems, weak clutch, head gaskets, etc but my dad had one of the very first, then a Mk11 with an Opico turbo on and both did high hours with him and were very reliable.

 

[MF 1200]

Sadly, these tractors had a terrible reputation. It may be quicker to list the good points about them.
Hydraulic problems, weak clutch, head gaskets, etc but my dad had one of the very first, then a Mk11 with an Opico turbo on and both did high hours with him and were very reliable.

Thanks for your reply. There seems to be a mixed message in what you say. The tractor in question does not have a turbo. I am still on the fence about it, but if you say that they did high hours and were reliable, I am inclined to think that it would be a good purchase?

 

[essexpete]

They were universally disliked but were a better drive than a 590 with longer wheel base and higher weight. The main issue was apparently head gasket on the large 4cyl engine. Iirr some of the early ones had hydraulic problems. If the tractor is tidy, working, not full of rust and will not be doing 00s of hours I can't think it would be too bad. Easy tractor to climb in and out of.

 

[76masseyman]

Thanks for your reply. There seems to be a mixed message in what you say. The tractor in question does not have a turbo. I am still on the fence about it, but if you say that they did high hours and were reliable, I am inclined to think that it would be a good purchase?

Yes, I do seem a little mixed there. I personally wouldn’t think twice about purchasing one in good condition, especially a MK11 model, as we were very fortunate with them, and it would be a nice addition.
But........sadly, and I’m sure others will fill us in soon, they were generally a shambles @yellowbelly !
But if yours is only for general light duties, it should be ok. Check for play in the steering also, and check the pto does actually work.

 

[Henarar]

I saw a MF 595 Mk2 for sale the other day and im considering buying it. It seems to be in very good condition and has 8000 hours on it. Apparently the PTO has never been used. Are they a reliable machine, and if not, what problems should I look out for?

Any help/ info would be appreciated.

You will get mixed replies, it seems they were either good or bad.
hopefully the bad ones will have been scrapped years ago.
chap I know has had a 2wd one for 30 years and its been a good old bus

 

[76masseyman]

They suffered from what one or two MF tractors suffered from at the time, the 1200 like you name @MF 1200 for instance.
The looked bigger, stronger and more powerful than they actually were.

 

[Exfarmer]

Check the steering!

 

[yellowbelly]

But........sadly, and I’m sure others will fill us in soon, they were generally a shambles @yellowbelly !

The one we had was a bit of trouble
It was a pity really as it was our first quiet cab tractor so it was a whole new 'driving experience'. It was a Mark 1.
Clutches were the main problem - probably because it did a lot of this......

...........and bale kickers hadn't been invented so there was not only the stopping and starting for every bale but you had to back up and stop and pull forward and stop, to drop out every bale too.

Just looked at it's file......
Cost £7450 in July 1976.
Cost £3000 to change it in May 1978 (with 1678hrs on the clock) for a Ford 7700 (2wd).
First new clutch......600hrs
Second new clutch.......1100hrs
Third new clutch.......1587hrs
It also had a few other 'bits and bobs'.....new injector pump, flywheel and, for it's age, it looks like it had quite a few power steering pipes and spool valve pipes too. Hydraulic brakes were a new thing on tractors then - there looks to be a fair few brake seals and pipes too
To be fair, in those days, we had the best MF dealer in the country (P&B) in our area and they stood all the clutch costs when it went out of warranty.

Don't let me put you off @MF 1200 , if that Mk2is still running after all those years, it's probably one like @76masseyman had and not one like we had

 

[BredRedHfd]

@Cowabunga probably fill you in on the details....

 

[Cowabunga]

@Cowabunga probably fill you in on the details....

Sorry, I feel very sick just thinking about the heap.

 

[MF-ANDY]

With a mk2 you shouldn't get head gasket problems and it will have a 13" clutche so that should be ok too.
The main problem is that many parts were slightly different to main stream 500 series tractors ie lift hydraulics, spools, steering to name a few. So parts could be a problem.

 

[gatepost]

I saw a MF 595 Mk2 for sale the other day and im considering buying it. It seems to be in very good condition and has 8000 hours on it. Apparently the PTO has never been used. Are they a reliable machine, and if not, what problems should I look out for?

Any help/ info would be appreciated.

Check the PTO actually does work, there's a bit in there that is obsolete, or at least it was about 20yrs ago

 

[Cowabunga]

It is only good as a museum piece, especially considering that any rare surviving heap is getting on for 45 years of age. A lesson on how not to engineer and build a tractor. As a practise run for the greater 500 series, that were launched a year or two later, it was a disaster and the then near bankrupt MF learnt very little. The mainly Coventry built 500 series were plagued with issues from launch and MF lost massive numbers of customers over that period, mainly to Ford who took the sales lead from then on, but it also gave an easy entry to Deere, which before this had only a tiny UK market share. MF's dismal first attempts at half-engineered 4WD versions of both the 595 and 590 also resulted in massive sales growth for Same and Fiat which, apart from a propensity to rust, were very well designed and far more reliable.
Within five years of the 500 series launch and with it still in production, imports and Ford had decimated MF's customer base. At that time Ford didn't even have a 4wd offering, but the Series 10 introduction with the ZF front axle immediately sounded the death knell of both County and Roadless tractors, although they did soldier on, gravely wounded, for a while.

Some long gone MF executives got their knickers in a twist some years ago when I criticised the 595 as being the worse and least reliable tractor ever built. What would they know, they weren't even born when those criminally underdeveloped lumps were tumbled out of the French factory.

It took the 'back to basics' 200 series and, more so the rather good 300 series to restore faith in MF tractors, but by then it was too late for many farmers who had tasted better, more reliable brands. The MF engineers did put a massive effort into designing better tractors and it paid off with the really innovative and game-changing 3000 series. This range was a good five years ahead of the completion when launched and the introduction of their Dynashift and constant power engines pushed it even further ahead, but I digress.

 

[essexpete]

Did the 595 share much with the 1080? That was another not well thought of tractor.

 

[timff]

Interesting report on the 500 series Cowbunga. I have experience of driving a 590, 565 and 550 which I quite liked...apart from getting my fingers severely pinched several times in that stupid right hand window open/close handle....which slammed shut several times with the full weight of the heavy window with my fingers in it... The 550 was a 148 but with heavier body so was known as being underpowered but what were the main problems with the 500 series, which I thought were revamped Red Giants using similar engines?

 

[BredRedHfd]

Interesting report on the 500 series Cowbunga. I have experience of driving a 590, 565 and 550 which I quite liked...apart from getting my fingers severely pinched several times in that stupid right hand window open/close handle....which slammed shut several times with the full weight of the heavy window with my fingers in it... The 550 was a 148 but with heavier body so was known as being underpowered but what were the main problems with the 500 series, which I thought were revamped Red Giants using similar engines?

I must admit, we had a 575 in the 80s/90s, and was one of the best tractors we ever had. 1 clutch, that was all the major work we did to it!
A 550 too, though that was a little underpowered if I remember correctly. 148 on steroids indeed...but reliable...
Seem to remember 595s always had a bad reputation when talked about...

 

[Cowabunga]

Did the 595 share much with the 1080? That was another not well thought of tractor.

Yes it did. Far too much. They were only 92 gross hp but extensively re-engineered from the 100 series or 200 series for some reason. All of the mods being absolute crap.

 

[essexpete]

So what was the 698 based on? I only drove the 600 series briefly but I did not like it. Seemed a backwards step in some ways to the 500.

 

[Cowabunga]

Interesting report on the 500 series Cowbunga. I have experience of driving a 590, 565 and 550 which I quite liked...apart from getting my fingers severely pinched several times in that stupid right hand window open/close handle....which slammed shut several times with the full weight of the heavy window with my fingers in it... The 550 was a 148 but with heavier body so was known as being underpowered but what were the main problems with the 500 series, which I thought were revamped Red Giants using similar engines?

The exhausts and radiators were extended high up and vibrated and quickly and repeatedly failed. Many components from alternator brackets to water pumps were inadequate cheap junk. Steel pipe routing and security was poor resulting in cracks and leaks. Clutch connecting rods were poorly designed for years, resulting in breakages and dangerous sudden non-functioning clutches. Filtration of the hydraulics on those fitted with auxiliary hydraulics was inadequate and the filter was poorly located for service. Many components were substandard, such as the synchromesh on the part synchronised eight speed box, where fitted. Steering systems prone to severe and premature wear, causing erratic steering. 595 2wd had oversensitive steering while all 4wd models were the opposite and needed high revs to work and about five turns lock to lock. Accessibility for anything but basic service was poor, with the bonnets fastened by multiple small bolts. iPTO clutches unreliable with control valves prone to stick and PTO brakes that wore into the clutch pack housings. Delicate internal auxiliary hydraulic pumps. Auto hitches with control levers that one could barely reach and hooks that were impossible to see. Auto hitches that were not suitable for larger tractors, with the hook too far under the axle which severely limited turning angle with a trailer and caused interference between lower links and pipe holders etc on trailer drawbars. Outdated dual clutches fitted to basic models that still used two stage clutch with PTO clutch adjustment through a tiny hole in the bottom of the bell housing. Inferior hydraulic versatility on basic models, although ones with auxiliary hydraulics were class-leading in that respect. Reverse gears that were either too fast in high range or too slow in low range.
Cab doors that provided great access but were heavy and with stays that had a scissor effect and could have your finger off if not careful at all times. Flat large glass areas and tinwork that drummed badly at certain road speeds. Rust prone cab construction which, to be fair, was fairly universal in those days with too many pressed steel boxed panels.

Those are the main issues. Probably missed a few. Most were addressed by subsequent models, but not all. The 600 series cabs, for instance, took the rust issue to a really bleak place.