MF 7620 Vario engine re map good or bad idea.

[Tom22890]

We have got a Massey Ferguson 7620 with a vario transmission, we are considering getting it remap as we are just short of a few hp when towing the drill (non pto drill). I’m wondering if anyone has done it before and if they gained more power or does the transmission just give up under the same amount of load so you don’t gain anything? I’m only thinking an extra 10 -20hp not blowing it brains out.
I’m just concerned about harming the transmission as the last thing I want to do is blow the vario up and end up with a big bill. So any advice/ opinions/ experience greatly received.

 

[shumungus]

If anyone's going to the shop for popcorn mines a large sweet please.

 

[FarmyStu]

You'll get nothing out of this website that will be of real help. So, in short, it's up to you.

 

[James]

if it's the same vario as the larger models and assuming front hubs are also the same then it should be ok

 

[john432]

Just make sure you use someone reputable, as anyone can buy a kit, have an afternoon being trained. And disappear leaving big expensive problems.

 

[Spud]

We have got a Massey Ferguson 7620 with a vario transmission, we are considering getting it remap as we are just short of a few hp when towing the drill (non pto drill). I’m wondering if anyone has done it before and if they gained more power or does the transmission just give up under the same amount of load so you don’t gain anything? I’m only thinking an extra 10 -20hp not blowing it brains out.
I’m just concerned about harming the transmission as the last thing I want to do is blow the vario up and end up with a big bill. So any advice/ opinions/ experience greatly received.

If you need a bigger tractor, buy one. Or drill slower. There is always a weak point - the cheapest being operating speed has to slow due to a lack of horsepower.
I have had two 7620 VT's for some years - the oldest being a late 2013 model with 7200hrs to its credit, and as fit as a flea. Everything works in harmony, the only thing different to new is we deleted the addblue once it came out of warranty. Tweaking just moves the weak point - it might get hot, lose traction, or something more expensive.

Focus instead on settings - not just the allowable % engine pull down, but the target kph, oil return pipework, fan speed, hydraulic settings, amount of soil dragged along, weight carried, tyre equipment etc. Its suprising what can be achieved sometimes.

 

[Cowabunga]

Just make sure you use someone reputable, as anyone can buy a kit, have an afternoon being trained. And disappear leaving big expensive problems.

A 7618 in this area had a burnt out clutch pack which was repaired only to fail again quite quickly. Turned out that whoever had re-mapped the computer turned the fuel up a tad too high and it was doing 220 at the shaft. It is already, from the factory, the highest hp version with that chassis size, so personally I would not have been happy with more than 180hp at the shaft with relative torque at low revs. Lord knows how much that lot cost to repair or who paid the bill.

 

[Will Blackburn]

Get a cog based tractor if you want transmission efficiency.

 

[Cowabunga]

Get a cog based tractor if you want transmission efficiency.

Depends. One of the most inefficient transmissions I ever had was a fully mechanical Same Laser 130. It was great on the PTO but even though it was 30kph, roading sapped power terribly.

 

[J 1177]

Is that the highest of the range, if it is I'd leave it alone. No problem with mapping a smaller tractor in the range up to the biggest in the range . IF they share the same components.

 

[Cowabunga]

Is that the highest of the range, if it is I'd leave it alone. No problem with mapping a smaller tractor in the range up to the biggest in the range . IF they share the same components.

I remember that in a previous range the 6480 was the most powerful in the range and I would not have chipped that one. The next model up was the 6485 which was a much bigger and stronger tractor altogether and the smallest in the range. I would have had no hesitation in chipping that one up to the same output as a 6499. However, and it is a big however, it should be noted that the 6485 has a clutch plate less in its shuttle clutches and PTO clutch than a 6490, which shouldn't be an issue if used sensibly but does illustrate that even identical looking models do have internal differences commensurate with their power output from the factory.

If ever these clutches wear out, the replacement packs could have the extra plates fitted with no bother.

 

[J 1177]

I remember that in a previous range the 6480 was the most powerful in the range and I would not have chipped that one. The next model up was the 6485 which was a much bigger and stronger tractor altogether and the smallest in the range. I would have had no hesitation in chipping that one up to the same output as a 6499. However, and it is a big however, it should be noted that the 6485 has a clutch plate less in its shuttle clutches and PTO clutch than a 6490, which shouldn't be an issue if used sensibly but does illustrate that even identical looking models do have internal differences commensurate with their power output from the factory.

If ever these clutches wear out, the replacement packs could have the extra plates fitted with no bother.

Ah iv a 6480 and i wouldnt chip or map it. Like you say it has to be noted little bits like those extra plates. In the bigger ones. There is quite a few makes that share commonality of their transmissions axles etc throughout either the range or part of a range.

 

[deleted user 837354]

I would seek qualified advice. I know some people with varios have their tractors chipped from day 1, but that may not be the case for all brands and models.

 

[yorkie]

I remember that in a previous range the 6480 was the most powerful in the range and I would not have chipped that one. The next model up was the 6485 which was a much bigger and stronger tractor altogether and the smallest in the range. I would have had no hesitation in chipping that one up to the same output as a 6499. However, and it is a big however, it should be noted that the 6485 has a clutch plate less in its shuttle clutches and PTO clutch than a 6490, which shouldn't be an issue if used sensibly but does illustrate that even identical looking models do have internal differences commensurate with their power output from the factory.

If ever these clutches wear out, the replacement packs could have the extra plates fitted with no bother.

thought you would know the engine and backend on 6485 and a 6499 are different , 1 a 6.6 and the other the 7.4 and back end a lot heavier

 

[Cowabunga]

thought you would know the engine and backend on 6485 and a 6499 are different , 1 a 6.6 and the other the 7.4 and back end a lot heavier

I didn't say they were the same. What I said was that I would update the 6485 up to the power of a 6499, but I should qualify that by saying that I would only go that far on a Euro2 engine not on a common rail version. That would only take it up to 190 at the shaft, up from the ridiculously low 135hp they were originally sent out with and the 150 shaft hp that they were later tuned to. Less in fact than a standard 6480. Did you know that?

 

[yorkie]

I didn't say they were the same. What I said was that I would update the 6485 up to the power of a 6499, but I should qualify that by saying that I would only go that far on a Euro2 engine not on a common rail version. That would only take it up to 190 at the shaft, up from the ridiculously low 135hp they were originally sent out with and the 150 shaft hp that they were later tuned to. Less in fact than a standard 6480. Did you know that?

both 6485 s 130 pto ,6480 115 and 120 pto , 6485 was a waste of time to heavy for the power it had , when we had 2 of them one you could about stand in front and stop it if wasn't in the dealers in bits

 

[rob h]

Really. We have a t2 6465 it's been dynoed at 133 hp. No chip but we haven't had it from new so it may of had a map.

 

[Cowabunga]

Really. We have a t2 6465 it's been dynoed at 133 hp. No chip but we haven't had it from new so it may of had a map.

Most 6480 stage2 models are around 135 to 140 at the shaft. Later ones around 150.

 

[Tom22890]

There are two more in the range above ours with the same engine and chassis, so it all just depends on the bits inside. I know in the ideal world I should just buy a bigger tractor but that’s not an option especially with how farming has been this year. I what I want to up it by is no more than if it had boost like the newer range have.

 

[Farma Parma]

There are two more in the range above ours with the same engine and chassis, so it all just depends on the bits inside. I know in the ideal world I should just buy a bigger tractor but that’s not an option especially with how farming has been this year. I what I want to up it by is no more than if it had boost like the newer range have.

everyone has there views on here about remapping chipping etc etc
I think you have these options...
Ask someone in the know from Massey & just see what the build spec differences are on the the two models above that tractor which incidentally both have the 7.4lt in.
The Vario unit might be 100% the same but id be checking 100% too see if it was.
Rear Linkage on a 7620 - 7624 will be the same without checking the brochure iam 99% sure on that.
Its slightly diff on a D6 tractor
Ive got a chip on a T3 6480 here & its only used when on heavy PTO work nothing else.
all it does is make it run at near enuff 170hp as it wont if not switched on. Bug in Boost software somewhere.
Massey are so good at Software (Not)

Too ad a 7622 has the 6.6 only if its a Vt its a 7.4 if D6
7624 is 7.4 in either trans
Straight out the 2013 brochure.
all the 7619 to 7626 are 9300kg rear lift regardless of what trans choice