New Holland Tm

[Wazmos]

Thinking about upgrading our loader tractor later this year, can someone explain tm’s to me.
Different transmissions? Is a classic four gears and dual power? Etc

At what point do they go up in size? is a tm 155 wider, longer etc than a 125?
Do they make good loader tractors or are they a little clumsy?
Thanks

 

[Nearly]

@Drillman

 

[Drillman]

Classic is no clutchless splitter. Dual power is a single split.

Range command is 3 ranges 6 powershifts per range and clutchless range change.

Power command is 18 gears all clutchless.

Range and power commands only have 6 reverse gears matching B range forwards. There not the quickest at going backwards for long distances.

Early models up to 2002 with range commands were very reliable 2002-2005 there was a bad batch of synchros which failed a lot at lowing hours. Usually replaced with the earlier type.

TM 115,125,135,150,165 were early versions all actually 10hp less than bonnet figure apart from the TM165 which was 160hp.

These were replaced in 2002 by TM120,130,140,155 these are the HP the bonnet number says.

Many TMs have had the spanner remap and will be pushing a lot more than standard figures. Engines are well regarded although can drop valves of over revved or at 10000hrs plus.

All the above tractors are the same physical size.

TM115,120,125,130 have I think a 8 or 8.5 ton chassis rating and one assistor ram.


TM135,140, with twin assistor rams have 9 ton chassis rating

TM150,155,165 have 10 ton chassis rating as they have bigger stronger front axle.

Rear lift capacity is good across the range with TM135 and larger models equipped with twin assist cylinders being well capable of lifting very heavy kit. 6 furrow plough or similar.

Tractors with front suspension have a marginally longer wheelbase than non suspended counterparts. As for the supersteer versions I have no idea.

All range and power command versions have sprung cabs. By modern standards it’s not the best but the difference over non suspended is noticeable and worth having. General cab ergonomics are very good. With controls falling nicely to hand and the shuttle having a nice action to it.

Also in 2002 the TM175/190 were also launched. Physically bigger and early ones had major reliability issues. Avoid unless you know exactly what to check and look out for.

Personally I would aim for TM135-155 with range command gearbox as there the best. Smart ones will hold there value and treated with respect will serve you well.

 

[Nearly]

That's the kind of reply that @Spud would be proud of.

 

[Wazmos]

That’s answered everything I needed to know.
Thanks drillman.

 

[dusty]

Only thing I would add is the classic does not have a clutchless shuttle so maybe not ideal for loader work and the range command has a fair delay in the shuttle. We’ve got a couple of dual Commands there good hardy tractors

 

[Boohoo]

I wouldn't recommend range command for loader work, reverse is too slow and sitting with your foot on the clutch starves the box of oil. I don't know if the same applies to power command. If your heart is set on a TM I'd look for a dual command but make sure it has ccls hydraulics, apparently some didn't.

 

[oil barron]

Fair enough points. But I’ve never seen the starving oil part noticeable. You used to really feel it on the TS115. On the plus side very stable with the big back end.

I wouldn't recommend range command for loader work, reverse is too slow and sitting with your foot on the clutch starves the box of oil. I don't know if the same applies to power command. If your heart is set on a TM I'd look for a dual command but make sure it has ccls hydraulics, apparently some didn't.

 

[newholland]

What a great TM summary @Drillman

Tm is excellent loader tractor and can lift 2tons with a decent size / make of loader.... we use jcb headstock with jcb telehandler size attachments no problem + hydraulic pins make life easier. Good view of loader as TM has a high up driver seating position.
Have never ever had an issue with range command no oil as mentioned previously? - works fine for us?
Its quite nice to put the gear buttons in loader joystick and throw original gear handle away
Go and buy a tidy TM and then fit a new loader yourself maybe?

 

[rob1]

we sold our tm 120 range command in dec it had 9000 hours on it and had been out main loader tractor, in all that time it only had one steering ram and the steering surge thingy under tha cab, total cost under £1000 and sold it for two thirds of what I paid new, they are brilliant loader tractor, we only sold it because we wanted a smaller one to get in some really tight horse yards we go to so bought a T5 120 which is good but not quite so stable with big loads on the front but does pull well. As has been said the reverse can be a bit slow if you have a long way to go backwards but that is a minor issue

 

[Boohoo]

View attachment 805204

Fair enough points. But I’ve never seen the starving oil part noticeable. You used to really feel it on the TS115. On the plus side very stable with the big back end.

You don't notice anything but there's something internal that loses oil flow. Possibly clutch packs? I used to work for someone who had 140s and 155s plus there were a few 8360s before them, all range command and the 155 with the loader has needed more gearbox repairs than the rest put together. Dealer says using the loader with your foot on the clutch causes the problem. Having said that the repairs haven't been extreme considering the work that has been done in 15000 hours

 

[Drillman]

You don't notice anything but there's something internal that loses oil flow. Possibly clutch packs? I used to work for someone who had 140s and 155s plus there were a few 8360s before them, all range command and the 155 with the loader has needed more gearbox repairs than the rest put together. Dealer says using the loader with your foot on the clutch causes the problem. Having said that the repairs haven't been extreme considering the work that has been done in 15000 hours

Only person I can think of with a TM type tractor with a loader is @Cowabunga who I believe runs a 8360 (predecessor to the TM150 but very similar) with a loader on it.

Maybe he could comment on his experience of the outfit?

 

[Kildare]

Another thumbs up for tm 150

 

[Cowabunga]

60 series and TM make excellent loader tractors. Mine is approaching 8000 hours now and the only transmission issues so far have been a bent synchro selector fork and the flywheel damper, both changed on the same workshop job at between 6500 and 7000 hours.
At around 5000 hours the seals went on the rear linkage top lift shaft and the bearings were changed at the same time. A few weeks ago both rear lift arms decided to partially strip their adjusting threads and both sides were completely changed for new,

For loader work they do need a matching heavy duty wide beam boom to clear the wide bonnet. This has no effect on the excellent steering lock. The inner anchor points of the steering rams are the main front axle wear points [assuming regular greasing], because the have no bushing and wear the axle casting directly. Any engineer can sort that out. All other joints on mine are original and in good condition.

My tractor is used exclusively on the loader and rear buck rake, clamping some 2500 tons only these days, but once used to clamp nearer 15000 tons annually. I have never found the Range Command six rear gears limiting. Never heard of any oil issue with it until tonight, although I suspect that has more to do with poor driver technique such as excessive slipping of the clutch. I have, for instance, found that when hauling silage up a steep road where first or second gear high ratio only just keeps you going, that if the tractor is balked by traffic and has to restart, that third or fourth medium range or below is needed to restart. An inexperienced driver tends to panic and try to restart in high. This is not good for the clutch pack!
The torque on the transmission mine is put through on such work and especially buck raking, keeping up with a Jaguar 840, is amazing, and a testament to the strength and durability of the design. The only point that could be improved is the forward reverse shuttle, which is synchronised rather than a proper power shuttle. It works well enough but a proper full hydraulic shuttle without synchronisers would potentially be less prone to wear over time.

I should mention that this series is fitted with either of two strengths of front axle. From 8360 and TM155 up, they have the heavy duty axle front and back, which I would recommend for long term loader work. Mine is fitted with a two ton counterweight most of the time which eases the load on the front somewhat and puts more on the simpler heavier back axle.