One for DB fans

[7610 super q]

What HP was the 1290 ?
Neighbour had a 1290, or 1294, 4wd, with a Case front loader on it. I can remember it pulling 10 T loads of muck/ silage up some very steep hills....slowly.....but it managed it.

 

[John 1594]

What HP was the 1290 ?
Neighbour had a 1290, or 1294, 4wd, with a Case front loader on it. I can remember it pulling 10 T loads of muck/ silage up some very steep hills....slowly.....but it managed it.

Did well then, because all a 1290 was was a 990 with a fancy cab, so 58hp

1390 was a glorified 996. Never did like the 13s, had one myself, not as nice to drive as the 990, nowhere near as able as the 1490 or 1494

wasnt sorry to see back of it tbh. One of the worse tractors ive owned. Also had a 1210, that wasnt much better, i always took the 990 given the choice, smoother, quieter, more manouvarble and better grip than the 1210

 

[cfr1964]

What HP was the 1290 ?
Neighbour had a 1290, or 1294, 4wd, with a Case front loader on it. I can remember it pulling 10 T loads of muck/ silage up some very steep hills....slowly.....but it managed it.

Downhill might have been interesting with drum brakes

 

[Selectamatic]

Did well then, because all a 1290 was was a 990 with a fancy cab, so 58hp

1390 was a glorified 996. Never did like the 13s, had one myself, not as nice to drive as the 990, nowhere near as able as the 1490 or 1494

wasnt sorry to see back of it tbh. One of the worse tractors ive owned. Also had a 1210, that wasnt much better, i always took the 990 given the choice, smoother, quieter, more manouvarble and better grip than the 1210

996's 1294's 1390's etc are a bit of a favourite here, probably one of the best of their time, light, nimble, but heavy enough to do a real actual job.

 

[Netherfield]

1212 was the first DB to have a spool as standard fitment, I gave £13,000 for a 1690 4WD in 1984 A819PUM included 2 spools as standard, ARM pickup hitch, Radiator Guard.

1490 2WD WCX94X 1982 came with 2 spools and DB PUH two piece lower window, 1490 DHD331Y same spec except ARM hitch and now had one piece lower window, not one of the 90's came with an assist ram.

Also the later 1490 had newer style rear wheels, because the early models had been tearing the fixings off the wheel rim, the earlier tractor had the wheels replaced under warranty, after a lot of arguing, all they wanted to do was a lot of welding on the old wheels, If I remember it correctly this was only on 16.9 x 34s and the 13.6 x 38s did not have problems. And I also think now that one spool was standard but I specified two on both 14s.

 

[Boohoo]

996's 1294's 1390's etc are a bit of a favourite here, probably one of the best of their time, light, nimble, but heavy enough to do a real actual job.

The 996 is definitely a favourite with us, never felt the same way about the 90s or 94s I've driven.

 

[Selectamatic]

1212 was the first DB to have a spool as standard fitment, I gave £13,000 for a 1690 4WD in 1984 A819PUM included 2 spools as standard, ARM pickup hitch, Radiator Guard.

1490 2WD WCX94X 1982 came with 2 spools and DB PUH two piece lower window, 1490 DHD331Y same spec except ARM hitch and now had one piece lower window, not one of the 90's came with an assist ram.

Also the later 1490 had newer style rear wheels, because the early models had been tearing the fixings off the wheel rim, the earlier tractor had the wheels replaced under warranty, after a lot of arguing, all they wanted to do was a lot of welding on the old wheels, If I remember it correctly this was only on 16.9 x 34s and the 13.6 x 38s did not have problems. And I also think now that one spool was standard but I specified two on both 14s.

16.9/38's had the cracking problem too, our old 1690 lugs were welded, we have welded our 1410's 16.9/34 lugs too.

We blamed it on sideways movements on the arms, heavy stuff like the plough crashing to one side when falling into a furrow for example...

 

[John 1594]

996's 1294's 1390's etc are a bit of a favourite here, probably one of the best of their time, light, nimble, but heavy enough to do a real actual job.

We did try the 1390 on heavy draft work, i couldnt see any gain from it in terms of grip compared to the 990, about the only thing better was it had a cab

it wasnt great for loader work either, badly balanced and light on the back, the front axle took a hammering, broke the king pins on occasions too

after much searching, a good 1490 was found and the loader fitted to that, the difference was unbelievable when we first tried it, actually being able to fill the bucket and turn the steering wheel with one hand was a revelation compared to the 1390

 

[Selectamatic]

We did try the 1390 on heavy draft work, i couldnt see any gain from it in terms of grip compared to the 990, about the only thing better was it had a cab

it wasnt great for loader work either, badly balanced and light on the back, the front axle took a hammering, broke the king pins on occasions too

after much searching, a good 1490 was found and the loader fitted to that, the difference was unbelievable when we first tried it, actually being able to fill the bucket and turn the steering wheel with one hand was a revelation compared to the 1390

Fair enough, but for harrowing, sowing, small baling, rolling, general tatting about those little tractors take some beating. I suppose the 1490 is no physically bigger though, so it's not the end of the world...

 

[John 1594]

1490 just has that bit more clearance and weight, for loader work it runs rings round a 13

Strange really, i always considered the 1210 to be a clumbsy great old thing, it didnt lack power by any means, just grip when things got wet, it certainly wasnt suited to drilling like the 990 was

yet the 1494 has the same wheelbase and feels a lot more nimble. I can only put it down to the better power steering and the seating position being further forwards compared to the 1210

 

[Thomas5060]

Why did DB never bring out a 4cyl turbo 100hp tractor? Everyone else was so why didn't DB?

 

[Wellytrack]

Why did DB never bring out a 4cyl turbo 100hp tractor? Everyone else was so why didn't DB?

 

[Thomas5060]

View attachment 458308

And on that bombshell, goodnight.

 

[John 1594]

Why did DB never bring out a 4cyl turbo 100hp tractor? Everyone else was so why didn't DB?

They did, it was called a 1410, that developed 91hp

but, as was the custom of the time, any tractor that was fitted with a hydrashift gearbox usually had the pump adusted up to take account of the slightly higher drivetrain losses that the hydrashift had compared to the syncrho. This was done at the factory while the engines were on test

so it was possible to have a 1412 that was near on 100hp

bear in mind the 14 range came out in 74, and they had been testing turbocharged engines as far back as 67/68, before ford even thought of the 7000

MF and IH were also a while bringing out 4 cylinder turbocharged engines on thier smaller ranges

 

[Thomas5060]

They did, it was called a 1410, that developed 91hp

but, as was the custom of the time, any tractor that was fitted with a hydrashift gearbox usually had the pump adusted up to take account of the slightly higher drivetrain losses that the hydrashift had compared to the syncrho. This was done at the factory while the engines were on test

so it was possible to have a 1412 that was near on 100hp

bear in mind the 14 range came out in 74, and they had been testing turbocharged engines as far back as 67/68, before ford even thought of the 7000

MF and IH were also a while bringing out 4 cylinder turbocharged engines on thier smaller ranges

Why did they do away with the 4cyl turbo when they brought out the 90 series? Too much power for backend or could engine not stick it?

 

[John 1594]

Of course, i could also ask why Ford chose to discontinue thier selectospeed gearbox in favour of a single speed splitter, when it was clear the market was crying out for innovation and a choice of more than 1 change on the move speed. Deere were experimenting with powershifts in the early 60s as soon as they bought out the multi cylinder range to replace the old 2 cylinders, DB had been experimenting with a 4 speed auto gearbox as early as 1962

Ford spent vast amounts developing selectospeed, and it still turned out to be such a white elephant that most selectospeed tractors had thier gearboxes swapped for the 8 speed constant mesh version

maybe it was just badly designed

 

[Thomas5060]

Of course, i could also ask why Ford chose to discontinue thier selectospeed gearbox in favour of a single speed splitter, when it was clear the market was crying out for innovation and a choice of more than 1 change on the move speed. Deere were experimenting with powershifts in the early 60s as soon as they bought out the multi cylinder range to replace the old 2 cylinders, DB had been experimenting with a 4 speed auto gearbox as early as 1962

Ford spent vast amounts developing selectospeed, and it still turned out to be such a white elephant that most selectospeed tractors had thier gearboxes swapped for the 8 speed constant mesh version

maybe it was just badly designed

Didn't mention Ford, just asked why they stopped producing the 4cyl turbo tractor? Maybe @Selectamatic could answer?

 

[cfr1964]

Why did they do away with the 4cyl turbo when they brought out the 90 series? Too much power for backend or could engine not stick it?

 

[Boohoo]

Didn't mention Ford, just asked why they stopped producing the 4cyl turbo tractor? Maybe @Selectamatic could answer?

The experts can correct me if I'm wrong but here's my explanation.
The 4 cylinder turbos lived on in the 1490 and the 13/1494 although derated from the power levels they had in the 1410/12. The 1410/12 didn't have a great reputation for reliability which I think was traced back to crankshafts from 1 supplier that weren't up to spec. David Brown didn't have the development budget of the likes of Ford or MF so couldn't afford to develop another 4 cylinder turbo that would be reliable at 100hp so chose to use a 6 cylinder in their 100hp class tractor. If the budget had been bigger and the banks had played ball they could've gone on to great things. The original Maxxum was basically a Meltham design and like all their designs was ahead of its time. They had some great visionary engineers who weren't afraid to experiment but unfortunately had a shoestring budget.

 

[Thomas5060]

The experts can correct me if I'm wrong but here's my explanation.
The 4 cylinder turbos lived on in the 1490 and the 13/1494 although derated from the power levels they had in the 1410/12. The 1410/12 didn't have a great reputation for reliability which I think was traced back to crankshafts from 1 supplier that weren't up to spec. David Brown didn't have the development budget of the likes of Ford or MF so couldn't afford to develop another 4 cylinder turbo that would be reliable at 100hp so chose to use a 6 cylinder in their 100hp class tractor. If the budget had been bigger and the banks had played ball they could've gone on to great things. The original Maxxum was basically a Meltham design and like all their designs was ahead of its time. They had some great visionary engineers who weren't afraid to experiment but unfortunately had a shoestring budget.

Thanks, had always wondered why they didn't have a tractor to match the 7610,698T etc