Boohoo
Member
- Location
- Newtownabbey
They had the 1690 to compete with the 7610 and the 1190 to compete with the 698T
One for DB fans
- Thread starter Thomas5060
- Start date
Wellytrack
Member
Nebraska test results below for ford 7000 and DB 1410 as follows:
Ford tested in 1972, DB in 1976
Ford is always the first figure.
Total weight without ballast
6215lbs
7750lbs
Max Hp
83.49 @ 2100rpm
80.88@2300rpm
Power At 540
78.81 @1901 rpm
79.35 @ 2078 rpm
Max Fuel use
74.08hp - 4.631 US Gallons per hour
69.6hp - 4.123 US Gallons per hour
Maximum drawbar power in Hp
66.66 Hp
67.06 Hp
Maximum pull in lbs
8138 lbs
7846 lbs
Max pull in lbs at travel speed
5773 @ 3.7mph
5408@ 3.69mph
Fairer comparison like for like.
Ford tested in 1972, DB in 1976
Ford is always the first figure.
Total weight without ballast
6215lbs
7750lbs
Max Hp
83.49 @ 2100rpm
80.88@2300rpm
Power At 540
78.81 @1901 rpm
79.35 @ 2078 rpm
Max Fuel use
74.08hp - 4.631 US Gallons per hour
69.6hp - 4.123 US Gallons per hour
Maximum drawbar power in Hp
66.66 Hp
67.06 Hp
Maximum pull in lbs
8138 lbs
7846 lbs
Max pull in lbs at travel speed
5773 @ 3.7mph
5408@ 3.69mph
Fairer comparison like for like.
John 1594
Member
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
No, they downrated it and stuck it in the 1490, exact same engine except for a rotary pump
multi power
Member
- Location
- pembrokeshire
As for wheels cracking, all the lugs have been welded on the 1394, mind you they were fine until my brother started driving it
- Location
- Larne, Northern Ireland
Why not keep it at 91hp and let the 1490 have a bit more power and fill gap between it and 1690, it could have been the 1590
John 1594
Member
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
By that time the company was being run by the accountants, not the engineers...a rationalised range was felt to be the simplest option
In the 70s, the other mainstream manufacturers had rationalised their ranges down to one or two main lines, very few offered implements, apart from badge engineered ones
DB on the otherhand offered a vast multitude of options, they built front loaders, diggers, industrial tractors, aircraft tugs, ploughs and anything else you wanted, all in house
something had to give
The 1590 idea was sound in prinicple, but it would have been more expensive to produce than the 1490, and hard to sell as for a few quid more it would be possible to buy a 1690, so it would have been a pointless exercise i suppose
In the 70s, the other mainstream manufacturers had rationalised their ranges down to one or two main lines, very few offered implements, apart from badge engineered ones
DB on the otherhand offered a vast multitude of options, they built front loaders, diggers, industrial tractors, aircraft tugs, ploughs and anything else you wanted, all in house
something had to give
The 1590 idea was sound in prinicple, but it would have been more expensive to produce than the 1490, and hard to sell as for a few quid more it would be possible to buy a 1690, so it would have been a pointless exercise i suppose
Selectamatic
Member
- Location
- North Wales
1410 and 1412's were never what they should have been, The back end was sound enough, the Hydra Shift unit could actually handle more power than the Synchromesh equivalent, which would strip teeth at higher hp under heavy load (They cured this by treating the gears, annealing perhaps?)
The engine's were not as good on them, they were conceived on a tight budget set by accountants.
The 1490 was pulled back a bit, and given a rotary pump, and turned into a good engine by comparison.
Also, costs, there was a need to recoup the 6 cylinder costs, having it stand alone above the 1490 drove the customer toward a 6 cylinder. For the customer, I bet that the difference between a 1490, a 1410 in 90 clothes, and a 1690 would have been too close, and caused problems for customers and dealers.
Despite this, we have a 1410 been with us since 1980, 14000 odd hours on it by now, and the engine is largely untouched, after being a front line tractor for many years. Many years ago we had a 1412 again a front line tractor of the time, part exchanged for the 1690 in 1982.
The likes of the 1410 and the 1690 are often bollocked for not being any good, a Ford is stronger, a Massey is faster, a John Deere is more green, etc etc, but who actually cares? Who has actually used these tractors, further, used these tractors to the limits of their power and torque day in day out for many years? Very few I'd suspect.
Like all other tractors they were machines of their time, designed to be used with implements designed on similar drawing boards, and on the whole they coped with it, as did all other colours, some were better, some were worse and there were Friday afternoon lemons in all colours, but then as now, we managed with what we had, and often the preferred dealer drove the brand, not the other way round.
The engine's were not as good on them, they were conceived on a tight budget set by accountants.
The 1490 was pulled back a bit, and given a rotary pump, and turned into a good engine by comparison.
Also, costs, there was a need to recoup the 6 cylinder costs, having it stand alone above the 1490 drove the customer toward a 6 cylinder. For the customer, I bet that the difference between a 1490, a 1410 in 90 clothes, and a 1690 would have been too close, and caused problems for customers and dealers.
Despite this, we have a 1410 been with us since 1980, 14000 odd hours on it by now, and the engine is largely untouched, after being a front line tractor for many years. Many years ago we had a 1412 again a front line tractor of the time, part exchanged for the 1690 in 1982.
The likes of the 1410 and the 1690 are often bollocked for not being any good, a Ford is stronger, a Massey is faster, a John Deere is more green, etc etc, but who actually cares? Who has actually used these tractors, further, used these tractors to the limits of their power and torque day in day out for many years? Very few I'd suspect.
Like all other tractors they were machines of their time, designed to be used with implements designed on similar drawing boards, and on the whole they coped with it, as did all other colours, some were better, some were worse and there were Friday afternoon lemons in all colours, but then as now, we managed with what we had, and often the preferred dealer drove the brand, not the other way round.
Roy_H
Member
I well remember our neighbour trading his IH 475 for a 1210 ( Having been loyal to IH for many years) When my dad asked the guy who drove it for him how he liked it he said "Its not a patch on the old Inter', doesn't pull as well and not as much power on the PTO"
John 1594
Member
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Grandfather had a new 1212 back in the day..having already got the 990. Dealer bought the 1212 down with a 9 tine bomford superflow on the back. Now this land was heavy, heavier than anything we have now. They finished up with 2 tines left in the frame before the 1210 was getting along at an accepable rate
They still bought it, buy it was bught mainly as a haulage tractor and for top work, the hydrashift proving well suited to hauling 10 ton loads of seed tates and fertiliser off the local railways station in the spring with an old ex army trailer
the 990 was kept, it still did all the ploughing, drilling and potato planting, as it was simply the better tractor for the job
many years later, i needed something bigger than the 990, so foolishly bought a 1210. It never really did much, it had a year with us, did some powerharrowing, trailer work and a bit of baling. Then i spotted a nice 1494 so bought that as well
. Next year a 1390 came up for sale with a loader, so we traded the 1210 in, the wheels and spools were swapped and the 1210 went to ireland on a set of 36" wheels
So for the next 2 years we managed with a 990 for drilling and ploughing, the 1494 did all the getting ready, trailer work, fert and spray work, and the 1390 as a loader
Then i heard the 1594 was coming up for sale, and decided it would save a lot of work if we could powerharrow and drill in one pass, so that was the main reason behind buying it. As a sideline it got hired out for a lot of trailer work every autumn
the 1390 never had impressed me, i toyed with getting a 1394, but figured i wouldnt gain much, a 1494 was what i needed for loader work
in the meantime, i rebuilt a 1490 for a customer, who then ran it for a total of 36 hours work before deciding to retire, i then bought it back off him for bascially what it had cost to rebuild. The loader was removed from the 1390, swapped over and the 13 was sold. Ive now pretty much got what i need, the 1490 may get sold if i ever find another tidy 1494 though
Netherfield
Member
- Location
- West Yorkshire
How could any company afford to have so much money stood idle.
Boohoo
Member
- Location
- Newtownabbey
There are plenty of pictures like that from every era right up to the 94s. I suspect the scene was similar around Basildon, Banner Lane and Doncaster. It's just the way things were done
Selectamatic
Member
- Location
- North Wales
Boohoo
Member
- Location
- Newtownabbey
They don't have grills or exhausts fitted so I assumed there was a supplier problem and they just kept on building incomplete tractors. Of course I could be wrong and those bits were dealer fit.
Netherfield
Member
- Location
- West Yorkshire
No supplier problem, any easily removable part was not fitted, one who farmed at the side of a parking area always had a few lynch pins,Dynamos,air cleaners to sell in the local pub.
As stated 80% during the early 60s were destined for export , try going to a dealer and you would be quoted at least 3 months delivery, mainly I imagine to keep the price up rather than a shortage of actual stock, one tractor that dad bought was one of the last 4 cylinder 880s, had to wait for delivery although we later found out it must have been 8 months old working back from when the last batch went down the production line. So yes in effect those parts were dealer fit,supplied and delivered in a box along with the tractor.
And quite few of those in the picture were 880s 0r 950s,those where the pre cleaner can be seen, the 990 air cleaner was in the front out of sight.
Last edited:
Roy_H
Member
Yeah you had to be a 'man' to steer one if it was fitted with a front loader and no power steering which l think is one of the reasons my family sent a brand new one back to the dealers having been on the farm for less than a week.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
We had a 950 as our main loader tractor on 300 acres with 100 cows and that never had power steering. I drove it regularly from the age of 13 and one of my first jobs was mucking out the deep litter cow yard which 2 years muck in it. Standing on on the tractor I was level with the top of the muck. I would never have considered myself a man.
John 1594
Member
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Id date that picture around late 1962/early 63
In the foreground you have series 2 990s, these would have had the six stud front wheels, but the batterys still located under the seat
Anything with an air cleaner protruding from the bonnet is likely to be an 880, the first 880s had the 950 non cross flow engine, the one with the extended pre cleaner was probably for export
The 3 cylinder 880 didnt have the air cleaner out the side of the bonnet, so this picture must pre date its introduction, which was 63/64
multi power
Member
- Location
- pembrokeshire
That's about the age I was when I started doing loader work with a mf 35 , no power steering of course and I too managed fine,
Netherfield
Member
- Location
- West Yorkshire
You may be right on the date, but the battery cables can be seen hanging out of the front of the bonnet on the 990s. We had a 990 CWJ205B with the battery in the front which would be 1964 reg.
Last edited:
John 1594
Member
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Didnt spot that. In that case then you are right, they would be series 3 990s with the later front axle?