Mccormick tractors.

johndeere6920s

johndeere6920s

Well-Known Member
Does anyone know much about the mtx range of them? Are they a carbon copy of the mx case? I think they were good but kicked up massively after 10k hours?
 
johndeere6920s said:
Does anyone know much about the mtx range of them? Are they a carbon copy of the mx case? I think they were good but kicked up massively after 10k hours?
Click to expand...

Depends what age of one you are after. Early ones had a Perkins engine instead of the Cummins in the MX.
 
Seem to be a poor seller s/h from what I know.
Have they the same transmission as the mx series?
 
Didn't they have a similar gear box to a power quad Deere? I heard from several people that they used to stick/jam?
 
I heard it is the brakes in them that are astromomical to fix.
They are still a popular tractor down in kerry with alot of them high houred at this stage ,i know a mechanic who knows them inside out and he considers them under rated
 
I thought the MX were a horrible tractor to drive when they were relatively new, I don't know what I'd make of them now. Transmission was awful, controls were awful, cab was small, bonnet was big, big and awkward with poor visibility, even worse than a Valmet :eek3:
 
i got buried ,sunk to the back axle in a spring and chanced a local mx110 with bald tyres for a pull out .I have never seen such animal of a tractor to pull mighty impressed ,i would safely say it would shlt a 110-90 .The mccormick mc range were a copy of the mx ,a good share of both ranges sold down here by buckleys
 
Green Grass said:
i got buried ,sunk to the back axle in a spring and chanced a local mx110 with bald tyres for a pull out .I have never seen such animal of a tractor to pull mighty impressed ,i would safely say it would shlt a 110-90 .The mccormick mc range were a copy of the mx ,a good share of both ranges sold down here by buckleys
Click to expand...
I've heard that about them there suppose to be unbelievable to pull
 
They have a great name for pulling.
Seen them do well at pulling competitions too.
I think the Cummins engine is a great slogger.
The 51 series ie 5140s etc were well liked for it too.
Was the mx series just a fancier looking version of the 51 series?
 
They had their quirks just like any tractor.

Good few have the Carraro front axle suspension which is well regarded once looked after.

Brakes were one area they needed attention. But think there was a fix in place for the crown and pinion issues in the MX which was a problem on tractors doing a lot of road work.

The cheap looking red and tacky decals just made them look a bit budget end compared to the Case IH livery.

Speed Sequencer in the bigger ones was a bit slow. A bit like the grumpy Italian living in the box wandered off to find the next cog before engaging it with a slap of a sledge
 
We actually looked at an mx years ago and we're turned off it as we heard a horror story but I can't remember I think it was something to do with damper plates and clutch packs at certain hours
 
Often did work on a case mx 135. Was good at pulling on hills and found traction good in it. Bonnet seemed huge compared to the deutz or even the case cs. Was not a fan of the cab lay out and was really not a fan of the gearbox. Ya get used to it but I found it clunky
 
I must not be fussy as I never found a Case MX or McCormick MTX cab small.

Profi mentioned the suspension, important to stress the need for grease there as something like 20 grease nipples plus on it alone....

I'd be a bit wary of anything bigger than a 140 or 150. Case IH had strengthened various bits of the backend for the 150/170 but unsure whether McCormick used these or not.

They represent great value for money though in my book. The Perkins engine probably turned off true Case IH men.
 
Never knew the MC got the silver treatment. Always thought it was just the CX105 and the MTX 150.

https://www.donedeal.ie/tractors-for-sale/2007-mccormick-mc115-ans-quicke-q55-loader/21067051

NjljOThlNzA5NTkzZmQ5M2RjMDY3ODBiMjJkOWE0NTAEPxYNEqZ3563csACk7HlRaHR0cDovL3MzLWV1LXdlc3QtMS5hbWF6b25hd3MuY29tL2RvbmVkZWFsLmllLXBob3Rvcy9waG90b18xMTg1NDU5Njh8fHw2MDB4NjAwfHx8fHx8fHw=.jpeg
 
6600 said:
A red version local to here did savage hours with little trouble.
Click to expand...

Was that the one that was traded in last year?

Drove one once and was I'm impressed, heavy backend from an MX but short wheelbase and decent cab.
 
I saw a new 6610 Deere get stuck with a 14 nc dump trailer back in 01. Unhitched the trailer and drove the Deere out of the hole.neighbour had a new new mx 110 at the time,hitched up the dump trailer and after a few things out she came.unbelievable traction.the mx was a good bit cheaper to buy at the time and were a popular tractor for drawing silage around here.
 
monsterrott said:
I saw a new 6610 Deere get stuck with a 14 nc dump trailer back in 01. Unhitched the trailer and drove the Deere out of the hole.neighbour had a new new mx 110 at the time,hitched up the dump trailer and after a few things out she came.unbelievable traction.the mx was a good bit cheaper to buy at the time and were a popular tractor for drawing silage around here.
Click to expand...
I've seen our 6800 out pull nearly any tractor of similar size. Tm 140, McCormick 150, I'd have put her ahead of a deutz 130 as well but didn't see the Deere and deutz at silage or working ground next to each other on the same implement.
Though a lot has to do with tyres and pressures, ballast and then the driver. The 6800 seemed to have an immense front diff, worked really well always could see both wheels snagging if she was finding grip up a hill, or up the silage pit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top