John Deere

jd-baz

Well-Known Member
Sorry mis read first sentence i thought it said engines not ranges,
Lots of other changes so


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

tinman

Very Senior Member
100's were 7.6
10's were 8.1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
id assume you have drove both.
so ill ask out of interest, was there a noticeable difference in the power of the two or were they fairly similar.
 

johndeere6920s

Well-Known Member
id assume you have drove both.
so ill ask out of interest, was there a noticeable difference in the power of the two or were they fairly similar.
Be interested to know that too although I'd say with the bigger one you have alot more room to give here more ponies

Sent from my D2203 using Tapatalk
 

tinman

Very Senior Member
Be interested to know that too although I'd say with the bigger one you have alot more room to give here more ponies

Sent from my D2203 using Tapatalk
its just a 1/2 ltr tho so i was wondering if they had done something different on the engine that left them much the same, or was there a big difference.
the 10's would be a better spec'd tractor but just from a power point of view.
 

johndeere6920s

Well-Known Member
its just a 1/2 ltr tho so i was wondering if they had done something different on the engine that left them much the same, or was there a big difference.
the 10's would be a better spec'd tractor but just from a power point of view.
The shuttle on the left I suppose would be a big thing but still it's strange that the 10s have such a following compared to the 000
The price reflects it too.
Same with smaller models

Sent from my D2203 using Tapatalk
 

jd-baz

Well-Known Member
id assume you have drove both.
so ill ask out of interest, was there a noticeable difference in the power of the two or were they fairly similar.


Not a big noticeable difference but a difference, theres no replacement for displacement
You say only a half litre, drive a 2.5 hilux and a 3.0,always a differ



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Dratted

Well-Known Member
Not a big noticeable difference but a difference, theres no replacement for displacement
You say only a half litre, drive a 2.5 hilux and a 3.0,always a differ



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Completely depends on the engine, the old 2.5 hilux vs old 2.5 ranger, the 2.5 in the ranger would have wiped the floor with the hilux.

The 5.9 cummins would whip the arse of a JD 5.9 or 6.8L.
 

diesel power

Well-Known Member
Completely depends on the engine, the old 2.5 hilux vs old 2.5 ranger, the 2.5 in the ranger would have wiped the floor with the hilux.

The 5.9 cummins would whip the arse of a JD 5.9 or 6.8L.

The 5.9 Cummins is nearly a legendary engine now though. I doubt there's another even remotely close to it.
 

tinman

Very Senior Member
Not a big noticeable difference but a difference, theres no replacement for displacement
You say only a half litre, drive a 2.5 hilux and a 3.0,always a differ



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
of course there will be a difference there but they need every cc they can get down in them figures.
but when your up on 8 ltrs a half wouldnt be missed as much.
 

Arthur

Well-Known Member
of course there will be a difference there but they need every cc they can get down in them figures.
but when your up on 8 ltrs a half wouldnt be missed as much.

20% increase in capacity in the case of the Hi-lux, stick a 20% increase on a 7.5 litre and it becomes a 9 litre.
 

jd-baz

Well-Known Member
of course there will be a difference there but they need every cc they can get down in them figures.
but when your up on 8 ltrs a half wouldnt be missed as much.



20% increase in capacity in the case of the Hi-lux, stick a 20% increase on a 7.5 litre and it becomes a 9 litre.


Yes both right on both accounts but ill assure you theres a difference,the very early 8000 series also came with the 7.6 and then changed to the 8.1,and often heard there was a nice differ in the torque in the higher hp models.

Even take a 6000/6010 series deere and a powerstar tm,only .7 of a litre of a differ but a night and day differ in torque.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

jcb411abuser

Well-Known Member
Yes both right on both accounts but ill assure you theres a difference,the very early 8000 series also came with the 7.6 and then changed to the 8.1,and often heard there was a nice differ in the torque in the higher hp models.

Even take a 6000/6010 series deere and a powerstar tm,only .7 of a litre of a differ but a night and day differ in torque.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i have to disagree, the jd has alot more torque than the new holland. we got our 68 dynoed at a NH dealer put out nearly 1300lbs max torque the mechanics couldn't believe it as they couldn't get over 1000 out of the NH.

not much to separate the 7.6 or 8.1 other than getting to say you have the 8.1:thumbup:
 

jd-baz

Well-Known Member
i have to disagree, the jd has alot more torque than the new holland. we got our 68 dynoed at a NH dealer put out nearly 1300lbs max torque the mechanics couldn't believe it as they couldn't get over 1000 out of the NH.



not much to separate the 7.6 or 8.1 other than getting to say you have the 8.1:thumbup:


What model 68 have you?
That may be your opinion on the 8.1,but when youve used both you may see,



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

johndeere6920s

Well-Known Member
6500 perhaps at a push.

Looks like a lot of work gone into that and any of them for sale at the moment are two wheels in Hammond Lane.
Ours was as good as that one if not better as the cab was done up too.
Made 4500

Sent from my D2203 using Tapatalk
 
Top