The older masseys

MeathMassey said:
No but they were simple and the cabs on the 300, 3000 and 600 series were notorious for rusting. The steering wasn't all that bad either if you held onto the wheel the right way so you wouldn't break your finger whenever the front wheel would hit a stone or hole.
Click to expand...

There was a lad near here with a 165. The steering was gone in it for near twenty year. You could meet him on the left hand side the right hand side or the middle of the road. Hed be spinning the wheel trying to get it back. He was like a lad canoeing in a storm
 
The 178 gave a lot of clutch trouble, the power steering was troublesome as well and the hydraulics were slow. My father had two of them back in the seventies mainly at tillage work. Had a Ford 5000 as well and it was considered a much better tractor all round.
 
Barrowsider said:
IMO any tractor with a dry clutch can never make it onto the list of best tractors ever built.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree, every tractor has to be judged for it's era.
Fordson 9N's, Fergy 20's, 135, 165, Ford 5000's, 7000's etc, sold like hot cakes because they were so far ahead of what had gone before.
As for the MF 100 series, I have never driven a better sub 50hp tractor than the 135 and that is why so many of them are still going.
 
Mike said:
Poor/noisy cabs though, and the steering wasnt great either.
Click to expand...
Poor steering,poor t
gone said:
I couldn't agree, every tractor has to be judged for it's era.
Fordson 9N's, Fergy 20's, 135, 165, Ford 5000's, 7000's etc, sold like hot cakes because they were so far ahead of what had gone before.
As for the MF 100 series, I have never driven a better sub 50hp tractor than the 135 and that is why so many of them are still going.
Click to expand...
The ford 3600 is a better tractor in a lot of respects. A underrated maaachine!
 
100 series were great tractors in their time, having said that a 35 would do most things a 135 was capable of, IH kinda changed the playing field with the 74 series the guts of which stayed through the 85 series and further.
 
ahhh the age i live in where i never suffered with tractors with no power steering, 2wd, sub 50hp machines where double clutching was the norm
 
If you expand the list over enough headings, you'll eventually come to the conclusion the 135 was the greatest ever made imo.

Firstly, it was the probably the best tractor of its era. Best selling tractor that ever was. There's plenty of them still going, which is testament to the fact that even though their era has passed, they are still capable of doing a bit of work. They were very capable for the power output. Ultra Reliable, better power to weight ratio and engines than Ford and Nuffield offerings, bomb proof hydraulics unlike IH. Better quality materials were used in the panels and water hoses than Zetor. Less issues with brakes than the larger 100 series models, (dry braked ones that is)

Where they shone over a 35 was the direct injection head. Easier started on a frosty morning, back in the days when servicing and maintenance weren't top priority. Ran a bit sweeter, few horsepower more, and the dual clutch too, although many 35x were live drive.

You'll always hear of lads had bad experiences with most other tractors. Ford's with porous blocks, IH with hydraulic issues etc. I've yet to hear of anyone to ever say they had a bad 135
 
Kieran97 said:
If you expand the list over enough headings, you'll eventually come to the conclusion the 135 was the greatest ever made imo.

Firstly, it was the probably the best tractor of its era. Best selling tractor that ever was. There's plenty of them still going, which is testament to the fact that even though their era has passed, they are still capable of doing a bit of work. They were very capable for the power output. Ultra Reliable, better power to weight ratio and engines than Ford and Nuffield offerings, bomb proof hydraulics unlike IH. Better quality materials were used in the panels and water hoses than Zetor. Less issues with brakes than the larger 100 series models, (dry braked ones that is)

Where they shone over a 35 was the direct injection head. Easier started on a frosty morning, back in the days when servicing and maintenance weren't top priority. Ran a bit sweeter, few horsepower more, and the dual clutch too, although many 35x were live drive.

You'll always hear of lads had bad experiences with most other tractors. Ford's with porous blocks, IH with hydraulic issues etc. I've yet to hear of anyone to ever say they had a bad 135
Click to expand...
We had a 135 and we worked it to near death with dual wheels drawing beet and sold it to the bogs with over 7k hours It was sold .mostly because it was not able to stop eight tonne trailers .
 
Bog Man said:
We had a 135 and we worked it to near death with dual wheels drawing beet and sold it to the bogs with over 7k hours It was sold .mostly because it was not able to stop eight tonne trailers .
Click to expand...
Bit like a Hino 336 so, when it got the load moving the next issue was how to stop it..
 
Barrowsider said:
IMO any tractor with a dry clutch can never make it onto the list of best tractors ever built.
Click to expand...
Oh Jesus I can't stand wet clutches. I sure you nearly have to be a trained mechanic to service them. Dry clutch is dead simple and I do find a hell of a lot more accurate.
 
Kieran97 said:
If you expand the list over enough headings, you'll eventually come to the conclusion the 135 was the greatest ever made imo.

Firstly, it was the probably the best tractor of its era. Best selling tractor that ever was. There's plenty of them still going, which is testament to the fact that even though their era has passed, they are still capable of doing a bit of work. They were very capable for the power output. Ultra Reliable, better power to weight ratio and engines than Ford and Nuffield offerings, bomb proof hydraulics unlike IH. Better quality materials were used in the panels and water hoses than Zetor. Less issues with brakes than the larger 100 series models, (dry braked ones that is)

Where they shone over a 35 was the direct injection head. Easier started on a frosty morning, back in the days when servicing and maintenance weren't top priority. Ran a bit sweeter, few horsepower more, and the dual clutch too, although many 35x were live drive.

You'll always hear of lads had bad experiences with most other tractors. Ford's with porous blocks, IH with hydraulic issues etc. I've yet to hear of anyone to ever say they had a bad 135
Click to expand...
Deffenitely agree. I've got a 135 with 10000+ hours and it still starts rain hail or shine first time every time with the turn of the key. You can't kill a 135. I've even had people who know nothing about tractors say Jesus that's a shocking great wee tractor. 135 is the pinnacle of what tractors should be.
 
Mid cork said:
The 178 gave a lot of clutch trouble, the power steering was troublesome as well and the hydraulics were slow. My father had two of them back in the seventies mainly at tillage work. Had a Ford 5000 as well and it was considered a much better tractor all round.
Click to expand...
Yeah a lot of lads near me had them and got rid of them or put a 165 round axle into them. Heard about a lot of problems with the clutches and trust bearings in them.
 
Mf240 said:
There was a lad near here with a 165. The steering was gone in it for near twenty year. You could meet him on the left hand side the right hand side or the middle of the road. Hed be spinning the wheel trying to get it back. He was like a lad canoeing in a storm
Click to expand...
Jesus, sounds familiar. Had an ould lad in his 80s near me who had a 240 which he drove everywhere with the bearings in the steering Colume being completely destroyed to the point where I couldn't even steer the tractor let alone an 86 year old man. It's has craic to see how some ould fellas keep their yolks going.
 
Mike said:
The 300 series wasnt bad for rusting, the 3000 wasnt crazy bad either, the 600 series was poor alright, but even with many rust holes, it was still a far nicer place to spend a day than a 100 series, and the seat wasnt bolted directly to the backend
Click to expand...
Oh now. I worked a 3095 for a few years that me uncle had which was immaculate when first bought but after 4 years the doors and cab started to rot after being left in the rain, had a similar experience with the 399 and a landinie 8550 as well. The old 100 series weren't too bad with the flexi cab and deluxe seat or the c&g cabs with a good suspension seat.
 
Mid cork said:
The 178 gave a lot of clutch trouble, the power steering was troublesome as well and the hydraulics were slow. My father had two of them back in the seventies mainly at tillage work. Had a Ford 5000 as well and it was considered a much better tractor all round.
Click to expand...
Snap
We also got a 178 mid seventies and it was the only tractor l remember getting the road within 12 months of arriving here.
Nothing but bother.
Normally my dad would keep tractors for years and years .
Like yours it was replaced by a 5000 which only left the farm a few years back.
 
MeathMassey said:
Oh now. I worked a 3095 for a few years that me uncle had which was immaculate when first bought but after 4 years the doors and cab started to rot after being left in the rain, had a similar experience with the 399 and a landinie 8550 as well. The old 100 series weren't too bad with the flexi cab and deluxe seat or the c&g cabs with a good suspension seat.
Click to expand...
You are forgetting that the cabs rotted off most 100 series, hence C & G etc
I dont think I ever ever heard of a 300 series needing a replacement cab, the bottoms of the doors was the only weak point
 
gone said:
The 3600 wasn't introduced till very near the end of the 135, it also was a lot heavier on diesel and for my money, not as sweat an engine or lift, but doctors differ, it also has a dry clutch.
Click to expand...
Jesus you have to be a Cavan man to note any difference in diesel! But yes I suppose the 3000 was the direct comparison of the day and to be fair the 135 is queen Bee.
 
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the gearbox of them 100 series Masssey's, particularly from the 165 up.
They were dog rough. Our "big' tractor was a square axle 165 . It's gone this 30 years and I can still remember the grating of gears. Ignorant hoor of a yoke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top