Tractor   
 Parts
We have the parts you need to repair your tractor.  Click Here or call 800-853-2651
Yesterday's Tractors

   Allis Chalmers Case Cockshutt Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   H. Ferguson John Deere Massey Minn. Moline Oliver All The Rest

Marketplace
Tractor Manuals
Tractor Parts
Classified Ads
Photo Ads

Shop for Parts:

Community
Discussion Forums
Project Journal
Tractor Town
Your Stories
Show & Pull Guide
Events Calendar
Hauling Schedule

Galleries
Tractor Photos
Implement Photos
Vintage Photos
Help Identify
Parts & Pieces
Stuck & Troubled
Vintage Ads
Community Album
Photo Ad Archives

Research & Info
Articles
Tractor Registry
Tip of the Day
Safety Cartoons
Tractor Values
List Prices
Production Nbrs
Tune-Up Specs
Serial Numbers
Tune-Up Guide
3-Point Specs
Paint Codes
Glossary

Miscellaneous
Tractor Games
Just For Kids
Virtual Show
Museum Guide
Memorial Page
Feedback Form

Related Sites
The Tractor Shed
TractorLinks.com
Ford N-Series Club
Garden Tractors
Today's Tractors
Classic Trucks
Kountry Life

Enter your email address to receive our newsletter!
subscribe
unsubscribe

Content Guide
Picture List - TOC
Ad Archives - TOC
Manuals - TOC

 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Traditional YT Forum ViewClassic View   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

This is the modern view of the Yesterday's Tractors Forums. Just login with your YT Userid and password to post. If you have trouble logging in, contact us by email to support at ytmag.com, or through the Reader Form, and we will get you going right away.

Another idea on should it have been (or be) built
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic    Yesterday's Tractors Forum Index -> John Deere
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Nice
Regular


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 26


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 5:25 am    Post subject: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Heres a should it have been (be) built: Why can"t John Deere produce a combine for a guy with less than 2500 acres? Most farms around here (WC Indiana) are 1000 acres if not less. With todays grain prices a father/son operation can make an upper middle class living on 900 acres. I farm some myself so I can run the numbers, trust me. So when will John Deere realize that doubling the size of combines every 10 years simply results in selling half as many 10 years later? Surely John Deere sees the short-sightedness in their current marketing and production. They set the industry standard, and there is very little competition, they can nearly choose to build what they want. And right now every combine they sell is a tool for 1/3 of their customers to try and eliminate 2/3 of their other longtime core customers.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
GreenEnvy
Regular


Joined: 08 Oct 2012
Posts: 71


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:26 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Take a look around. Everybody has been dropping the smallest combine in their lineups. Why are you blaming just JD? JD has been dropping the smallest combine in their lineup since the 60s starting with the 40 because the sales aren't there. They aren't forcing these bigger combines on us. We are. The same guys that ask that question you just did seem to disappear when it would come time to actually write a check for new one. Most guys that need a small combine realize its just cheaper to buy and maintain used one. If there was actually a market for a small combine JD would build or import one. And they did. Remember the 4425 and 4435? How well did those go over?
 
Back to top
View user's profile
leon
Tractor Expert


Joined: 12 Feb 1998
Posts: 1696


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:04 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Where there's a market big enough for Deere to make small combines and do it profitably, they do. You'll find some photos of Deere's Chinese made, Chinese marketed combines here.

http://www.google.com/search?q=photos+deere+combines+china&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=tEwBUd2uDJDk9gTnsID4Bg&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QsAQ&biw=1261&bih=684
 
Back to top
View user's profile
Nice
Regular


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 26


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:31 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

I stated that John Deere sets the standard so I hardly am insulting them. And they do, and they can somewhat set what size they build and sell. I like John Deere as much as the next guy and have mostly John Deere equipment, plus grew up around it. Have em put a 9400 sized combine on the market, let guys actually know that it is available and that they are serious and will support it and have parts/service around for years to come. I could go out this week and sell 10 no problem, probably a few today. The current S550 is rumored to be on shaky ground and they are supposedly limiting its production(who knows why if guys want them). And the "baby" S550 has more capacity than the 9600 had, biggest just 15 yrs ago. So my question is still, why not a 9400 sized combine? And why not realize the long term consequences of the loss of "9400 combine sized farms"? And I don't mean a monster called an S450 hiding that it is really the same size as a 9700 would have been. I want a true 180 to 200 bu. tank 4/6 row machine. Guys have gotten blinded by this big equipment and think they need it, when realistically you could harvest 3000 acres with a "little" S550 and not even blink. The only reason I'm singling John Deere out is that I'm a Deere guy and that I believe they could actually make it happen.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
matthies
Guest






Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:44 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

The 4425/4435, run and never look back.
 
Back to top
Whichester1
Regular


Joined: 10 Jan 2013
Posts: 141


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:59 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Your best bet is to buy a small low hour used combine of the size/capacity you require. Many are around that can be purchased for a fraction of the cost of a new one. The older cabs are not as nice and quiet as the new ones but these machines but they will easily get the job done. Lights are better on the new combines too, if you work at night a lot think about upgrades here.

You kind of have to be handy with your hands and tools as you can put more money in repairs if a Dealer does the work than than the combine is worth.

My experience anyway.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
GreenEnvy
Regular


Joined: 08 Oct 2012
Posts: 71


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:07 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Problem is guys like you that want a smaller combine like a 9400 also want to pay 9400 price. A 9400 built today is going to cost twice as much if not more then the original ones back in the early 90s. That is going to make for an expensive combine for the small capacity you will get. What a 9600 listed for back in 1992 when we bought one wouldn't even buy a new header now. Most guys that want a smaller combine find it cheaper to buy, maintain, and rebuild one. And you just said so yourself the S550 is rumored to be on shaky ground. And the reason why is nobody is buying them.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
MSD
Tractor Expert


Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Posts: 1502


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:34 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Not knowing but jut asking. What would the cost of production be for say a 9400 size combine versus what they are building now? Wouldn't it have to be close since it would have to have all the same components, just a little smaller? Another option is leasing from a place like this one in the link below. The article is dated but they are still doing business. Was just past their line up Sunday.
Combine leasing

 
Back to top
View user's profile
Greenday
Long Time User


Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 1402
Location: NW Missouri

Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:58 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Because the days of the small farmer are on the way out. I hate to see it happen but its the truth.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
Nice
Regular


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 26


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:58 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Yeah but they are also supposedly limiting the number built... So why limit them if guys want them? All I'm saying is they sell what they build. And they build what they want. So they could build 550's if they wanted or even 450's. Step outside the box and think about it this way: They are a full line farm equipment company, and the majority of their customers are really 9400 sized farmers. Also, most farmers around here would opt for less electronics in order to save on cost. So why not build the combine to complete the offering to this, their core customer. Lets face it, no one really needs the capacity of the biggest new machines. Its all about keeping up with the Jones'es. The reason the new 9400 would cost twice as much is because they would build it fancier than a Cadilac. You put words in my mouth about how much I or the farmers I speak of would be willing to pay. Everyone knows that they would still be expensive compared to the early 90's. However the guys that would buy a new 9400 remember that a combine is a machine used to pick corn, not a luxury car.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
Tom OConnor
Regular


Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 234


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:56 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

I farm about a thousand acres with a 9610. Never have taken it to the field and wished I had a smaller one.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
Tom OConnor
Regular


Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 234


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:56 am    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

I farm about a thousand acres with a 9610. Never have taken it to the field and wished I had a smaller one.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
JD Jim
Regular


Joined: 23 Jul 2002
Posts: 52


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

I farm about 1000 acres with a 9410 and love it. Perfect size. Probably trade up in 5 yrs and kinda worried about what I will get. Walker machine works great for me.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
LarrySTN
Long Time User


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 621


Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Problem with building a small combine is that it costs nearly the same to build as a large machine. Any farm equipment manufacturer produces what the market is looking for or they are out of business. Most big farms can afford a large machine, most small farms cannot afford a small machine. Economics drives production.
 
Back to top
View user's profile
buickanddeere
Tractor Guru


Joined: 31 May 2003
Posts: 23627
Location: in front of computer

Report to Moderator

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Another idea on should it have been (or be) built Reply to specific post Reply with quote

Other than the price of a couple tons of steel and more paint. It's doesn't cost any more to make a small or large combine.
Engineering, legal, production line equipment and labour are identical. Even shipping is similar.
If you can sell the large combine for twice as much, which would you build?
 
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Yesterday's Tractors Forum Index -> John Deere All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Discount Prices for Parts! You can help support this extensive website by purchasing your tractor parts, manuals and merchandise from our [ Antique Tractor Store ] or call our friendly sales staff toll free (800) 853-2651. [ More Info ]

YT Home | Tractor Manuals | Tractor Parts | Forum Home

Copyright © 1997-2013 Yesterday's Tractor Co. - A Washington State Corporation

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters