MF 165 paired with new holland 849

[biligana37]

I have a 165, and the opportunity to buy a new holland 849 round baler. I read that it will handle.it but the guy selling it is worried i dont have enough HP. Anyone running this setup or something similar? Want to know before i buy the baler if this is going to work. All of my land is flat there is one small slope but nothing concerning and it is a multipower 165. Thanks!

 

[DanielW]

A neighbour/friend around the corner from our Northern farm ran a few models of chain balers with his Ford 4600. His land was all quite flat, but if yours is also flat, I imagine you'll do OK.

My question would be: Do you really want to buy a chain baler? There are definitely folks who like them, and there's nothing strictly wrong with them, but I never understood the appeal. They make a looser bale (though not as loose as a soft core bale), they make a raggier-looking bale (ok for personal use, but it's very hard to sell hay made from one - at least around here), they beat the leaves off legume hay, and if the chains are worn, they're a pain to work on and a nightmare to replace.

If it's nearby, uber-cheap, you have grassy hay, and don't plan on selling any, then it may be worthwhile. But I'd be looking foe a conventional hard-core belt baler myself.

I'm a little biased against them, as I spent too much time helping that neighbour work on his. I've made these points on this forum before, but here they are again:

The folks who love those chain balers always make the same arguments:

I) They don't have any belts to 'screw with'.

II) You can practically bale firewood with one of those balers.

III) They'll say things like, 'I've been using mine for 40 years and it's always worked dandy with minimal trouble"

My counter arguments are always:

I) I think folks who are a fan of chain balers assume belt balers are a pain to work on, and need constant service. Not true. One of our balers (a Deere 435 at our Northern farm) is 22 years old, has required zero service, is still on the original belts, and looking at the belts and lacing today, there's no reason to suspect they won't last at least another 10 years. Even the old 1980's Vermeer backup baler at our Southern farm had the original belts until a couple years ago. I replaced them as the PO kept the baler outside and the sun hadn't done the belts any kindness, but even those year-old and sun-ravaged belts were still working. And replacing belts is a dead-easy, quick job. Compare that to the chain balers if/when the chains get worn. One of our neighbour's was constantly having chain trouble on one of his, and it was always a nightmare to unbind and replace links. Eventually a few years ago I helped him put in a full set of new chains. Waaaay more expensive than a set of belts, and a proper pain to replace. I could have replaced the belts in a belt baler 10X over in the time it took us to do one set of chains.

II) It's all well and good that those chain balers are tough enough to 'bale firewood'. But I tend to bale hay, not firewood. I'd rather forego the ability to bale a brush pile in favour of having a tighter, more sellable bale and a baler that keeps more leaves on the alfalfa and clover.

III) Using the argument that a piece of equipment has lasted and not given major trouble isn't really a meaningful argument. The fact that a piece of equipment just 'did it's job', isn't exactly super accolades. After all, this is an antique farm equipment forum. Every piece of equipment folks on here talk about is several decades old. And the majority of it has all worked for those decades without giving major trouble. So the argument 'I like my chain baler because it's always worked and never gave much trouble', isn't really all thst meaningful.

Those are my thoughts, anyway. There are certainly folks on here who will disagree with me, and possibly rift fully so. As I say: I'm biased against them because I spent too many hours helping that neighbour with his. Several times over the years we went and baled for him when his chain baler broke down and he was stuck bungling with broken or jammed chains. Not once did he ever bale for us when our belt baler broke down. Because our belt balers never broke down.

 

[DanielW]

O Golly - saw one of my paragraphs above made zero sense - somehow I must have turned my phone on voice recognition mode and it inserted a bunch of random words. Fixed it now.

 

[miangus]

I have a MF 65 High Arch with loaded tires, and I would not attempt to run my John Deere 510 with it, I believe that NH baler weights more. The 65 would have plenty of horsepower however the weight and especially the drawbar weight would concern me. I run it with a diesel 4020 with cast wheels and loaded tires. Originally dad ran it with a 3020-diesel power shift, that tractor was weighted to 10,000 pounds.