800 Ford

[Animal]

A friend of mine has one of these it is a gas motor, he has told me time and again that it has 45 hp, I looked up the specs and they say up to 45 hp. after using this tractor I would say it is a long way up. I just do not see 45 horse in these little tractors, am I missing something here?

 

[JMOR]

(quoted from post at 21:44:12 12/14/11) A friend of mine has one of these it is a gas motor, he has told me time and again that it has 45 hp, I looked up the specs and they say up to 45 hp. after using this tractor I would say it is a long way up. I just do not see 45 horse in these little tractors, am I missing something here?

hick head? Beats me. What? You don't believe the specs? What do you believe? Silicone?

 

[Ultradog MN]

I do trust the Nebraska tests.
And I agree that 45 hp did make that series seem rather cat hammed.
A more fair comparison of that tractor to other brands and colors would be found in it's sister the 900. Same engine, tranny, etc but a substantially larger machine more capable of utilizing that much HP.

 

[Dean]

The early 8/9x0 series gasoline tractors were rated at about 43.5 PTO HP at the Nebraska tests. Later 8/9x1 versions were rated at over 48 HP.

These tractors were some of the most powerful tractors for their size built by anyone.

Dean

 

[Keith Williams]

The 28 inch wheels did not allow these machines to get the power to the ground.
BUT
When you put these guys on a PTO job, they shine.

I have a little newer 1964 ford 4000. A little more power through some minor tweaking. (bigger carb, fuel line, exhaust) I remember back in the day...
We had a guy that used all IH equipment that would fill the silos at all the farms in the area. Used the farmer's tractor to run the blower. He really liked when he could hook the blower up to the 4000. He said he could unload silage wagons faster with it than any other tractor that they worked with. I remember the muffler would get red hot while they pushed it. They left the 4000 idle between loads to cool off.

Keith

 

[Ken-Pa]

I know alot of you guys won"t believe this but when i was a teenager in the 60s , my Dad had order in special built 601 workmaster because he subcontracted out to the PenDot to road mowing with it & hoped for getting a contract for winter work also . Anyhow dad had several cops as friends so one day upon a visit from one of them , dad asked him to clock this Ford on the highway . So I took it out to a long flat area as instructed & let loose . This tractor also had the Sherman hi/lo in it . So as I was going & shifted in to hi 4th gear & passed the cop . We then went back to home & the cop showed Dad the read out . 69 mph . At that speed I didn"t dare move the steering wheel . That"s honest truth . Boy I wish I would"ve bought that tractor from Dad in 1972 . So if a machine is cared for properly , they will perform well . God bless, Ken

 

[Animal]

I believe if thats 45 horse power that they must be shetlands!

 

[Jimmyjack]

Well, those shetlands sure drink a lot. Im wearing out the hinges in the hood keeping gas in mine, but it (861)is a joy.

 

[Animal]

Is it really that hard on fuel? I had a 2000 that I thought was pretty good on gas.

 

[old]

I have had an 841 since back in the late 80s and even has a rebuilt engine and ya they do pretty good and as for fuel do pretty good but my Oliver 77 rated as per the neb test at 38HP pulls circles around the 841 hands down. Ya it maybe rated at 45HP but the Oliver sure has a lot more torque that the Ford does but then some can not understand torque power and HP do not add up and torque is where it is as not HP

 

[Jimmyjack]

Yes it is, but it puts out that much more work. If you dont need the ponys, it seems an 8N uses about half as much, and a Jubilee somewhere inbetween, but Im only guessing, but it definately sucks gas.

 

[MarkB_MI]

You might get 45 HP to the PTO, but you certainly won't get it to the ground. These tractors are very light for their horsepower.

 

[Sean in PA]

(quoted from post at 00:05:51 12/15/11) I know alot of you guys won"t believe this but when i was a teenager in the 60s , my Dad had order in special built 601 workmaster because he subcontracted out to the PenDot to road mowing with it & hoped for getting a contract for winter work also . Anyhow dad had several cops as friends so one day upon a visit from one of them , dad asked him to clock this Ford on the highway . So I took it out to a long flat area as instructed & let loose . This tractor also had the Sherman hi/lo in it . So as I was going & shifted in to hi 4th gear & passed the cop . We then went back to home & the cop showed Dad the read out . 69 mph . At that speed I didn"t dare move the steering wheel . That"s honest truth . Boy I wish I would"ve bought that tractor from Dad in 1972 . So if a machine is cared for properly , they will perform well . God bless, Ken

I thought that you weren't supposed to shift between gears on those old Ford tractors while they were moving, with the S-O-S transmissions being the exception. in my operators manual for the 3 cylinder 2000, 3000, 4000 & 5000 tractors, it says "Always depress the clutch pedal fully and bring the tractor to a complete stop before moving either gearshift lever. Do not attempt to change gears while the tractor is in motion." Are the older ones different in that respect?

 

[souNdguy]

nebraska test is pretty conclusive..

soundguy

 

[Fordfarmer]

I've always shifted from 3rd to 4th on the go on my
Jubilee. Likewise from 4th to 5th on the 850, 860s,
and 950 that I used to own. And 6th to 7th and 7th
to 8th on the go with my '65-ups. They aren't
syncronized, but you can do it without grinding,
with practice.

 

[Dean]

You're right, Ken. I don't.

Dean

 

[Dean]

As should be expected, late model 172 CI engines (large carburetor, etc.) use noticeably more fuel than early model 172 CI engines, and much more fuel than do 134 CI engines.

Dean

 

[Anonymous-0]

put 14.9 rears on the 800, load them and install pie weights. then see how much horsepower is put to the ground. you'll be surprised. i once saw an 860 so equipped tie an oliver 88 rowcrop pulling a stone boat. ANY of the old fords have to be well weighted to reach their full pulling potential. these tractors without extra ballast and small rear tires are like having a corvette engine mounted on a go cart.

 

[reb-in-pa]

Fordfarmer --

It's the awful things that can happen while practicing shifts without stopping that produce the language in the manuals about stopping before shifting. Don't ask how I know this, but even after a hundred successful speed shifts, it only takes one or two cogs knocked off gears to teach one the patience needed to come to a complete stop before shifting an unsynchronized transmission. And, yes, I love my Selectospeed.

Ray

 

[flyingace]

(quoted from post at 22:28:15 12/14/11) I have had an 841 since back in the late 80s and even has a rebuilt engine and ya they do pretty good and as for fuel do pretty good but my Oliver 77 rated as per the neb test at 38HP pulls circles around the 841 hands down. Ya it maybe rated at 45HP but the Oliver sure has a lot more torque that the Ford does but then some can not understand torque power and HP do not add up and torque is where it is as not HP

I agree here. I have a 23 HP lawn mower. This is roughly equivalent to the
HP of a 9N. Could my lawn mower pull a 6' scraper blade - I don't think so. HP is the worst power measurement I can imagine to rate a tractor, but it's all they ever give you.

 

[Dean]

All 48-64 Ford tractors have constant mesh transmissions (non synchronized) The technology is similar to automotive transmissions prior to the advent of synchronizers and was one of the significant advantages of Ford tractors of this vintage vis a vis contempory competition.

Like, non synchronized automotive transmissions of the early era, these transmissions can be shifted without stopping if all things are as they should be and the operator knows what he is doing.

I've been doing so (including Shermans) for 40+ years without incident.

Dean

 

[Ken-Pa]

Thats ok Dean . If I would"ve seen that cops readout I wouldn"t have either . I just know at whatever speed I was traveling , it was fast . I would"ve hated to have a bug hit me in the eye & made me jerk the steering wheel . My dad was one of the best Ford mechanics in this area back then , so God only knows what all he did to that engine that I know of . I sure wish I would"ve bought it from him in 72 when he offered it to me . But you know wives & the options they give us at times (either me or that tractor) was the one I received . But then in 1998 when I bought my 640 without her permission , she did leave .Oh well , I"ve njoyed my tractor , but it sure gets lonely . God bless our freedom, Ken

 

[Keith Williams]

Animal,(and others)
It looks like a discussion like this comes up every once in a while. I found this one in the archives.

http://www.ytmag.com/cgi-bin/viewit.cgi?bd=ford&th=460062

Some good points there.
Keith

 

[PitCrew]

My 172(well maybe a little bigger) makes 70 shetlands

 

[mike1972chev]

I WILL say this,argue ALL you want to about this you want to guys.

#1 If the 800s made 45 hp like advertised. OK

#2 I am seeing in another post here,if they have enough weight added,they will pull good................ OK

#3 If these 2 things are constantly done on these little Fords,The rear end or trans will explode!!!

The rear axle/transmission components. in these tractors are SMALL compared to the other equivilent HP tractors they are being compared to on here!It is common to see pinion supports busted in all of the 600/800 series.

So,If you get one of these tractors to "dead hook" and get perfect traction under a severe load via ballast,weights,ect,You are asking for trouble! Most guys I see doing these things are trying to make a "horse out of a pony" and proove a point to the "bigger tractor"owners (My dad was famous for trying to do this!

Dont get me wrong,I LOVE my little 1955 Ford 600,but I know it's limitations.Adding weight to the rear to get it to pull like the "bigger framed tractors" is just tractor abuse.Size the machine to the job being done!