Farmall 400-450 Rear End Issues?

[Bill VA]

Did the Farmall 400-450 tractors have any rear end issues similar to the later 560 Farmalls?

Just curious,

Thanks!
Bill

 

[D Slater]

Early 560 tractors used the same basic gear train as a 450 with a few changes. Think the only thing that helped the 450 to not have the same reputation was farmers transitioned to pulling heavier loads in the period. Also the F-560 had more gear reduction in the ring and pinion that could transfer more power to the final drives even if both engines had the same power. Later 560 had improvements to differential and drive parts on back and a few other things. Axle bearings, axles and some other parts failed in both. Depending on ground worked some had very little problem. Rating a 450 as 4 plow and a 560 as 5 was to much in tough ground in my opinion.

 

[rustred]

i would agree also , 3/16 for 450 and 4/16 for 560. we did try the neighbors 5/16 plow with our 560 and it was just too much, it pulled it
but in low gear.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

I've heard it made mention, perhaps in one of the books or magazine articles written on the subject, that they were STARTING to have problems with the 450s. It wasn't until the 560 came out that it was frequent enough to necessitate a recall and design change.

I've never seen a clear explanation of EXACTLY where the problem lay. Usually just a lot of hand-waving and "rear end problems" "final drive problems." Axle bearings, bull pinion bearings, gears, differential... I don't know.

We used to have a 560 and on a couple occasions it sheared the bolts holding the ring gear to the differential. That's where I thought where the problem was, but I've been told no...

 

[rustred]

just like the 1/2 ton fords from the 60's. had weak axle brgs. ford had ball brgs. while GM had roller brgs. dad would laugh at the neighbor with his his 1966 ford, said the load makes them balls turn into rollers. always replacing the brgs. while in the GM it was unheard of to replace an axle brg.

 

[D Slater]

Last fix was differential changed to use cone bearings, differential carriers changed to use the cone race and to use a bigger bull pinion shaft bearing, bull pinion and bull gears were changed to a different pressure angle. Other parts changed but not necessarily at the same time. Oil return tube from hydraulics was changed twice with last one dumping oil on differential. Transmission housing was changed to use a 4 bolt main shaft bearing retainer. Roller bearing was used there on part. Started being built with roller inner axle bearing. Bearing was available to replace others including M on up. One keyway rear axle was standard unless a two key axle was needed for certain implements. Some 450 started showing up with one keyway axles. Axle housings had the wall thickness increased later on. Probably forgot something.

 

[Old weldor]

Rust reds comment makes me wonder why every hot rodder, drag racer, circle track racer installs a Ford 9 inch rearend in there car? I was raised around Fords and never heard that one before! Some of the speed equipment companys even sell 9 inch Ford rearends in custom widths!

 

[Brownie450]

Dad bought our 450D new in '56 & it got worked pretty hard
on the picker & field work. It had 2 sets of rear axle ball
bearings replaced plus differential bearings. Also broke
both rear axles--both times with the picker on---one in a
mud hole, & once on the highway. Mud hole was probably the
worst since there was nothing solid to put under the jacks.

There were a couple 450s that had bad inside bearings & let
the bull gear chew through the bottom of the transmission
case. The mechanic in town just gutted the tranny & welded
a piece over the hole, then re-assembled the gears.

We've still got the 450, & it still performs well. Only gets
used for light duty & auger use. It will auger & idle all day
on 5 gallons of fuel.
Jim

 

[the tractor vet]

Well around here when the 460-560 came out EVERYBODY that jumped on the band wagon got a new set of plows for what ever they bought. My one close friend and old customer his dad bought a 460 in 1960 and that tractor is still on the same farm to this day along with the fast hitch semi mount plows he bought with it . John boy just totally restored them plows last month with all new Case I H iron , You don't want to know how much that cost today. That 460 started life with the 2 1/2 axles an after the fifth or sixth axle to snap off while under the picker i got changed to the 2 3/4 axles . I had a 460 vary early model like S/N 571 . I hated that tractor , it was a nice BIG little tractor and i had and axle inner bearing fail and the filings contaminated the whole hdy. system and what a nightmare that turned into . Just one more tractor i can say i have had every nut and bolt in out and back in TWICE .

 

[rustred]

that is because a ball brg. was never good for a heavy load. you need a roller brg. just as ih found out in the tractor. and 9 inch differentials have nothing to do with an axle brg carrying a load. my comments are true as can be as i watched the axle brgs being changed and also helped. hands on experience again. a car has no weight on the back axles. load up a 1/2 ton with posts or firewood and drive 100 miles home regularly and you will be replacing those axle brgs. these brgs are on the outside right next to the brake shoes , not in the diff.

 

[Bill VA]

Thanks for the replies everyone - great info and much appreciated!

 

[DR. EVIL]

We ran the Daylights out of our 450 gas with Fast Hitch. I think the engine was stock, maybe, it pulled 4-14's well 6-7 deep in old corn ground in 3rd gear. Alfalfa sod you dropped into 2nd. With the Case 4-14 trailing plow and Midwest plow harrow, could still run 3rd in old corn ground, in tight old alfalfa sod it would run hot in 2nd gear, but low side of 3rd was less than 1/4 mph slower than 2nd gear high TA and it would run 1450 rpm and never get above the high end of the white Cold band on the temp Guage. It very possibly had been rebuilt with M&W Add Power's or IH FireCraters, never had it on a dynamic.
But we had bearings go bad on both sides of the differential, left side about 1966, right side 1967, ran M&W direct axle duals anytime we drove on tilled ground or did any kind of tillage.
When we stepped up to the Money-Pit 4010-D we gained less than 1/2 mph with the same implements until we had the owner of Warners Turbo Shop out one night, Terry Warner and he turned the pump up to between 100 & 105 pto hp. The HEAD GASKET lasted about 45-50 hours, but it was fun fall plowing with it, could run 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th gear!

 

[Stuart]

You must of had an easy pulling plow or easy plowing ground to pull 4-14 with a stock 450. Out 400 and 450 both had IH FireCraters pistons and put out 58hp on our dyno. You must of had a very sick 4010 to only gain 1/2 mph with the same implements. My dad worked for a farmer when tge 4010s came out. He was using IH 560 diesels. Dealer dropped it off and it made the 560s look sick. A healthy 450 would out lug a 560. Typically 400/450 has more rear snd problems when neglected or abused

 

[rustred]

i guess a 4010 would make a 560 look sick. it compares to the 660 not 560.

 

[Stuart]

I wasnt aware they made a 660 row crop

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

(quoted from post at 06:46:10 12/04/22) I wasnt aware they made a 660 row crop

They didn't. Only standard tread.

All a 660 was, was a 560 with the engine turned up to 2400RPM, and planetary final drive hubs to gear it back down. Cool tractor, though.

 

[rustred]

here is some more differences, as it is a bigger tractor than the 560. and is a close match for the 4010 h.p. it is about 2 inches taller.
has a taller rad, and a spacer under the rad and also under the rear platform. has a taller air cleaner also. the side shields are taller
also. it has 18.4 x 34 rear tires compared to 18.4 x 30 on the 560. also has different rear wheel weights than the 560. also the front hubs
and rims are different. but use the same front 750x18 tires. The CC stamped on serial tag means heavy duty 3rd gear tillage . have never saw
that on the 560. not all 660's have it . the steering wheel is also 2 inches larger diameter. i am comparing international tractors here.

 

[DR. EVIL]

A person would think that, but in this case this 4010 was about even on power with the 560 gas the neighbor did ALL his fieldwork on 320 acres with. But our 4010 had about 3-times the repairs the neighbor's 560 needed year after year.
Our 4010 was the ONLY 4010 around, dozens of 4020's, gas, diesel, but no LP, was probably a dozen 4020's with turbo's. 560 pulled 4-14's and 12-13 ft disk like our 4010 did,
Strangely enough Dad asked his IH dealer what he needed to pull a 5-14 plow about 1962, dealership owner said 660 diesel in your hills. The 806 was 2-3 years away still. Our 4010 wouldn't pull 5-14's, we tried.
Every 4020, gas or diesel pulled 5-14's maybe 5-16's. Neighbor tried pulling 6-16's with his pulling 4020 with mixed results.
The engines in the 560 & 660 were the same, gas and diesel, 560 ran 1800, 660 ran 2400. The 660 had planetary reduction in each rear axle to run same speeds as 560 at higher rpm.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

If I were to hazard a guess, the radiator was "taller" by the same amount as the spacer?

So basically smoke and mirrors to make the tractor look bigger when in reality it was not.

Funny 18.4x34 are pretty common on 560s with the stamped steel 9-bolt rear wheels. IIRC stock was 16.9x34, or 15.5x38 with the cast rear wheels.

 

[rustred]

correct on rad. but you have a tractor with basically over 20 more h.p. had to do something as the large rear hubs with planetaries and tires
raised the tactor up. some 660 's had 23.1 x 26 also. some had a hand clutch too. my old worn out 660 put out 87 h.p. on pto dyno, while my
buddies 660 with all new engine parts put out 85 here on my yard. and in the field the 660 burns over a gallon an hr. more fuel than the 560, but its
still under 3 gallons an hr. compare that to the 806 which is slightly stronger burns around 5 gallons an hr. yes i know its a totally
different newer bigger engine and dont have to work as hard with the same implement . but i cant complain about the 660's as thats my main field
tractor.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

By "bigger" meant physically bigger. Of course it has more HP, but the castings, frame rails, engine block, are all physically identical to those of the 560.

Nowadays tractor manufacturers don't even try to make tractors in a series "look bigger" when they have more HP.