B. White

Member
I'm coming around full circle in my later years. I've been watching older tractors in the this HP range and received some good advice on here when asking about going to look at a Ford, since I ain't a diesel expert. Folks who went from mules to tractors many years ago told me they weren't worried about brand, since you can get a bad one from any of them. Find a good one. I was not looking at a 135. I had a gas version when I was a teen and sold it to my BIL 30 years ago. His son called in the spring and wanted to know if I was interested before they put it up for sale, but I didn't want another gas version.

Went and looked at a Ford 3000. Looked great and looked like it had been barn kept with all gauges working. Grandson of owner was questioned on the phone and told him I was picky, so didn't want to look at it unless in excellent shape. He said it was, so drove 1.5 hrs to look at it. It wouldn't crank. Looked great, not cleaned up, just clean. His younger grandson called me after I was several miles away and said they went and bought fuel and had it running, so it must have been low. I was too far to be interested in turning around.

Saw a 135 early one morning and thought I should probably look at it, since it was clean and a diesel, but owner didn't get back to me until after bedtime. Called the next morning, but he didn't answer and didn't call back until I was on my way to buy the one I bought.

Last one I checked on owner responded quick, so I hit the road. Looked like someone did a great job cleaning it up and then it was kept clean. Was about $400 more than the non-cranking 3000 I looked at. The person that sold it was the 3rd owner and has had it about 2-3 yrs. Lived over an hour from his property where he had it and was having to travel more for work, so no reason to keep it for a garden. I like that there is wear after being painted, so not a recent quick cleanup. Starts immediately. No smoke at start or running. Only issue was guinea wasp nest I think I shed on the drive back. My last antique for a while.

Maybe a little Divine intervention to make it work. I don't say that lightly. Everything lined up and I'm as happy as a kid on Christmas morning with this one.

1753054849168.jpeg


1753054879378.jpeg


1753054906456.jpeg
 
There isn't much about the 135 not to like. Except maybe for one thing. The clutch pedal. Every time I get on one I cuss that clutch pedal. The only way I can operate it effectively is to stand up first. That just ain't practical. If I had to drive one every day I'd seriously consider making some changes so the pedal would push forward rather than straight down. I just don't have the leg/knee strength to work that any more.
 
There isn't much about the 135 not to like. Except maybe for one thing. The clutch pedal. Every time I get on one I cuss that clutch pedal. The only way I can operate it effectively is to stand up first. That just ain't practical. If I had to drive one every day I'd seriously consider making some changes so the pedal would push forward rather than straight down. I just don't have the leg/knee strength to work that any more.
I agree, the 50/65 and 150/165/175 models had an easier to push clutch pedal than the 35/135 models did due to the extra linkage they had. And if a fellow makes the mistake of installing a 175 dual clutch with its heavier springs in a 135 it would make a football player grunt..
 
There isn't much about the 135 not to like. Except maybe for one thing. The clutch pedal. Every time I get on one I cuss that clutch pedal. The only way I can operate it effectively is to stand up first. That just ain't practical. If I had to drive one every day I'd seriously consider making some changes so the pedal would push forward rather than straight down. I just don't have the leg/knee strength to work that any more.

I've read that before, but don't notice it. Maybe cause I had one long ago, or just because I'm built odd and with a heavier lower body than average.
 
The MF135 was selected as the best overall tractor MF ever built. I've owned the 4-cyl Continental version and the 3-cyl Perkins gas version. The Perkins would out-pull the Continental every time. I never did notice clutch pedal resistance being excessive.
 
I mowed 6-7 acres yesterday evening and will do some more this evening and in the morning. It beat my expectations in every way with a 6 ft mower behind it. I've been using a newer model 70 hp with a FEL and 4wd. Turning radius is so much better that I don't really think it took me any longer in 3rd vs using the big tractor in 4th. It handled the steep places that make me nervous with any of them. It rode very smooth and I didn't feel as bounced around as usual. Smaller and lower to the ground with no FEL gave great visibility.

I was going to use this one as a backup. I'll mow some peas and beans down before long and put a plow behind it. If it plows like it mows, I may seriously consider selling the bigger one.
 
I left out one major advantage above. Went back out this afternoon and it was 95.2. Started in a narrow area at the bottom of a hill with a little shade first, then started on the rest. It was 88 when I quit. I can't feel heat from the engine like on the other one. Shirt wasn't even damp when I got off. It is common on forums (haven't noticed it on this one, but lots of others) for everyone giving tractor buying advice to say nobody ever wished they'd bought a smaller tractor, need 4wd, need FEL, etc. Those things are all nice and have their place, but depending on your needs there may be more advantages to something smaller and cheaper for 90% of your use that will get the job done.
 
Yesterday's Tractor Forums

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top