New Holland 66 vs IH 50T

[Leroy]

Seeing that IH has tweaked my memory a little and I have to amend my earlier reply. I could be wrong, but I believe the older two-digit IH series like that one used a different knotter than the later All-Twine ones used on balers like the 435, 440, New Ideas, etc. Once again I could be wrong, but I think the older IH's like that 50T used the old Deering design that was a slightly modified version of the ones used on the Deering grain binders. I believe the All-Twine knotters they later used were a beefed-up version of the McCormick knotter design. There's a chap near me who rebuilds and sells a lot of grain binders to the Amish & Mennonites, and he told me the Deering knotter style was less persnickety than the McCormick ones and is thus the preferred knotter for the Amish he sells to. I don't know all the differences, but I know the Deering knotters had a stripper to pull the twine off the billhook (similar to the Rasspe knotters) while the McCormick/All-Twine knotters didn't (they relied on the bale being pushed out of the chamber to pull the twine off), The lack of a stripper was one of the primary sources of frustration with the later All-Twine knotters: If there was a little slop in the linkages or if you didn't keep the revs up, they weren't happy at releasing the twine.

If my memory's correct in all that, the Deering knotters on that 50T a might be more reliable than the later IH's, but I suspect parts are nearly impossible to find for them.

If you're looking for a reliable baler that you don't have to do much tinkering on, can readily find parts for, and can count on to punch out a few hundred bales a day for several days a year without a fuss, then I'd stay away from the IH. But seeing the nice-looking barn and shop in the background of your NH picture and hearing that you're already dealing with the wackiness and unconventionality of engine-driven balers, I suspect you must like to tinker and rebuild old/unconventional equipment. And you probably don't rely solely on your square baler to feed your animals. In this case and if you can get the IH cheap enough (maybe try to talk him down a little), no harm in buying the IH to be another toy/tinkering project.

But if reliability, consistency, and parts availability are the primary goals, it'd still have to be the NH for me.

This is the first I have heard of an all twine knotter. But have not baled any since 1981

 

[Leroy]

So after hearing all of you guys input on the 66 & 50t balers I think I'm just going to try and rebuild the 66. Do you guys know where I might be able to find all the bushings for the 66? Thanks

In the time we had the 66 (153 to 1978) do not remember having to replace any bushings But that was 45+ years ago. Only the bale chamber slides. Where are the bushings you have to replace as I do not rember baler having any but like I said 45+ years ago. Still have the manuals here someplace.

 

[rrlund]

I have to believe there are enough used balers out there that you wouldn't have to stoop to buying either one of those antiques.

 

[DeltaRed]

Those balers are pretty old. 65 plus years old. The 50 is twice the baler than the NewHolland.For a 'front line' machine,I'd kep looking.That said,I had a 55W for years,put thousands of trouble free bales through it. Never missed a tie(wire). Could make 100 lb bricks if needeed.Was still working when I 'upgraded' to a (POS) NewHolland 283. The Old IH was still a better,trouble free machine.It is still working today for a neighbor who only puts up a very few acres a year.

 

[Fritz Maurer]

Ah, the old boogeyman IH knotters.... The 50T has conventional knotters that work the same way as everything else, with the exception of a cam and linkage that drop both knotter assemblies down and inch during the rotation of the bill hooks; this was to avoid pulling 1/4" of twine under tension through the twine disks. Other manufacturers figured out that the twine is not damaged pulling it through the disks this way, so that idea was not used after the 50T. After the 50T came the radical change of knotter that a few people hate and have tales of woe to tell whether they are true or not.

That being said, the 50T has other problems that you might want to consider the New Holland.
1). It is Heavy. Need a tractor with some weight by time the wagon gets full.
2). It is slow. Crankshaft speed is 45 rpm... to get maximum capacity you will need to double up the windrows if the hay is dry enough.
3). It's really long and an odd shape which makes finding winter quarters difficult... especially with the twine box hanging out the left side while trying to back it into a tight spot.
4). The tongue doesn't swing. If you have to do any road time, the 50T is 9-1/2 feet wide.

If you were even remotely entertaining the idea of spending $800 , I wouldn't mess with either of them. There are all kinds of baler deals out there for something a lot more modern and easier to work on.

 

[Fritz Maurer]

So a little more about these balers. I purchased the 66 a couple years ago and up to that point it had not been ran in about 20yrs. it was shedded though so it wasn't in terrible shape aside from no paint and the gasoline had pretty much turned into jelly. I cleaned the tank, carb and fuel line out made a few other small repairs. At that point I put some fresh gas in it cranked the motor over a few times and it fired right up. It seems to work good it just has lot of play in the bushings.

As for the 50t I don't know a whole lot about it. but i do know that the baler has been shedded over the last 10yrs up until this month. The motor was rebuilt about 10yrs ago and was also painted. I don't think it's been used much in the last 10yrs if at all. Over all it's in nice shape. The guy selling it is looking to get $800 for it

Here are the two balers in question
View attachment 98417View attachment 98418View attachment 98419View attachment 98420

That is a rather nice looking 50T, by the looks of that auger chain I'd say a bale hasn't gone through it this century.

 

[Absent Minded Farmer]

Here in Ohio I do not rember seeing a 50 in either T or W. The 45 about ended the McCormick baler sales. Did not know that when we bought our 46 baler but that was before computors as in late 70's. Dad wanted to get a JD but none avaible at that time and I was glad of that as I did not like the JD balers from first site. Was a few 55 but that was about it.

Merry Christmas, Leroy!

Were the farms in your area smaller & did not require a bigger baler like the 50?

Mike

 

[A . M. Aitkins]

Thanks everyone for all your input I really do appreciate it! Thanks

 

[Leroy]

Merry Christmas, Leroy!

Were the farms in your area smaller & did not require a bigger baler like the 50?

Mike

Smaller yes but the handling of biger the weight would have been a problem. For years I have been on a if I remember correctly a 30 pound weight limit because of my back. Destroyed it while at work close to 40 years ago. But for all my life had problems lifting. I remember the 80 pound fertilizer bags. I never could handle. Then the 50 pound seed bags I could hardly lift. Now I have trouble just handling a 28 bottle case of water.. Lighter weight is better than hurting for years trying to do too much A 40 pound hay bale was almost too much weight. But then with those 40 pound bales three of us became over heated in one year. Next year had that 46 IHC paler with thrower but only baled for 3 more years till no more cows. Left on election day in 1980. I am now 81 years old and just barly able to get around any more.

 

[560Dennis]

We had 50T , great baler , bought used , I think that the only time it missed a Tie was when it ran out of string.
no issues with the cub engine .
i think the reason it was at the dealership was someone didn’t time the knotters correctly.cwectimedcaccordingvthecbook and that ended that issues.
we Left it outside in the weather. The baler always started and tied everytime we wanted to use it.
im confident that you won’t have any issues with it , but you have to look it over good .

tip on starting ,open the fuel valve .
I would rotate the cub motor one turn with hand crank With full choke.
Then rotate choke valve to half choke , ours would start very soon with rapid hand cranks .

 

[C. Amick]

I have a NH Super 66. It's a good baler. Never could figure out what the difference is in the 66 and the Super 66 other than tool box location.

 

[Leroy]

I have a NH Super 66. It's a good baler. Never could figure out what the difference is in the 66 and the Super 66 other than tool box location.

If I remember correctly the pickup has a few extra teeth.

 

[Jeff in ND]

No advice but I stacked many 1000s of bales on the rack behind a well worn NH 66. It was a PTO model. In that photo above, the wad-board shield on the side is missing (so was the one Dad had). Dad told the story about some neighbor kid that almost got hit in the head by the wad-board flying out while bending over near that to pick up some missed hay from the windrow to toss in the baler. Dad and a neighbor owned it jointly and Dad fully when the neighbor retired. It was parked in the trees around '88 or so in working order when Dad got a newer NH. I was shocked that someone bought it for like $50 at the retirement auction in '98. There was some serious rust out on the bale case near the knotter that would make it potentially break apart packing a bale w/o some welding.

 

[C. Amick]

The wad board shield was missing when my dad got the NH66 baler. terrible safety hazard. Fortunately the owner still had the bent up shield that dad was able to repair and reinstall. My guess is that the shield got taken off by a gate post.

 

[A . M. Aitkins]

I think the wad board shield on my 66 was ripped off at one point. because the metal tabs and screws are still on the baler.