New Holland Chain Baler Years, Models and Bale Sizes

[Bill VA]

A friend of mine has a New Holland 848 chain baler he might sale for cheap and wanted to know if I’d be interested.

What is the good, bad and ugly of this New Holland Chain baler?

Was the chain baler the first round baler New Holland ever offered?

What years were they produced? Is there a list of baler models and bale sizes?

Thanks!
Bill

 

[PJH]

A friend of mine has a New Holland 848 chain baler he might sale for cheap and wanted to know if I’d be interested.

What is the good, bad and ugly of this New Holland Chain baler?

Was the chain baler the first round baler New Holland ever offered?

What years were they produced? Is there a list of baler models and bale sizes?

Thanks!
Bill

Bill, I use a NH 848 baler. I bought it shortly after the turn of the century. According to the Messick's website, it was made from January 1985 to October 1991. My baler was virtually unused when I bought it, and it has given me very good service. It has the manual string wrap, meaning I crank a lever to wrap twine on each bale. My old tractors only have one double acting hydraulics and that is used for the bale gate. If you have a cab tractor the manual lever would be very unhandy. Electric and hydraulic twine wrap was optional, I think. Mine has a 4 ft wide pickup, so your windrows should be sized accordingly. 5 ft pickup was optional, I think. I use a 48 HP John Deere to run this baler, usually in 3rd gear - sometimes in 4th on flat ground, and sometimes in 2nd on my steep hills. The manual sez that you need a 40 HP tractor for it. The manual sez that it makes 800 lb bales. I weighed 4 on the local quarry scale and they weighed 2400 lbs. Those bales were super dry - a little moisture would bump them up on the scale. This baler has air bags for springs. If you replace the air bags with New Holland parts, it will cost around $450 per bag. They are common truck air bags, and the last that I bought were around $350 for two bags. There are two bags and I have replaced them both in the 24 years that I've owned the baler. I have re-sealed both gate cylinders - common repairs for any machine. I have replaced about four bent bars. One of the fields that I sharecrop had some logging around it and I rolled up a firewood sized chunk which the baler didn't like. Bent bars - operator error - not the fault of the baler. It's a simple and easy machine to work on. To sum it up - this is what I call a 50 hp baler. It makes bales that a 50hp tractor can handle. Many of my neighbors try to handle 100hp bales with their 50hp tractors and it generally results in broken loaders, broken wheel spindles, hungry cattle and lots of weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. I am 75 years old, very good health and I plan to make this baler last until I am done making hay. Slow and easy - I have made 170 bales so far this year for my little cattle herd. Any more questions - I will try to answer.

 

[old]

A friend of mine has a New Holland 848 chain baler he might sale for cheap and wanted to know if I’d be interested.

What is the good, bad and ugly of this New Holland Chain baler?

Was the chain baler the first round baler New Holland ever offered?

What years were they produced? Is there a list of baler models and bale sizes?

Thanks!
Bill

I've been using a NH850 chain baler for years it would be a few years newer then the 848. The manual say you need at the very least 55HP to run the NH850. The 850 puts out a bale that is about 6X6 and some of my bales have come in over 1500lbs I've been told by older guys who have had them they will bale just about any thing including tree branches which I have sen my baler pick up and add to the bale

 

[rustred]

I've been using a NH850 chain baler for years it would be a few years newer then the 848. The manual say you need at the very least 55HP to run the NH850. The 850 puts out a bale that is about 6X6 and some of my bales have come in over 1500lbs I've been told by older guys who have had them they will bale just about any thing including tree branches which I have sen my baler pick up and add to the bale

not a chance they make 6 ft high bales, 5 ft is more like it. and like pjh says about 800 lbs. not a chance you gonna make over 1500 lb bales with these old soft core balers. and yes i use the 851 and 855 also. the 855 is a way better baler. no air bags on the 851 , but the 855 has air bags. and its automatic tie.

 

[MJMJ]

Yeah, the 850 was a 5x5 baler.

 

[old]

Yeah, the 850 was a 5x5 baler.

Odd I stand 6 foot tall and the bale is as wide as my arm span which being 6 foot is also 6 foot

 

[MJMJ]

Odd I stand 6 foot tall and the bale is as wide as my arm span which being 6 foot is also 6 foot

Guess you should take that up with New Holland. I'm sure they lied to us for the last 40 years.

 

[DanielW]

I think you're both right(ish)? NH advertised the 850 as a 5'-6"' x 5'-6", and the Alberta/Prairie institute tests of that baler had bales slightly larger at 5'-8" x 5'-8". The prairie institute test had it making bales up to 1900#, but they were known to really put balers through their paces when they did tests. I don't know that I'd want to put that much weight through a chain baler consistently: I suspect most operators were making slightly smaller and lighter bales with them.

See test results: https://pami.ca/pdfs/reports_research_updates/(4a) Balers and Baler Attachments/18.PDF

Original NH ad with 1500# bale weight listed: https://www.ebay.ca/itm/175108773003

 

[Butch(OH)]

Guess you should take that up with New Holland. I'm sure they lied to us for the last 40 years.

Experience, reality and specs mean virtually nothing on this site.
Pipe dreams, Old wives tales, Bull droppings and out and out lies reign king.

 

[DanielW]

It's also worth noting that the 848 baler mentioned by the OP is a smaller chamber/bale size than the 850 mentioned by Old. The 848 was rated for max 1200# bales by NH, while the 850 had a much higher bale weight rating.

Test results from the Prairie institute for the 848 to compare to above: https://pami.ca/pdfs/reports_research_updates/(4a) Balers and Baler Attachments/488.PDF

 

[rrlund]

With so many cheap belt balers around, I wouldn't bother with one of those old chain balers. They only reason NH ever built them was because Vermeer owned the patent on the belt balers and NH didn't want to pay to use it. You'll note that as soon as the patent expired, NH went to belts. If chains had been a good idea, they would have stuck with them.

 

[old]

I think you're both right(ish)? NH advertised the 850 as a 5'-6"' x 5'-6", and the Alberta/Prairie institute tests of that baler had bales slightly larger at 5'-8" x 5'-8". The prairie institute test had it making bales up to 1900#, but they were known to really put balers through their paces when they did tests. I don't know that I'd want to put that much weight through a chain baler consistently: I suspect most operators were making slightly smaller and lighter bales with them.

See test results: https://pami.ca/pdfs/reports_research_updates/(4a) Balers and Baler Attachments/18.PDF

Original NH ad with 1500# bale weight listed: https://www.ebay.ca/itm/175108773003

On my NH805 there is a stop gauge with a number of lines. I almost never go to the last line that says stop but I do go to the next to last line most of the time. I have almost flipped my Ford 841S a couple times moving the bales

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

With so many cheap belt balers around, I wouldn't bother with one of those old chain balers. They only reason NH ever built them was because Vermeer owned the patent on the belt balers and NH didn't want to pay to use it. You'll note that as soon as the patent expired, NH went to belts. If chains had been a good idea, they would have stuck with them.

Krone still markets a chain baler, so the idea must not be totally without merit.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

I think you're both right(ish)? NH advertised the 850 as a 5'-6"' x 5'-6", and the Alberta/Prairie institute tests of that baler had bales slightly larger at 5'-8" x 5'-8". The prairie institute test had it making bales up to 1900#, but they were known to really put balers through their paces when they did tests. I don't know that I'd want to put that much weight through a chain baler consistently: I suspect most operators were making slightly smaller and lighter bales with them.

See test results: https://pami.ca/pdfs/reports_research_updates/(4a) Balers and Baler Attachments/18.PDF

Original NH ad with 1500# bale weight listed: https://www.ebay.ca/itm/175108773003

Especially considering that the newest New Holland chain baler is about 40 years old... Those old worn chains wouldn't last long being packed to the max.

 

[MJMJ]

Krone still markets a chain baler, so the idea must not be totally without merit.

Krone makes a fixed chamber/soft core baler. Its not a chain baler like the old New Hollands. Unless they make a baler I’m not familiar with.
Edit: I see they do make a similar baler now. I had never seen those before. They’re described as if they’re similar but much improved, I’m curious about them now. Are they offered in North America?

 

[shaun wallace]

1 st generation New Holland 850s came out in 74-75. Had latches on upper chain with single roller to tension floor chains

 

[JDIH]

What crop you're baling a the intended use may be a factor. In alfalfa the chain balers beat a lot of the leaves off. Newer fancier balers will make a tighter, better looking bale. If storing outside, a tight bale with net will weather better. In my area a pretty net wrapped bale full of junk will bring more than perfect quality in a sloppy looking bale if you plan on selling the hay.

 

[m16ty]

With so many cheap belt balers around, I wouldn't bother with one of those old chain balers. They only reason NH ever built them was because Vermeer owned the patent on the belt balers and NH didn't want to pay to use it. You'll note that as soon as the patent expired, NH went to belts. If chains had been a good idea, they would have stuck with them.

If the old NH isn't worn completely out (most are), I'd rather have one of those chain balers than a old belt baler. Older belt balers can be picky about how you feed them and what you feed them, those old NH chain balers will eat almost anything you try to shove in them.