This site is not affiliated with AGCO Inc., Duluth GA., Allis-Chalmers Co., Milwaukee, WI., or any surviving or related corporate entity. All trademarks remain the property of their respective owners. All information presented herein should be considered the result of an un-moderated public forum with no responsibility for its accuracy or usability assumed by the users and sponsors of this site or any corporate entity.
The Forum Parts and Services Unofficial Allis Store Tractor Shows Serial Numbers
Forum Home Forum Home > Allis Chalmers > Farm Equipment
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


The WD-35/WD-45

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
DrAllis View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 16913
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DrAllis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The WD-35/WD-45
    Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 6:09am
When I can't sleep at night, my mind wonders what should have been. In 1948 the release of the new "WD" tractor series, should have had TWO models: the WD-35 and WD-45. The specs: same exact engine block (no side plate) and tall cylinder head and everything else, EXCEPT the pistons and crankshaft stroke are different between the 201 and 226. Also the same WD-45 manifold but different carburetors and air cleaners. The chassis would be identical with the constant mesh/helical gear transmission design in both. Hand clutch 2 plates on the WD-35 and 3 plates on the WD-45. Foot clutch 6 springs on the WD-35 and 9 springs on the WD-45. Front steering support is from the WC (hollow) for the WD-35 and the 90 lbs heavier (solid) for the WD-45. Rear wheels 10 inch wide with 12.4 x 28's on the WD-35 and 12 inch wide rims with 14.9 x 28's only offered on the WD-45. Fluid filled both models. Taller fender brackets on the 14.9 tires.  This dual model/dual HP offering would have given A-C a much sooner and better foothold on competing against the H and M Farmall tractors, which were the "King" of that time. Had this happened, the D-series should have then been 3 to 5 years sooner..............sigh.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Ed (Ont) View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 08 Nov 2009
Location: New Lowell, Ont
Points: 966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ed (Ont) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 7:05am
That would have been great!! You should have been their chief engineer or designer. SmileSmile
Back to Top
Ed (Ont) View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 08 Nov 2009
Location: New Lowell, Ont
Points: 966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ed (Ont) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 7:08am
And that gets me thinking that I need taller brackets for my 14.9's. I guess I could fix that with a bit of work. Lol.
Back to Top
Charlie175 View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Shenandoah, VA
Points: 6277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Charlie175 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 7:16am
I think AC was stuck on the drop axle design for far too long. Straight axles were far less complicated and offered larger wheel sizes for better ride comfort. Sure AC still made a great plowing/cultivator tractor with traction booster but for all purpose use they were getting left behind.
I like the idea of WD35/45, kind of relates to the 210/220 idea. Lot of common parts to reduce costs.
Charlie

'48 B, '51 CA, '56 WD45 '61 D17, '63 D12, '65 D10 , '68 One-Ninety XTD
Back to Top
darrel in ND View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Location: Hebron, ND
Points: 8239
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote darrel in ND Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 7:27am
It's like the plow peddler (Walter B????, lol) once wrote a story on; on so many occasions, Allis Chalmers saved failure from the brink of success
Darrel
Back to Top
DrAllis View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 16913
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DrAllis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 7:28am
I don't really have an issue with the outboard final drives and a 28 inch tire per say. Take a 16.9 x 28 tire for example. It has more square inches of "foot print" on the ground than a 13.6 x 38 inch tire. So we're talking like a D-17 versus a 2510 John Deere or 400 Farmall. How about an 18.4 x 28 versus a 16.9 x 34 ??  A One-Eighty versus a 1650 Oliver for comparison. The 18.4 x 28 again has MORE rubber on the ground. The D-19 size chassis was a good place to redesign the finals for a larger diameter tire. Just too late in history and lacking in features others had.
Back to Top
Pat the Plumber CIL View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Springfield,Il
Points: 4382
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pat the Plumber CIL Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 8:44am
Live or independent pto and hydraulics . Maybe a differential lock . Hi lo power director and a 6 cylinder wd 55 , 65 . Oh one can dream what could have been.
You only need to know 3 things to be a plumber;Crap rolls down hill,Hot is on the left and Don't bite your fingernails

1964 D-17 SIV 3 Pt.WF,1964 D-15 Ser II 3pt.WF ,1960 D-17 SI NF,1956 WD 45 WF.
Back to Top
IBWD MIke View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Location: Newton Ia.
Points: 2698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IBWD MIke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 9:33am
Interesting. Had they been able to do that it would have been a great strategy. I'd venture a guess that it was contemplated. Needing to get the WD to market probably got in the way. They probably weren't tooled up to start 45 production.

Have thought many times that trying to compete with the Farmalls of the day with the WC-WD-WD 45 was akin to bringing a knife to a gun fight! I love my 45's but trying to compete with a 450.....

Not being able to sleep is not a problem I suffer from, kind of the opposite. Out in the cold working, (or standing around at an auction), get in for the evening, some supper, adult beverages, and a hot shower and I'm out about 20 minutes later!
Back to Top
DaveKamp View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access
Avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 4980
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DaveKamp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 9:45am
I don't think there's anything WRONG with the idea of a WD35/wd45, other than the fact that having two of basically the same footprint, with different horsepower means you've got basically two models of the same platform in production, with basically same production costs out the door, competing for the same buyer...

Or the other way of looking at it-  The total resource cost (basic material, process, assembly logistics and space) of building just ONE higher-power engine, one chassis, and one platform in double volume, is less than the cost of building the more powerful version.

I THINK it was Edsel that was asked about why he ignored the big, comfortable old sedan, or a sporty convertible, said "An old man will buy a young man's car... a young man won't buy an old man's car".  That exact thing doesn't apply here, but the concept is how to respond to a divided market mentality.  In the case of two tractors, what would the advantage of the smaller power be?  significantly lower price? fitting in a smaller space?  more maneuverability?  Lower overhead clearance?

I don't think Allis could have made the out-the-door price low enough of a WD-35 to make it more attractive than the WD-45... and (I could be totally wrong here but) I don't think they could have gotten it out the door any SOONER...  as engine improvements to make that additional power really wasn't challenging in technology or scope.

Allis KINDA did the same thing by putting the B/C/CA engine form factor in the WD chassis (The RC from '38-41).  At that point, I don't think it was so much a function of sales price or manufacturing cost as it was simple availability of the parts to do so... it was a wartime production situation- they had the engines for one tractor, chassis for another, and so they built 'em up with what they had left... and people bought them because they could GET them...

When I can't sleep (and it's darn rare I can't) I consider what could have been, had the biz world not been so gridlocked with patent aggression.  If full-flow live hydraulics, full live PTO, draft gear lift and coupling, ergonomics, and all the other great things we take for granted NOW, would have been negotiated through in say... 1949, we would have had much better machines working the fields three decades sooner... and many of the great systems, and great companies we HAD, would still be in business to offer options for the marketplace.
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
Back to Top
HudCo View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Location: Plymouth Utah
Points: 2636
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HudCo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 10:30am
i am still stuck on the part where you have to crawl into the tractor seat instead of sitting on a platform with a flat floor like the farmalls or the deeres and olivers
Back to Top
DrAllis View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 16913
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DrAllis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 10:55am
My thinking was the actual production costs per basic machine would have become a little less because of the increased volume. With  the 12 inch rear wheels and 14.9 tires available only on the WD-45 (as standard equipment), that in itself creates more dollars in its production costs and more performance value to the end user.  The difference in rear tire sizes also gives the WD-35 a slightly lower gear ratio to accommodate 25% or so less engine HP. The only serious casting differences between the two models is the front steering support. That part would still utilize the old WC casting for the WD-35 and a newly created casting for the WD-45. I suppose one 125 lb rear wheel weight on each side could have been standard equipment on the WD-45 in an effort to further separate their differences and build costs.  All said, there still would have been more 45's sold than 35's, but it would have made sales to a customer who simply didn't need 45 HP, when he could save $$$ buying 35 HP instead. At $5 bucks per HP a WD-35 would have been $1750 and the WD-45 at $2,250. Those numbers are not too far off from what they actually were from the beginning WD in 1948 and the early model WD-45's in 1953.  Again, just dreaming.......   For comparisons there were the 190 and 190XT........210 and 220......Deere 4000 and 4020.......IH 706 and 806.....
Back to Top
DaveKamp View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access
Avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 4980
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DaveKamp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 12:26pm
Yeah, it's interesting to see what companies did, and did not do.

A really good illustration of just one facet of it came to me in form of an engine for a Dixon 308 ZTR I owned many years ago.  The original engine was an 8hp, and it expired with a bang one day, yielding a picture window in the block.

I looked up the parts lists for the various models, and like any manufacturer, they had a basic chassis, which was fitted with different engines and different decks... and initially they were all mechanical (cone-clutch) drivelines, at some point Dixon introduced a hydrostatic drive module that'd fit the same form-factor chassis, so they offered it in clutch, hydrostat, several deck sizes, and according to the deck and drive, engine size.

They would fit the 8hp to 30" deck with mechanical drive
If you chose a 36" deck, you got a 10hp, or a 42" deck 12hp
If you chose a hydrostatic drive, the 30" got a 10hp, and the 36" deck got 12hp...
So basically, it was sized on the deck, and any hydro was 2hp more, right?

My 8hp's spec number was SUPPOSED to be stamped in a particular spot, that as a result of the aforementioned appearance of air-cooled crankcase, the serial and spec numbers had exited my property at a velocity just shy of Mach 1...

So I called Dixon to figure out which spec I'd need for a replacement.

The salesman (IIRC, his name was Norm?) looked it up and told me, and said "Hey- do you need an engine?"  I said Of Course!  I asked him how much, he threw me a price that was WELL UNDER what I'd expected to pay... so I jumped on it.

Two days later, there's a box on my doorstep, with a 17hp Intek in it.

I called him back, said there's been some mistake, he sent me a 17hp instead of an 8.

he said "Put it on, and use it".

Well gee... will it fit?

"Yep, bolts on perfect, same bolt pattern, same shaft, and I threw in a pair of fuel tank brackets to fit yours on it.  You'll love it- it's dead quiet, smooth, and more power than you'll ever need, so it'll last forever"

So I asked why they sent a 17hp instead of an 8.

He explained that they don't BUY 8's anymore.  They don't by 10s, 12's, 14's, or 16's.
Why?

Because if they buy all those different sizes, they have to stock, and organize, and keep track of four different engines, and then figure out which ones go to which assemblies, and all the drawings for each of the build sheets has to be updated to fit all those combinations...

But if they just buy 4x as many 17's, they NEVER have to worry about having sufficient power, they don't have to maintain 20 different combinations of deck and drive sizes, wiring diagrams, parts lists, etc...

And the cost-out-the-door is lower on ALL machines, because the manufacturing support overhead has been slashed to next-to-nothing.

And... when they order just that one engine size, they get a much better deal, because they're buying 40,000 17hp engines, rather than 10000 8's, 10000 10's, etc.

Another example was the transmission in my '72 Jeep Commando.  It was a Turbo Hydramatic 400, and it was unordinary because it was neither a Buick-Olds-Pontiac, or Chevy bellhousing bolt pattern, it was a Caddillac/Bentley/Rolls-Royce bolt pattern... and it had an adapter ring to fit the CBRR pattern to it's AMC 304 V8.  Yes, this was totally normal.

Why?

Because of production volume economics.  The largest volume of TH400 cases, was the B-O-P case with conventional long tailshaft housing... it was available in every full-size GM sedan and station wagon from inception through what... 1979 or so.  Next most common was the Chevy pattern, it was most volumetric in the shorter tailshaft/transfer case variety because it was used in cars AND light trucks, both 2wd and 4wd, but the Hydramatic division made less of those, because it was JUST Chevy/GMC.

When it came to bolt patterns, Caddillac, Bentley, and Rolls-Royce used the same pattern, and had the Hydramatic Division make them a case specifically intended for use in their heavy sedans and limousines.  They used a long tailshaft assembly... BUT...  For 'specialty' customers, they wanted to be able to adapt a transfer case, so that armored limos could have a driven front axle TOO... and there's LOTS of big old Cad/Bentley/RR limos that have a Dana 60 front axle tucked under there with run-flat tires carrying a body filled with bullet-absorptive armor.

So why the Jeep?  Easy-  The Cad/Bent/RR transfer case was the LOWEST production volume of T-case housing.  By selling them, with T-case shafting and an adapter ring kit, they could INCREASE the production volume of a low-production part, and bring the cost DOWN, while serving multiple market demands, hence, it's simpler, and more profitable, while bringing that value to the customer's end product.

Sometimes, the dollar cost isn't where you THINK it is... but at the end of the day, when there's a guy signing a deal, the dollars are there.

Back on the WD35...

Think of what it'd be, if they made a WD35 with 4wd, a flat floor, full live hydraulics, fully live PTO, power steering, a combination 3point and snap hitch, 12v lighting all around... and a heated cab option?

If they split off and made the WD35 engine AND the WD45 engine, it would have made BOTH engines end production costs more.  They'd be better off doing what Dixon did...

Making the engine good for 55hp, labelling it as a 45hp in the WD45, and labeling it as 35 in the WD35... and laughing when it stomped-daisys all over the competetor's 35hp tractor.

My Grandfather was really tight with his money... he didn't pay for stuff he didn't think made a difference in his dollar, which is probably why he stuck to Allis.  He decided it was time to relegate the 1-ton 4x4 to farm-only operation, and get a smaller 2wd pickup for errand running.  He wanted a diesel stick-shift, so he bought a Ram D50 (a Mitsubishi) turbodiesel.  He didn't want to pay for the 'optional' 5-speed (I don't think he ever saw a speedometer reach 55mph in his lifetime)... so he harangued the dealership until they agreed to sell him a 4-speed.  They 'ordered' it, and a few days later, he went to pick it up, sure enough, the stick showed 4-speed.

I was 18 when we were coming back from (what turned out to be my last trip with him to) the sale barn. He'd had this truck for 5 years or so by then, and asked ME if I wanted to drive.

Sure!  I hopped in, started it up, and he reminded me that 'It's a diesel'... "Okay Grandpa"...

As we were goin' up the valley blacktop, he said "She's a diesel, giver some, feel the power"... so I did... just a little.  "Hear the turbo?)  "Yeah, I do"... (The boost gauge made it to about 5psi).  We got to a straight stretch and he asked me how it felt, I said "I dunno... there's something not quite right here"...

He said "What?"

"I dunno, hangon"...

 I pushed in the clutch, blipped the throttle a little, watched the boost gauge, and said "Hmm..."...

I pulled it back one gear, eased it out, and brought up the throttle, and the boost gauge came back up to about 10, then I rolled on more throttle, boost came up to gauge upper normal, and I chopped the throttle, and the wastegate let out a little hiss...

He said "What was THAT?"

I pushed the clutch back in, backed up another gear blipped the throttle, eased it out, then mashed it to the floor, boost went to limit and she took off like it's ass was on fire.  His eyes turned into saucers as I went past 3rd, then shifted into 4th with that little diesel running 4200rpm, he thought it was 'running away'... 

I said "I figured out what's wrong, Grandpa" (Whilst he was conteplating a new pair of underwear), I pushed in the clutch, dropped the throttle and said "Watch This!!"

I slid the shifter over to the far right, past the pattern indication, and down,

Into 5th gear.

Let out the clutch, RPMS down at 2100rpm, and we're going 70mph.

Two hours later, we're sitting on the porch, drinking lemonade, and he said:

"Those Sons-of-Bitshes tricked me... they just switched the shifter knob, and lowered the price to sell me a truck they already had"

"Yeah, Grandpa, and YOU got the better deal..."

See, it would've cost Mitsu/Dodge AND the dealer MORE MONEY to ship out a pickup with a 4 speed, than just change the damned knob (and not tell him that it's a 5-speed).

He also didn't realize that, if he REALLY wanted to enjoy the diesel, he should give it some boost, and SPIN it... after all, the 4D55T was 2.3L that's easily 80hp, and it was MOST fuel efficient when it wasn't lugged down below boost range...
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
Back to Top
captaindana View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Location: Fort Plain, NY
Points: 1666
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote captaindana Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 1:03pm
Great reading Dave! Thank you!
Blue Skies and Tail Winds
                          Dana
Back to Top
EPALLIS View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Illinois
Points: 1046
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote EPALLIS Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 1:12pm
I wish my mind wandered like the good Dr's does.  So thankful for these kinds of posts.  Happy Thanksgiving everyone for continuing to make Allis-Chalmers an adventure!
Back to Top
steve(ill) View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: illinois
Points: 68808
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote steve(ill) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 1:17pm
I bought a new F250 Super Cab in 1989  for $14.000.  Told the dealer the ONLY OPTIONS was Air Cond, 351V8 and Limit Slip rear end...  bucket seats were $500. so i ordered the standard PLASTIC BENCH, no bumper , no spare tire, no carpet ... basic farm truck.. I would add as needed LATER.....

Truck came in 3 weeks later... YEP 'THATS NOT MY TRUCK" i said... Dealer said it was made in on the line that makes Camper Specials and Horse trailer pullers... 99% of the trucks off that line were $20,000. or more.....  I got my 351 and LS rear end.. Also got cloth seats, chrome rear bumper, spare tire, AM-FM radio, pin stripe paint job.... He said "they dont build what you want and they were not going to REMOVE parts" .


Edited by steve(ill) - 24 Nov 2022 at 1:18pm
Like them all, but love the "B"s.
Back to Top
DrAllis View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 16913
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DrAllis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 4:14pm
Interesting read, Dave. My WD-35 engine versus the WD-45 engine wouldn't really be an issue, I don't think. Every single part between them is exactly the same, except for the pistons and the crankshaft. The production cost differences of the pistons and crankshafts would be in pennies, just a matter of which ones they used. The carburetor was a bolt on vendored part, so just choose which one is needed. I'd imagine they'd have to make a batch of each engine, maybe a weeks run of one or the other to keep crankshafts and pistons in the proper sequence. Repair parts books would include each type of part used. Anyway, we will never know !!!
Back to Top
jvin248 View Drop Down
Bronze Level
Bronze Level
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2022
Location: Detroit
Points: 125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jvin248 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 5:43pm
.

Good split to match Farmall.

How many farmers might buy the 'WD-35' and then do the few upgrade swaps? Would that bridge the pricing between the two? Save a big amount of cash? Or cost more so just buy the WD-45?

How did the C/CA and WD/WD-45 pricing match to the Farmall H and Ms?



I've considered a similar-vein business study of the ebb and flow of the tractor manufacturers by comparing models and pricing from the 1930s through the end of the 1970s.

Many of the tractor brands got caught up in Mergers & Acquisitions or getting into non-farm businesses where they split their attention in two very different markets (such as farming selling to an end-user and road construction equipment selling batches of machines to a purchasing agent). AC was in grid electrical power equipment which could be a big distraction at times rather than the hoped for revenue diversification. So a dozen different dynamic financial traps would make that curiosity a career.


Hindsight is a wonderful thing; but was there any story of AC bargaining with Ferguson after 'the Ford Split' to license the 3-point architecture? Every tractor made today has a three point hitch and some have two! AC had a workable hitch but all the implements were unique -- farmers want the ability to swap tractors and implements when something breaks, which happens a lot. So showing how easy it was to share implements a farmer already owned with the new tractor would have been a huge benefit.

And the Vermeer large round baler taken as a scaled up AC round baler was a missed opportunity. Didn't AC make a large-sized baler too? If they did, they were not alone, IBM at the time thought there was a world-wide computer demand of 'exactly five machines' or something like that. Again given hindsight...

.
Back to Top
Ed (Ont) View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 08 Nov 2009
Location: New Lowell, Ont
Points: 966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ed (Ont) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 5:55pm
Great article Dave Kamp. The TH400 trans did fit the Chev pattern. There are thousands of them running up and down the road. Was kind of their hi performance option of the day at that time. One big difference was they had electric kick down on them. But the hot rod preference now is the TH350. Less rotating weight and can be made bulletproof easily. Now maybe they made a version with different bell housing pattern to sell to the high end car makers. Just like now ZF has sold millions of the 8-speed transmissions to BMW, Land Rover and Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger. And now hotrod guys are using them. The 400 and all Chev trannies bolted up to six cylinder, small block and big block motors. Chev was king of interchange unlike Ford. We used to joke that once you took off a ford starter it would not fit back on. Of course now the hot rod guys are using overdrives like the 700 or 4L80E etc. And on the TH350 you can unbolt the tailstock and hook up a gear vendors overdrive to make it a six speed. Sorry for getting off track here. 

Edited by Ed (Ont) - 24 Nov 2022 at 7:26pm
Back to Top
exSW View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Location: Pennsylvania
Points: 756
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote exSW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 6:24pm
One of IH's selling points of the H/M through 460/560 was they were different frame sized tractors. That could still use each others mounted implements.
Learning AC...slowly
Back to Top
Charlie175 View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Shenandoah, VA
Points: 6277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Charlie175 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 7:21pm
Look at how long AC stuck with 4 gear transmissions without Hi/Lo options. 3 working speeds didn't equate to a lot of choices. I'd love to read up on the test tractors AC had in the 40's/50's. 
Back to the original question, wasn't the RC made to fit in sort of like this? Bigger B/C but it didn't work out so great.
Charlie

'48 B, '51 CA, '56 WD45 '61 D17, '63 D12, '65 D10 , '68 One-Ninety XTD
Back to Top
Bill Deppe/AC Salvag View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Maquoketa, Iowa
Points: 952
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bill Deppe/AC Salvag Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 10:44pm
Believe a dealer I was acquainted with, from the last century, told me the RC was an immediate repurpose to compete with the F12 power range. Also remember someone telling me their dad had a mounted corn picker on an RC
Back to Top
JC-WI View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: wisconsin
Points: 32058
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JC-WI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2022 at 11:31pm
If not mistaken, the RC's mounted picker was a one row mounted picker
He who says there is no evil has already deceived himself
The truth is the truth, sugar coated or not. Trawler II says, "Remember that."
Back to Top
Gary Burnett View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Virginia
Points: 2729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gary Burnett Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 6:22am
When AC bought Buda it had gotten the 230 motor used in he WD45 diesel,better choice would have been the 273 motor gas and diesel that was used in the Cockshutt 50.It'd been a big up grade for the WD series.
Back to Top
PaulB View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Rocky Ridge Md
Points: 3965
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote PaulB Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 6:43am
The Allis Chalmers CA was almost more tractor than the WD was and surely cheaper at the time. Had the CA been built with about to 30 HP and 11.2X28 instead of the 11.2X24 tires with a corresponding gear ratio change to match speed to power, that would have run circles around a WD35 and would have sold for less. At that time a few dollars was a lot. The CA design is a more modern design tractor than The WD with the somewhat of a platform and centered seat to match other makers and was accepted better by those that had other colors on their farm. What could have been will tantalize all of us. 
If it was fun to pull in LOW gear, I could have a John Deere.
If you can't make it GO... make it SHINY
Back to Top
DrAllis View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 16913
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DrAllis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 6:48am
Hmmmmm........sounds like a bigger brother called the WD-55 !!  which would include a 15% slower ring and pinion, 16.9 x 28 rubber on 14 inch rims, lengthen the wheelbase a few inches, a new torque housing with beefier PTO gears and a slightly larger diameter hand clutch, a hydraulic pump with larger diameter pumping plungers and more sump capacity, cast iron rear wheel centers for more weight, power steering as standard equipment ...... Yeah, That should do it, coming in at 55 PTO HP @ 1650 RPM.
Back to Top
Gary Burnett View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Virginia
Points: 2729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gary Burnett Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 6:54am
Originally posted by DrAllis DrAllis wrote:

Hmmmmm........sounds like a bigger brother called the WD-55 !!  which would include a 15% slower ring and pinion, 16.9 x 28 rubber on 14 inch rims, lengthen the wheelbase a few inches, a new torque housing with beefier PTO gears and a slightly larger diameter hand clutch, a hydraulic pump with larger diameter pumping plungers and more sump capacity, cast iron rear wheel centers for more weight, power steering as standard equipment ...... Yeah, That should do it, coming in at 55 PTO HP @ 1650 RPM.


Might not need all that,I put a gas 262 in a  WD45D ran it for years doing various things on the farm with no problems.
Back to Top
DrAllis View Drop Down
Orange Level Access
Orange Level Access


Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Points: 16913
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DrAllis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 7:03am
I've seen a couple of those engines transplanted too. The 45 diesel chassis did have the 15% slower ring and pinion. I am just looking at it from past experience. More weight would be needed to truly get the power to the ground and to be competitive against other brands of the same "rated" HP. I know there were a fair amount of PTO's ripped out of real WD-45's, so for even more HP to be reliable, more "beef" would have been needed. Same goes for the hand clutch. Longer wheelbase for more nose weight to handle larger rear mounted equipment. Probably been a good time for slightly heavier final drives for more strength and weight.

Edited by DrAllis - 25 Nov 2022 at 7:11am
Back to Top
darrel in ND View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Location: Hebron, ND
Points: 8239
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote darrel in ND Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 7:18am
Great thread!
So many things that could have/should have been done differently by allis. But in the grand scheme of things, a different CEO in the end would have been the one thing that would have saved the company. That coming from a late, very dear friend of mine whom I worked for for 14 years, at the dealership he and his family owned for years, was built up selling the allis brand, and was the second dealership in the nation in sales more than once.
Darrel
Back to Top
IBWD MIke View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Location: Newton Ia.
Points: 2698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IBWD MIke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 7:37am
There is a chapter in Norm's bible, "You should have seen the ones that got away". Some of the concepts discussed here are in that chapter.
Back to Top
Ed (Ont) View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 08 Nov 2009
Location: New Lowell, Ont
Points: 966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ed (Ont) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2022 at 8:14am
All great ideas and very interesting thread. Have to keep in mind tho that hindsight is 20/20.  Smile
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.059 seconds.


Help Support the
Unofficial Allis Forum