Hydraulics and power-takeoff are, like hitching systems, a historic battleground of patent and trademark in agricultural technology.
The NAMES used fell under 'Trademark', while the METHOD of operation, was protected under patent.
The END RESULT was where the 'spoils of war' resided- did it accomplish the goal... do the job... and provide the benefit of the feature which was to make a manufacturer the 'king'.
Most who are confounded by why manufacturers did so many things, and used so many names, don't realize that it was a giant chess-game of patents, trademarks, and lawsuits.
The Aliis Chalmers Power Director is something we all are well familiar of. Compare it to the IH/Farmall Torque Amplifier... they attempted to do essentially the same thing, but two different ways. The Power Director used a high and low ratio gearset, and a pair of wet clutches.
The Torque Amplifier did it with two sets of gears, and an overrunning clutch.
They were both well-advertised, and found their way in most tractors after 1957 or so.
What's the differences that REALLY mattered?
The P-D had NEUTRAL. The T/A was either up, or down. IF you were bailing hay with a T/A, and were starting to plug up the baler, you could flip to low, and HOPE the baler would catch up. With a T/A, you could bump to NEUTRAL, let it catch up, then pull LOW. On Grandpa's Series II, My usual was 2nd gear HI, and pull it low when it started getting a bit thick, nudge to Neutral. With a T/A, I'd been SOL.
Now, it's been a long time since I looked at one, and I never bailed with one, but I THINK that an IH 560, the PTO was driven independant of the transmission and main clutch, I could probably release the foot clutch, and the PTO would stay running... in effect, the same RESULT as pulling a PD to neutral, but on the Allis, doing so would disengage the bailer.
IIRC it was Cockshutt/Co-Op that held the patent on the 'first' full-live PTO (meaning, totally-independant of the transmission clutch)
Why didn't someone do it so that there was a P/D AND a 'totally live' PTO? Well, doing so would put them in peril of substantial patent litigation, OR, they'd have to pay royalties for using the concept, or probably BOTH.
And never, ever, ever forget- Companies' R&D departments would come up with ideas that NOBODY uses, and they'd PATENT them... and NEVER use them. Why?
Because doing so, means that if someone else comes up with the same idea, and puts it into production, you've got 'em cornered into a patent-infrigment suit, with damages and royalties.
It wasn't until long after the patents expired, that a manufacturer could safely use methods developed by others... unless, of course, the manufacturer was able to run their competition out of business, and then BUY them out of insolvency, which DID happen often... and not just in agricultural biz. Buying out what's left of a company means you have all their intellectual property.
We call things all "3-point" because Harry Ferguson fought to keep rights to HIS invention when his relationship with Ford went south. All the other hitching systems fell away to the '3-point' after Harry's patents expired.
Doesn't matter what we call it... it only matters what it IS.
Topic Options
Post Options
Thanks(0)
jaybmiller wrote:
