Nebraska tests in the 70's

There was a post on Neb test of tractors; reminded me of a conversation with Carl Stephens - hope that is correct spelling - the tractor marketing mgr who drove the 7080 over the trestle pulling the rail cars.  He said AC rented and bought Deere higher hp tractors and they never performed as well as the neb test against our AC's in the field as to pulling and economy etc.  He did some research, bought some beers, and came up with some interesting info.  Seems Deere noted the tractor to be sent for testing - all the bearings, clutches were set up loose, hyd pressures were at the lowest setting, even the front wheel brgs were loose. The engine was a pick of the litter that was extensively dyno broke in and having a fine tune of the timing and fuel curve set before being sent to be put on the tractor. AC just picked a tractor, made sure there were no leaks, ran it a few laps around the bull pen , dyno checked it and sent it on the way.  Rumor was pity the customer who got a green 'test tractor' as it was 'worn out' to speak.  AC almost always fared well at the tests as to finishing near the top of competition. Many other brands did not, we used to read the tester's comments, some had minor or major breakdowns at the lab. Occasionally the unit had to be repaired and replaced or returned. Just a few memories of the distant past...  and to take the results in a lighter frame of mind …. if you know what I mean.  To those in the know, enlighten me on the Nebraska law fate of not being able to sell a tractor in Neb w/o being tested at Neb test first ….

The grossly overweighted thing was because of pulling on concrete which has no traction compared to firm soil. It was the same surface for everyone. Also the drawbar chain was in a straight line not giving any downward tug against the drawbar. Interesting news on Deere's test tractor prep. Kind of equals the story of their field combines at the Farm Progress show having plastic/composite cylinder bars to minimize damage in very wet corn harvesting. They didn't last very long but that was OK fine.

Well then, how would you have done it so hundreds of tractors could have been tested with fair and consistent results?? The drawbar testing was measuring the efficiency of the driveline. Traction in the field was related to tire size (square inches on the ground) weight on the drive tires, drawbar height and length, etc, etc.

Edited by DrAllis - 07 Mar 2020 at 7:27am

You can't get consistantly fair comparisons on dirt. Too many variables from one day to the next vs concrete.

I understand and that's fine I guess something is better than nothing.The thing is I see the pictures of tractors being tested with 10 or 12 sets of wheel weights on them.What do you think would have happened if Farmer Jones had bought a D17 put on 10 sets of wheel weights,hooked to his King Kong plow went out and tore the differential out.Called the dealer for a warranty claim?

Gary Burnett wrote: I understand and that's fine I guess something is better than nothing.The thing is I see the pictures of tractors being tested with 10 or 12 sets of wheel weights on them.What do you think would have happened if Farmer Jones had bought a D17 put on 10 sets of wheel weights,hooked to his King Kong plow went out and tore the differential out.Called the dealer for a warranty claim?

Probably why companies started to put weight limits in the operator manual. I believe the 175 and 185 had weight limits and the Nebraska test, if I remember right, stuck to that weight limit. I don't think there is a perfect test but I think Nebraska test came as close as anyone could get. You get a general idea of fuel economy, max horse power at the belt or pto and the drawbar and at what speed a certain load is pulled without dropping too many engine rpms.