135's and money the make?

MidlandsM

MF 135's ..what is it about them that they command such a premium.....I see them for sale up to 6k?

Is it collectors going mad for them? Are they scarce because many have been exported? or what is it?

kincaid

just a nice little very reliable no frills tractor, im doing mine up at the moment...
There was one sold in original condition at Cambridge Auctions about 2 years ago for 14,200 stg...

zetecescort

Also because of their size they are easy transported to shows etc. easy enough restore aswell, can be done in a garden shed without the needed for heavy lifting

liam7831

They are totally overpriced, fellas do them up and ask outrageous money. They were over 350,000 built so there not exactly what you call rare.

MidlandsM

liam7831 wrote: »

They are totally overpriced, fellas do them up and ask outrageous money. They were over 350,000 built so there not exactly what you call rare.

yeah, so I'm at a loss to the price of them

NuckingFacker

MidlandsM wrote: »

yeah, so I'm at a loss to the price of them

Also no real need to mention just how poor a tractor they actually are/were either. Mouse power, slow, noisy, poor hydraulics and a brutal lift system. I've a 165 in the shed now, equally crap imo, equally overvalued imo and I spent many, many a torturous hour on a 135/165/188 turning hay/baling/drawing trailers.

Yet an International harvester/Case, is considered to be inferior, much cheaper to buy, not regarded at all, when their hydraulics were/are leagues ahead, fantastic engines, better steel etc etc.

Same goes for David Browns - have you ever endured a worse engineered/less ergonomic malady and yet people rave about them. A Zetor felt tight and comfy by comparison. The whole 135 phenomenon is a mystery to me and I'm a tractor fan. I'm also at a loss as to why any sane person would buy anything except a Kubota tractor at the moment - the engineering is leagues ahead of everyone else, the build quality is rock solid and they are the next thing to bullet-proof. And yet people buy Dorfs, zetors and all the rest. Just goes to show that what makes sense is usually the last thing that's popular.

iverjohnston

A lot of the phenomenon is driven by nostalgia. The 135 and the 35 before it were the tractors which really mechanised farming, and as the OP states, 350,000 were sold. An awful lot of people learn to drive on one, and spent formative years ( well, from 7 till early teens) zooming round the yard on them. Then when these people hit the mid 40's and get a yearning to recreate their youth, they want one like the father owned. And often have the money to acquire one.

NuckingFacker, sell the 165 and buy a couple of Internationals!

piston

There are other similar sized tractors from around the same era that were just as good and can be bought much cheaper. Super Dexta, Ford 2000/3000, DB885, various Internationals, the smaller Zetors.

I own and use a 165, bought because I learned to drive in one and to be perfectly honestly, when I remove the rose tinted specs, it's a heap of junk and I should change for a Ford 4600 or a International 574. MF165s had terrible steering, brakes and hydraulics. Their only redeeming feature is the Perkins engines.

The 135 had brakes which were even more useless than the 165. The only thing good to say about the brakes on a 135 is that they are easy to overhaul.

NuckingFacker

iverjohnston wrote: »

A lot of the phenomenon is driven by nostalgia. The 135 and the 35 before it were the tractors which really mechanised farming, and as the OP states, 350,000 were sold. An awful lot of people learn to drive on one, and spent formative years ( well, from 7 till early teens) zooming round the yard on them. Then when these people hit the mid 40's and get a yearning to recreate their youth, they want one like the father owned. And often have the money to acquire one.

NuckingFacker, sell the 165 and buy a couple of Internationals!

I'm keeping it as my pension:D. If prices keep going up, by the time I hang up my hammer they'll be worth their weight in gold. And about as useful.

Figerty

NuckingFacker wrote: »

I'm keeping it as my pension:D. If prices keep going up, by the time I hang up my hammer they'll be worth their weight in gold. And about as useful.

The 35X was a huge leap forward in a providing a useful all round tractor in the 60's. My 35X is 50 years old and still easy to drive.

Lift is reasonably good for it's size with draft control, and trailer hydraulics. Dual clutch, live drive. Light steering, easy to grease and service.

Have a 35 and wouldn't part with it. Why? cheap to run, easy maintain... fully air-conditioned (no Cab).

I can turn it in the yard (like something you would see in the dukes of Hazard) on six pence with the brakes separated and hit the left or right !

135 was a bit more powerful, but I never really liked them.

Questionsmad

MF 135s were one of the best tractors ever made for there size never mind zetors and Kubutas, and are still more reliable than zetors or any other tractor. There is a great lift in them as the lift in my 135 and my friends 135 are still as good as the day they came out of the factory, and unless your lazy the steering and brakes are great, I have no trouble at all with them. The price of a good 135 is around 4000-4500 but it is costly doing them up so people try to make money by selling them deer. The 135 is a much more comfortable tractor to drive than a 35 as it extras such as the foot throttle and Differencial lock and a dual clutch. 135 are gear perfect for topping with the finger bar mower and are very easy on land, also they are so light on diesal they pretty much run on fums. And as for them being load I think they sound lovely, if you disagree you should invest in a nice pair of earmuffs.
Questionmad

Masseymad

good man questions, i theink that youare 100% correct and the 135 is a great yoke to pull for its size

NuckingFacker

Masseymad wrote: »

good man questions, i theink that youare 100% correct and the 135 is a great yoke to pull for its size

Jasus, I thought from your username you were a Ford man all the way.

MidlandsM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Jasus, I thought from your username you were a Ford man all the way.

lol .....and MassyMad's not biased at all, at all......:pac:

Masseymad

sure im not biassed at all i like masseys,fords, landinis (they kinda are MFs),fiats
i just happen to think the MF 135 is a class yoke

MidlandsM

Masseymad wrote: »

sure im not biassed at all i like masseys,fords, landinis (they kinda are MFs),fiats
i just happen to think the MF 135 is a class yoke

since when is a massey like a ford? :pac:

Masseymad

there not ... landinis are

NuckingFacker

Masseymad wrote: »

there not ... landinis are

Landinis are nothing like Fords.

Masseymad

there the same colour hahaha

almostover

Agree that the MF's arent as good as some competitors tractors. Not from an agri background but have worked a 165 before....woeful lift on it! Very poor range, would hardly lift the back of a 6 foot topper 6 inches off the ground without serious top link adjustment. Engine is good but brakes are woeful (square axle even!) seating position is sh**e and the foot throttle is a pain too. Not to mention the 6 speed gear box which is painfully slow on the road and has 2 useless reverse gears, one too fast and one too slow! Driven a zetor 4718 a bit too and is a much more comfortable tractor to operate not to mention with probably a better lift and definitely a better gearbox. If only the zetor steel didnt turn out like swiss cheese after 15-20 years of use.

We actually bought a rough enough john deere 2130 for small money a few years back and its 10 times the tractor that a 165/185 is! Savage lift, strong, reliable engine, lovely steering, comfy cab. Pity tis so run down by us now....parts are costly and until she stops working tis unlikely anything more than basic maintenance can be afforded by us.

Masseymad

almostover wrote: »

Agree that the MF's arent as good as some competitors tractors. Not from an agri background but have worked a 165 before....woeful lift on it! Very poor range, would hardly lift the back of a 6 foot topper 6 inches off the ground without serious top link adjustment. Engine is good but brakes are woeful (square axle even!) seating position is sh**e and the foot throttle is a pain too. Not to mention the 6 speed gear box which is painfully slow on the road and has 2 useless reverse gears, one too fast and one too slow! Driven a zetor 4718 a bit too and is a much more comfortable tractor to operate not to mention with probably a better lift and definitely a better gearbox. If only the zetor steel didnt turn out like swiss cheese after 15-20 years of use.

We actually bought a rough enough john deere 2130 for small money a few years back and its 10 times the tractor that a 165/185 is! Savage lift, strong, reliable engine, lovely steering, comfy cab. Pity tis so run down by us now....parts are costly and until she stops working tis unlikely anything more than basic maintenance can be afforded by us.

to be honest with you i hate 165s...and as for how high the lift can go can be adjusted...if you want a rite 100 series mf just buy a 168

Figerty

Masseymad wrote: »

to be honest with you i hate 165s...and as for how high the lift can go can be adjusted...if you want a rite 100 series mf just buy a 168

Jaysus lads,, they stopped making the 165s in 1975,....ye are giving out about a 40 year old tractor..

NuckingFacker

Figerty wrote: »

Jaysus lads,, they stopped making the 165s in 1975,....ye are giving out about a 40 year old tractor..

Round here, that's considered suspiciously new and hi-tech. It'll take another ten years or so to form a proper opinion.

Masseymad

sure theres a lad round here that has a 165 and no car and the women love him

MidlandsM

Masseymad wrote: »

sure theres a lad round here that has a 165 and no car and the women love him

:rolleyes:

Masseymad

well to be fair that was a small bit of an exaduration....

flutered

my first was a 20 tvo, i then upgraded to a 20 desiel, next was a 35 tvo, then a 4711, i retired after that, there is now a 165 in the yard, it does what it is asked, (which is not much), i do not expect to see any other tractor in the yard in my lifetime.

Avns1s

Masseymad wrote: »

sure theres a lad round here that has a 165 and no car and the women love him

He must have something else as well with the 165..... if u catch my drift!!

MidlandsM

Avns1s wrote: »

He must have something else as well with the 165..... if u catch my drift!!

yeah, probably an oul batchelor with lots of oul land n' cash.......:P

flutered

Avns1s wrote: »

He must have something else as well with the 165..... if u catch my drift!!

dosh and viagra, a potent mix for the opposite sex.

Figerty

I drove a 165 at the weekend and it is to be fair a pig of a tractor to drive! The front wheels took an epileptic fit when I speeded up on the road; I had forgotten how wobbly they get with any bit of wear.

I was also on a 168 as well putting in bales. The cab in that must have been designed by a fella with a rubber neck and previously been a WWII Tank driver. The visibility was shocking.

My Ford 4000 is a rolls royce by comparision.. but the 35 is nicer to drive than both of them!

Masseymad

Figerty wrote: »

I drove a 165 at the weekend and it is to be fair a pig of a tractor to drive! The front wheels took an epileptic fit when I speeded up on the road; I had forgotten how wobbly they get with any bit of wear.

I was also on a 168 as well putting in bales. The cab in that must have been designed by a fella with a rubber neck and previously been a WWII Tank driver. The visibility was shocking.

My Ford 4000 is a rolls royce by comparision.. but the 35 is nicer to drive than both of them!

168s r savage what kinda cab was on it?