MF question

tismesoitis

I see lads advertising 100 series masseys some say square axel others have round. What differance does it make to the tractor is one type better than the other?

tanko

I think the tractors with square axles are regarded as the better ones but I'm not sure why.

White Clover

Tanko is correct. Square axle masseys have oil immersed disk brakes similar to today's tractors. Older round axle tractors had dry brakes and are best avoided.

kk.man

+1...square ones appears from the mid seventies till end of production...you will see they are more expensive than the round ones.

emaherx

White Clover wrote: »

Tanko is correct. Square axle masseys have oil immersed disk brakes similar to today's tractors. Older round axle tractors had dry brakes and are best avoided.

Yes Square axles have the far superior Oil immersed disk brakes, however if the money is right I wouldn't write off the older round axle dry brake type, could be a valuable yard tractor to many and the brakes are simple enough to adjust and maintain, but will most likely need to be overhauled on any bought in machine as Irish farmers are allergic to brake maintenance.

Obviously if the tractor is going to be doing a lot of hauling of large trailers or a lot of side braking then the square axles are a must.

White Clover

emaherx wrote: »

Yes Square axles have the far superior Oil immersed disk brakes, however if the money is right I wouldn't write off the older round axle dry brake type, could be a valuable yard tractor to many and the brakes are simple enough to adjust and maintain, but will most likely need to be overhauled on any bought in machine as Irish farmers are allergic to brake maintenance.

Obviously if the tractor is going to be doing a lot of hauling of large trailers or a lot of side braking then the square axles are a must.

Good point. I have a little fleet of Zetors myself for handy jobs!

emaherx

White Clover wrote: »

Good point. I have a little fleet of Zetors myself for handy jobs!

And you dare speak ill of Massey Brakes? :D:D:D:D:D:D

White Clover

emaherx wrote: »

And you dare speak ill of Massey Brakes? :D:D:D:D:D:D

LOL, I know!!
Like you said though, a bit of maintenance goes a long way.

Keepgrowing

White Clover wrote: »

LOL, I know!!
Like you said though, a bit of maintenance goes a long way.

I de

emaherx

tismesoitis wrote: »

I see lads advertising 100 series masseys some say square axel others have round. What differance does it make to the tractor is one type better than the other?

Just reread this, be aware if looking at 135's on DoneDeal that they are sometimes advertised as having square axles but this is the front axle and should be advertised as straight for newer type or swept back for older type.

Don't think any major advantage of the straight axle on these other than age. Might be a little stronger but Don't think swept back were particularly troublesome but have more parts to wear.

Think lads advertise these as square axle type because enough people have heard that square axle models are better but don't know why

charolais0153

How would you know round brakes from square

emaherx

135's generally have round rear axles with drum brakes. There may be a tiny amount of specialist or modified 135's with disk brakes or industrial models like the MF 40 being sold as 135's.

lookinghere

Once the axle is on it be happy with it lol

emaherx

charolais0153 wrote: »

How would you know round brakes from square

The brake disks are all round. It's the rear axle housings that are square or round. You will see it from looking at back of tractor.

kk.man

That right about the square axel in the MF 135...they mean the front square axel (which there is little difference between either IMO)...However there is a big difference on the 165 168 etc round verses square in the rear of these.

croot

charolais0153 wrote: »

How would you know round brakes from square

Its very obvious really. I have a square axel 165 and you wont mistake them




Round

greysides

What was the difference between the 165 and 168? And 185 and 188?

Was it the same difference?

Until now I thought it was the axles.

Muckit

The 8series are younger versions of their 5series cousins. The 8s had 6" spacers fitted between the gearbox and back end housing. They had a slightly bigger door as a result.

They also had slightly more horsepower.

The 165 had the 203 and 212 engines. The 168 had the 236 engine with 66hp. The 203 engine models were usually found in the older 165s and the 212 engined ones usually had the square rear axle.

The 148 was the replacement for the 135. It had the same engine as the 135 but the fuel pump was tweaked to give 2hp more (45 up to 47hp).

emaherx

greysides wrote: »

What was the difference between the 165 and 168? And 185 and 188?

Was it the same difference?

Until now I thought it was the axles.

Longer wheel base on the 8's, there is a spacer section in the transmission in a 188 or 168 compared to 185 or 165.

emaherx

Muckit wrote: »

The 8series are younger versions of their 5series cousins. The 8s had 6" spacers fitted between the gearbox and back end housing. They had a slightly bigger door as a result.

They also had slightly more horsepower.

The 165 had the 203 and 212 engines. The 168 had the 236 engine with 66hp. The 203 engine models were usually found in the older 165s and the 212 engined ones usually had the square rear axle.

The 148 was the replacement for the 135. It had the same engine as the 135 but the fuel pump was tweaked to give 2hp more (45 up to 47hp).

Upstaged and beaten to it by Muckit

Muckit

The 188s also had a spacer to the front aswel as far as I know, compared to the 185. They had weighted wheels. I also think they had an upgraded gearbox and were multi power.

lookinghere

Muckit wrote: »

The 8series are younger versions of their 5series cousins. The 8s had 6" spacers fitted between the gearbox and back end housing. They had a slightly bigger door as a result.

They also had slightly more horsepower.

The 165 had the 203 and 212 engines. The 168 had the 236 engine with 66hp. The 203 engine models were usually found in the older 165s and the 212 engined ones usually had the square rear axle.

The 148 was the replacement for the 135. It had the same engine as the 135 but the fuel pump was tweaked to give 2hp more (45 up to 47hp).

You have cleared up all the queries now lol

emaherx

Muckit wrote: »

The 188s also had a spacer to the front aswel as far as I know, compared to the 185. They had weighted wheels. I also think they had an upgraded gearbox and were multi power.

Well weighted wheels and multipower were options in the 5's so they are not necessarily noticeable differences, but the wheelbase and engines certainly are.

White Clover

emaherx wrote: »

Well weighted wheels and multipower were options in the 5's so they are not necessarily noticeable differences, but the wheelbase and engines certainly are.

What are the specs of the 175 and 178?

mayota

Weren't the 8's all 8 speed (1-4 L+H) and 5's 6 speed (1-3 L+H) ?

White Clover

mayota wrote: »

Weren't the 8's all 8 speed (1-4 L+H) and 5's 6 speed (1-3 L+H) ?

Neighbor here had 2 x 188. 1 was multi power
and other 8 speed.

greysides

Those are my 'era' of tractor, with 65's and 135's. I couldn't drive any of the more modern ones.

A little 65 with a Vicon Lely Acrobat on the back was the making of a summer afternoon. Or a 168 with a PZ haybob.

A Ford County transmuted to a 5000 with twin hoops as a roll cage and a rotovator on the worked nicely at other times of the year. The heat from the engine keeping you warm on frosty evenings.

emaherx

A quick look at Tractordata.com contradicts some of what was said on here already. (Although they seem to contradict themselves on some of their data.)
Looks like 8's and 5's have a big overlap in the years

White Clover wrote: »

What are the specs of the 175 and 178?

Difference between a 178/175 and a 188/185 seems to be lower HP and lower Hydraulic output.
Same Engine but different pump? or just incorrect data on the webpage?
178 A4.248 73Hp
188 A4.248 75HP

mayota wrote: »

Weren't the 8's all 8 speed (1-4 L+H) and 5's 6 speed (1-3 L+H) ?

According to Tractordata 178 and 175 had choice of 6X2, 8X2 and 12X4(multipower) gearboxes where as 188 and 185 had choice of 8X2 or 12X4(multipower) gearboxes.

lookinghere

emaherx wrote: »

A quick look at Tractordata.com contradicts some of what was said on here already. (Although they seem to contradict themselves on some of their data.)
Looks like 8's and 5's have a big overlap in the years



Difference between a 178/175 and a 188/185 seems to be lower HP and lower Hydraulic output.
Same Engine but different pump? or just incorrect data on the webpage?
178 A4.248 73Hp
188 A4.248 75HP



According to Tractordata 178 and 175 had choice of 6X2, 8X2 and 12X4(multipower) gearboxes where as 188 and 185 had choice of 8X2 or 12X4(multipower) gearboxes.

Did it also put it had no engine braking with the multi power lol

larthehar

lookinghere wrote: »

Did it also put it had no engine braking with the multi power lol

It did in high assuming oil levels were full!
We had a 188, 3F 1R, H+L and high/low multipower..
Handy for field work but dangerous with loads on the road..

White Clover

lookinghere wrote: »

Did it also put it had no engine braking with the multi power lol

You have engine braking in high multi

lookinghere

larthehar wrote: »

It did in low assuming oil levels were full!
We had a 188, 3F 1R, H+L and high/low multipower..
Handy for field work but dangerous with loads on the road..

I know. They were grand once you no them. But for a lad that wouldn't going down a hill would be dangerous

Base price

I thought some 148's had multi power as well.

emaherx

Base price wrote: »

I thought some 148's had multi power as well.

It was definitely on option across the range, even common to see in 135's

emaherx

larthehar wrote: »

It did in high assuming oil levels were full!
We had a 188, 3F 1R, H+L and high/low multipower..
Handy for field work but dangerous with loads on the road..

I'm not surprised that tractordata.com hasn't listed all possible configurations.

Definitely a tractor to keep the brakes well maintained on!

We had a 188 that turned out to be a 178 when we looked at the serial number, previous owner upgraded the bonnet medallions!

croot

emaherx wrote: »

It was definitely on option across the range, even common to see in 135's

My uncle imported a 135 multi power from the uk in the early 80's and the first time I was let drive it was bringing in hay bales on the buck rake. I got the free wheel thrill of multi power down a big hill and lost all the bales on the way. Oh how we all laughed ..... not.

CloughCasey1

croot wrote: »

My uncle imported a 135 multi power from the uk in the early 80's and the first time I was let drive it was bringing in hay bales on the buck rake. I got the free wheel thrill of multi power down a big hill and lost all the bales on the way. Oh how we all laughed ..... not.

FIL had two 35s when i came here first. One had multipower other didnt. Was going to take loader and all other good parts of the one without multi but the 35 with multi head went so he traded it for a 135. You would notice the multi on hills when at hay or fert it would hold the power on downward slopes and not just run off.