Massey 135 lift a silage bale?

Cattlepen

Lads will a massey 135 lift a silage bale or would a bigger one be needed

charolais0153

Cattlepen wrote: »

Lads will a massey 135 lift a silage bale or would a bigger one be needed

No

SuperTortoise

Not without big weights on the front.

Mac Taylor

I would agree, neighbor took over a place a few years ago and it came with a 135 he stuck with it for a year and traded it for a 290 the following year. Alright for a bale of hay

Cattlepen

Can anyone advise what size of the vintage type tractors could lift a bale of silage round yard with a bale lifter?

jimmy G M

Cattlepen wrote: »

Can anyone advise what size of the vintage type tractors could lift a bale of silage round yard with a bale lifter?

You would need a min of 60 hp, so ford 4000, MF 165, DB 995 etc. Would do the job around a yard.

Mac Taylor

jimmy G M wrote: »

You would need a min of 60 hp, so ford 4000, MF 165, DB 995 etc. Would do the job around a yard.

Mf565 if you can find a rust free one..... not sure it’s vintage though

Cattlepen

Thanks lads

Jennehy

jimmy G M wrote: »

You would need a min of 60 hp, so ford 4000, MF 165, DB 995 etc. Would do the job around a yard.

Ford 3000 would lift a bale not to mind a 4000

rushvalley

If you already have a 135 and just looking to shove in a few bales during winter it'll manage fine. If you're buying a tractor go for a 165 or bigger.

kay 9

135 be fine with this years silage or haylage/hay.
Get wet heavy stuff and a 165 won't budge them off the ground never mind a 135.
Have a ferguson 20 here and it'll move haylage, tried it one day the other tractors were occupied. Was pleasantly surprised

Farmer

Worst case scenario, if it's just for feeding, it'll reverse one in. Bale spike is better than carrier, every kilo counts as does the distance out from the lift arms. With some of the carriers that have the holes for the pins extended out the front, even a 165 wont bring a bale up a hill in forward gear

I regularly move well wilted bales in a level concrete yard with a 35. With the skid brakes, it can turn on a sixpence

Mr321

Cattlepen wrote: »

Lads will a massey 135 lift a silage bale or would a bigger one be needed

Depends on the bale..

McHale bales no but I've lifted Welder, John Deere bales with mine on level ground.

Who2

There must be a lot of rp12s still about if a 3000 can lift a bale. Get something big enough with a bit of comfort an ih 885 can be picked up for handy money and well capable of doing most tasks around a yard and for the sake of it get 4x4

9935452

Mr321 wrote: »

Cattlepen wrote: »

Lads will a massey 135 lift a silage bale or would a bigger one be needed

Depends on the bale..

McHale bales no but I've lifted Welder, John Deere bales with mine on level ground.

To be fair it would depend on how wet the bales are.
Ive wrapped bales for years.
The only bale that the mchale wrapper couldnt lift was from a class 46 but the bale was saturated.
There was a lad on a forum weighing bales of haylage off a fusion . Average was 310/315kgs .
I have a 85hp 2wd which regularily draws fusion bales with a double bale handler.
No weights if the bales are relatively dry.
200kgs if they are wet .

For the op i would say if he was changing for a bigger tractor look for a tidy 8111

Wessel3

165 to small for big bales unless loaded with front weights, mf 185 even the same,
675/690 as long as there is plenty on the nose

emaherx

Wessel3 wrote: »

165 to small for big bales unless loaded with front weights, mf 185 even the same,
675/690 as long as there is plenty on the nose

A 165 and a 675 are nearly the same tractor except for the cab.

A 165 that can't lift any 4x4 bale of silage, is in need of some repair.

A 165 or 675 can lift about 1.6 metric tonnes
A 185 or 690 can lift about 2

lalababa

Cattlepen wrote: »

Lads will a massey 135 lift a silage bale or would a bigger one be needed

If you are drawing NO. If you already have the 135 and some front weights and the bales are dry weather and you are just feeding with a very small draw then you can tip away. If you are buying a tractor then 50hp + is warranted, ideally 60hp. Fusion bales get up to 900 kg+ wettish made. Tractordata.com or .co.uk will give you an idea of what tractors lift what. 165 up with weights would do draws. JD from 1630 up with weights. DB 990 up ditto.

Wessel3

Only speaking from experience. Put a fusion bale. Dry not even wet and lush grass. Packed really tight and it will wheelie a 165/185 on a bale tipper. Weights needed. And I wouldn't dare go on the road. Seems to be a game on here who can have the smallest machine barely fit for the job. Trust me I've tried.

anthony500_1

I've a mf265 here. And hilly land and yard. The 265 will lift a fusion bale. But it will also lift the nose till the bale sits on the ground again if you take off to fast, drive to fast, go up a hill nose first. My land is all around the yard and no road work is needed to draw bales, but if it was, I would not chance the 265 on the road, it would bounce you in over the wall and the next wall, and the wall after that.

Tbh i look forward to the day I can afford to trade it in for something safer to handle wet or dry bales.

emaherx

Wessel3 wrote: »

Only speaking from experience. Put a fusion bale. Dry not even wet and lush grass. Packed really tight and it will wheelie a 165/185 on a bale tipper. Weights needed. And I wouldn't dare go on the road. Seems to be a game on here who can have the smallest machine barely fit for the job. Trust me I've tried.

But you suggested a 675 instead?
Weights are advisable and a simple upgrade for any tractor that is light in the front.

20silkcut

9935452 wrote: »

To be fair it would depend on how wet the bales are.
Ive wrapped bales for years.
The only bale that the mchale wrapper couldnt lift was from a class 46 but the bale was saturated.
There was a lad on a forum weighing bales of haylage off a fusion . Average was 310/315kgs .
I have a 85hp 2wd which regularily draws fusion bales with a double bale handler.
No weights if the bales are relatively dry.
200kgs if they are wet .

For the op i would say if he was changing for a bigger tractor look for a tidy 8111

+1 on the 8111 not only will it lift bales for sport I tested mine last year after fitting new tyres and it pulled a trailer load of 18 mc Hale bales of silage up a hill at her ease. With good tyres it’s an animal. With a handler on the back you can root bales out of anywhere don’t have to store them on concrete.
Can be got cheaper than most 165s and would beat the living daylights out of it handling bales.

Cattlepen

I was only asking about it for lift bales to a feed barrier within a small concrete yard. It won’t be drawing trailers or any heavy rough stuff

emaherx

Cattlepen wrote: »

I was only asking about it for lift bales to a feed barrier within a small concrete yard. It won’t be drawing trailers or any heavy rough stuff

Do you have a 135? Or are you in the market for a small tractor?

If you have one just try lifting one of your bales (not too high ). The biggest issue will be how light the tractor is in front but you can add weight. Most 135's don't have power steering so too much weight out front will make it a pig to steer, so it's never going to be an ideal choice.

And as advised by other posters here the 8111 is a good budget option and a capable tractor.

Hard Knocks

emaherx wrote: »

A 165 and a 675 are nearly the same tractor except for the cab.

A 165 that can't lift any 4x4 bale of silage, is in need of some repair.

A 165 or 675 can lift about 1.6 metric tonnes
A 185 or 690 can lift about 2

Does the small back tyre not give the 675 an advantage over similar powered tractors

20silkcut

Cattlepen wrote: »

I was only asking about it for lift bales to a feed barrier within a small concrete yard. It won’t be drawing trailers or any heavy rough stuff

135 is not designed for bales. Just mentioned the 8111 cause it’s in the same price range and very much able for bales.

emaherx

https://goo.gl/images/MzswEy

Bass Reeves

emaherx wrote: »

A 165 and a 675 are nearly the same tractor except for the cab.

A 165 that can't lift any 4x4 bale of silage, is in need of some repair.

A 165 or 675 can lift about 1.6 metric tonnes
A 185 or 690 can lift about 2

No totally different tractors a 675 was very similar to a 375, there was the 2, series and 5 series between them and the the 165. There si more to lifing as well than just the lifting capability of the rear linkage.

A 165 had a lift capibility of about 1.63T, here wheelbase was 82" and she weighted between 2.3-3.5T depending on spec and her pump flow to the 3 point lift was 4.5 gallons/min with a total pump flow of 10 gallon/min. The 165 was only 58hp as well

The 675 had a lift cabibility of very slightly over 2T, it wheel base was 90'' and it total weight was 3.9-4.1 T. I have not got figures of the flow to the 3 point linkage but its total pump flow was 17 gallons/min so I imagine it flow to the 3point linkage was above 6gallons/min. As well it was 62HP.


The 275 and 575 were in between with the 275 actually being a slighter stronger machine. WB is very important lifting a bale as it gives stability a heavier tractor will also have more weight in front of the rear axle which will prevent the tendancy of the front wheels to come off the ground and a longer WB will give more weight at the front of the tractor.

If you ever saw a 675 and a 165 side by side you see straight away the difference. You want to go to a 188 to compare to a 675.


A 165 was grand to lift bales up to 7-8 years ago. Older balers only made bales to about 700kgs, newer bales are hitting 900kgs when bales are down near 20%DM. The extar WB and greater lifting capibility on tractors after the 165 make a huge difference. Zetors would have better lift capibility and better WB than MF's in general.

Also one other thing about stated lift capibility this is the lift capibility at the balls at the 3point linkage. It is like you had a weight that is 1'' wide that you lift as far as AFAIK. A bale goes 4' back beyond and a couple of inches this so weight lifting capibility has to be higher In general to real lift capibility is genearlly is less than 50% of the stated lift capibility when daeling with bales. So a tractor with a lift capibility of 1.6T could only lift a bale of 700ish kgs. even if it had the stability ( wheelbase and weight in front of rear axle)

Wessel3

mf 675 is around 3 ton nothing more, 165 is around 1.5 tons I think. only giving experience as I have both and depending on bales they can be bossed around no problems, surprising the size of tractor you need to manage the big fusion bales now a days. front weights a must
135 will lift but will wheelie, and side brakes needed. mf 165 has to be driven in reverse here due to no weights on her , lifts ok but the pump is knocking hard, just abuse on them really

Muckit

Wessel3 wrote: »

mf 165 .....lifts ok but the pump is knocking hard, just abuse on them really

It will start knocking if you push lift lever too far and she goes into constant pumping

9935452

Muckit wrote: »

Wessel3 wrote: »

mf 165 .....lifts ok but the pump is knocking hard, just abuse on them really

It will start knocking if you push lift lever too far and she goes into constant pumping

They knock if the pump is worn too.
165 and 135 at home knock and crack lifting heavy weights before it gets near constant pumping

Muckit

9935452 wrote: »

They knock if the pump is worn too.

I'd say it'd be more wear in the pressure release valve.... stemming from people having it shoved up into constant pumping when they shouldn't !!