john deere turbo

the 8630s and 8640s used the block as part of the frame and so they flexed the block alot and they cracked between the cylinders and wouldn't hold head gaskets. The reason most of th 86's got updated to a 50 series motor is cause deere beefed up the blocks on them.
 
agreed the VGT turbos John Deere tries to run are junk! We have encountered massive turbo failures but the good thing about John Deere are they so stabnd behind thier product. I have spent numerous hours with John Deere guys trying to figure out thier turbo problems. Simplest thing I have told them is go back to old school! I was in a John Deere 9630 that had enough wires in thier to make the Interntional Space station look low tech and they still couldn't figure out what the problem was. But our Quads with the 15 litre cummins were still going strong!
 
Got a neighbor that has an 8970 (think) that was hammering pretty bad when he was trying to finish up plowing this season, it sounded high in the motor from what I hear, would love to tear into it as I've never had a chance to work on a big motor.

Interesting with that block flexing story, always like learning new stuff.

Jim
 
the deere 8960s had 855 cummins and the 8970s had n14s i would love to have a 8960 you cant beat an 855
 
Kman9090 said:
agreed the VGT turbos John Deere tries to run are junk! We have encountered massive turbo failures but the good thing about John Deere are they so stabnd behind thier product. I have spent numerous hours with John Deere guys trying to figure out thier turbo problems. Simplest thing I have told them is go back to old school!
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't see any VGT issues Deere might have as being any better or worse than any other manufacturer that uses VGTs. Simply put, I don't find them terribly reliable regardless of what they are on.

I agree that going back to a more basic style turbo would probably fix a lot of headaches, but I don't see this being an option for OEMs with upcoming Tier 4 emissions standards coming up.

Kman9090 said:
I was in a John Deere 9630 that had enough wires in thier to make the Interntional Space station look low tech and they still couldn't figure out what the problem was. But our Quads with the 15 litre cummins were still going strong!
Click to expand...

If you think that thing has a lot of wires on it, I can assure you that the new stuff being developed will have more...
 
allisfarmer said:
the deere 8960s had 855 cummins and the 8970s had n14s i would love to have a 8960 you cant beat an 855
Click to expand...
same motor :what:

John deere put their own electronics on them that failed and caused alot of headaches also. BUT i do agree that putting the cummins in there was one of their better ideas....

For a slightly older tractor and alot less $$$ you can have a 4x more reliable tractor. one of our tractors is a ford 976 with a 855 n14 motor, our older tractor is a versatile 895 with the same motor(the ford is rated at 360 hp and the versatile is rated at 310) and it has well over 12k hours and it runs awesome.

Arent the new 9630 deere tractors 13.5 lieters?? and they are trying to push 530 some odd horses outta them?? case is doing almost the same thing with 15 lieters, in my opinion the 15 lieter cummins motor will last much longer than the 13.5 lieter deere motor.

as the old timer saying goes "There's no replacement for displacement"

sorry if it sounds like im on a anti John Deere crusade, we own a john deere 4020 and we didnt update from it untill last year(we bought a new holland 8970), it had 11k hours when we rebuilt it. we still use it to run our grain augers
 
naa i 100% agree about the cash per horsepower lol green paints expensive versys and steigers are the hands down best horses for the money simple made to pull sh## lol
 
I work for a guy part time that has 2 8220s and a 8320 both of the 8220s are cr and keep throwing codes for rp and about every 200 hours are throwing fuel filter codes and they aint even bad I think he should just get Fendts and be done with it
 
If there's no "replacement for displacement" we'd all be driving Powerstrokes :badidea: . No one gives Deere any credit for designing their own engines. We run mostly green with one red 4wd. Our old 8650 JD has more technology built into it than a 10 year newer 9230 Case.
 
mondtster said:
Personally, I don't see any VGT issues Deere might have as being any better or worse than any other manufacturer that uses VGTs. Simply put, I don't find them terribly reliable regardless of what they are on.

I agree that going back to a more basic style turbo would probably fix a lot of headaches, but I don't see this being an option for OEMs with upcoming Tier 4 emissions standards coming up.



If you think that thing has a lot of wires on it, I can assure you that the new stuff being developed will have more...
Click to expand...

HArdly any turbo failures out of the Case or Challenger tractors. I mean their are some but not like the John Deere failures. The machine I was referring to with all the wires was a test tractor with an experimental turbo. Everything on the tractor was being controlled my a laptop by the guy sitting next to me. He could turn the horspower up or down as I laoded or un loaded. John Deere has practically been giving their 9630's away for as cheap they have been selling them.
 
RLH-Motorsports said:
Massey Fergs are the only way to go except the 1155 bc that 8cyl motor was junk! first i would do with a john deere would be sell it!
Click to expand...

My uncle has an MF1155. its gutless, burns 11gal/hr, but it sounds dang good with straight exhaust!
 
59Dsul said:
If there's no "replacement for displacement" we'd all be driving Powerstrokes :badidea: . No one gives Deere any credit for designing their own engines. We run mostly green with one red 4wd. Our old 8650 JD has more technology built into it than a 10 year newer 9230 Case.
Click to expand...

the displacement of a V8 is spread between 8 cylinders and the displacement of a 6 cylinder is spread between 6 cylinders and so on you get the idea, so theoreticly the pistons of a cummins are larger than a powerstrokes.

thats why my 4 cylinder 134 cu. inch F head jeep motor has bigger pistons than my chevy 350
 
YOUNG GUNS15 said:
the displacement of a V8 is spread between 8 cylinders and the displacement of a 6 cylinder is spread between 6 cylinders and so on you get the idea, so theoreticly the pistons of a cummins are larger than a powerstrokes.

thats why my 4 cylinder 134 cu. inch F head jeep motor has bigger pistons than my chevy 350
Click to expand...

Right but at the same time while the piston may be larger in diameter the volume of the cylinder is what is being measured and is what counts. My '07 Grizzly 700 has the same piston diameter as my 5.9l Cummins lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top