11:56:43pm, Monday, April 15, 2024
|
Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 09/16/2014 Posts: 153 |
Cleaning out shop yesterday and came across an old NTPA folder from when I pulled. This shows the start of the component tractors. I broke so much stuff in 1995 & 1996 that I wanted a variance to run some of the stuff my fellow competitors had. After my last rejection letter from NTPA in spring of 1997 I did it the hard way. My last tractor I built in 1997 had a one piece frame with rollcage, truck differential, drop box, and humpco 3 speed trans in a 4010 rearend. I showed up at Tomah for the first hook with new tractor the day after the Randy Rose accident and everyone was looking at my rollcage, one piece frame, outdoor brake hats and engine on rollers and didn't notice how much cast was missing. Not a lot of cast left so the next year for safety and fair competition components were allowed in the NTPA Super Stock class. What a good decision by NTPA to allow components in the Super Stock and Pro Stock classes. I had a alcohol tractor and had and RPM limiter to save my engine every time something failed in the driveline, but so many Super Stock and Pro Stocks lost there engine when this happened and most where out the rest of the year. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Stevie
|
Good read on the history of our sport and how it developed! Thanks for putting it on here Doug. Your posts are always informative and give a different perspective to a lot of issues in pulling. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Curious fan
|
Who was the first to have a component tractor and what year did they become legal? Thanks |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
another fan
|
Either Clifton or Johnson? Maybe Hootman about the same time? |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
The first one might have been joe kwiakowski? That is the earliest one I can remember |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Future
|
Schmucker ran his component prostock @ OSTPA for 1 year before NTPA allowed it. Build it and they will come! |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
just curious the barnyard beast was sold years ago to a guy out east i think the name was sonnetag but whatever happened to the tractor from there thanks for any info |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 09/23/2008 Posts: 632 |
Hull's out of time tractor currently |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
correct
|
First it went to Larry kline and became the green Gate Super Deere or something like that. Then sonnentag. I think sonnentag took the engine out and some other stuff and turned it into a component tractor and that what the outta time tractor is.. so Hulls got some of it. The barnyard beast chassis then made its way to keighm parabek in ohio and he ran it for years until he got one of the old smokin hot deere component chassis. dont know where the chassis is now. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 03/14/2010 Posts: 58 |
Green Gate Savage |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Moderator Registered: 01/11/2009 Posts: 1,576 |
Component Tinker Toy debuted in Ft. Wayne, Indiana in winter of 2006. Bryan Lively - 
    |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Chip42
|
Both Rampage and Aftermath were out in 2005 on the OSTPA circuit as component Pro Stocks. Can't remember where they were debuted...I know that Rampage won the Tiffin OSTPA pull in July 2005 and I would guess that may have been one of the first times out. I didn't see it personally until Randolph and Canton. I know it was very close but I think Karlens may have finished Aftermath before Schmuckers got the new Rampage out...I could be wrong though. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Moderator Registered: 01/11/2009 Posts: 1,576 |
It was actually early 2005, I have a photo of the first pass by Mr. Don Masterson on the component in my archives. Bryan Lively -
|
|
Conner's
|
Fan
|
Conner's were the first. Light years ahead of the rest. |
|
Re: Conner's
|
still had an oliver rear
|
sorry but the connor tractor still had a tractor rear end. it may have had some truck parts in it but it was still an 1850 rear in bad medicine. |
|
Re: Conner's
|
Funny looking Oliver rear end
|
Here is the outside -
Here is the inside - 
|
|
Re: Conner's
|
Looking back
|
I believe don mastersons tinker toy was the first component pro stock to be built. |
|
Re: Conner's
|
Thinking
|
I think Rampage was the first Component Pro Stock to pull with OSTPA. Not sure who had the first Component Pro in the country. |
|
Re: Conner's
|
still had an oliver rear
|
that first picture sure looks like an oliver rear end to me. so you picture PROVES MY POINT. sure it had truck parts in it [as i said before] but the housing was still oliver. oliver. oliver. oliver. last i knew oliver made tractors and that rear end housing was from a tractor. if bad medicine didnt have a tractor rear end it wouldnt have been legal. i'm pretty sure the connors were NOT the first to put truck parts in a tractor housing either. thats been going on for years. since the very early mod days. |
|
Re: Conner's
|
Crazy
|
Still an Oliver rear end.
How about you chnage your thought and say Oliver housing. other than that it is a component. Pretty easy to tell that. |
|
Re: Conner's
|
still had an oliver rear
|
said oliver housing repeatedly! said truck internals repeatedly! what part dont you understand? its still an oliver rear end. almost every rear has aftermarket parts [some from trucks and some custom made]. sure as sh!t connors were NOT the first to put truck parts IN a TRACTOR rear end. bad medicine was 100% legal in its day and component tractors WERE NOT LEGAL YET!!! whats next you going to tell us that it was a billet block because it had billet rods in it? Lustik made that tractor into a component tractor a few years AFTER they bought it!!!!!!!! |
|
It was a component
|
Fan
|
I don't care about what it was "housed in" by intentional design it was a component before they were legal. Full frame chassis. Housing with Eatin truck parts, there was nothing agricultural about that rear ended other than the housing. No different than using a Doc Rearend, Fullpull, Ace, etc. So they used a 2255 Oliver rearend to house their parts in (yes 2255 not an 1850) The design was component and made them the first in the SS class. You are getting caught up in the semantics of the housing and not the design. |
|
Re: It was a component
|
correct
|
What you see in those Conner pictures is still going on in classes today that components are not legal in. As long as its tucked inside an ag housing, its considered an ag rear end. Take the ag housing away and expose the parts and bam you're component. It's semantics but by the letter of the rule Conners was not and would not today be considered a component. |
|
Re: Phone number for builder of Bad Medicine
|
Wanting to build a Oliver puller wanting them to build the motor and fuel system need phone number |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
Tinker toy was the first that I remember Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:16PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Roscoe
|
i always thought it was the orginal diehard deere that was the first pro component Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:16PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Registered: 03/31/2008 Posts: 761 |
IIRC that one was kind of like Bad Medicine mentioned above. It used an OEM rear end housing, but it was from a powershift tranny they were allowed to remove which left the ending and rear connected by only the frame. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:16PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Ryan
|
That's what I was thinking |
|
Component Pro
|
Registered: 10/23/2015 Posts: 50 |
Several years ago there was a tractor for sale in The Puller advertised as a "component pro stock". It was either a Case or Case IH that said Hoyt Clagwell on the side shields. Said it had a truck rear and an 800 or something cube CAT motor in it. This was way before components were allowed to run in pro stock. It may have been from up in Canada or something. Maybe someone else remembers this tractor?? Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:09PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Registered: 04/22/2015 Posts: 52 |
We knew the guy very well with that tractor , only lives 30 miles from us in central mn . had a JD skidder rear end and semi motor and transmission with tube chassis . run as a pro stock in our local club . believe he built it around 1999 Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:10PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
I remember seeing the tractor in question for sale in The Puller magazine a long time ago Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:10PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Pro
|
Registered: 09/23/2008 Posts: 632 |
I was gonna say the custom tractors but the Montgomery wards may be before them, I know I wouldn't mind having one of each just sitting in the shed so I could make people wonder where they came from. |
|
First Component
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,445 |
I believe that my son Jake has posted on this very topic before that Mark Hootman Pike NY was the first total component tractor. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:12PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: First Component
|
Pulling History
|
You can tell everybody is done farming! There are two subjects that are always entertaining and bring 'em out of the woodwork, Bad Medicine and Doug Roberts/Outlaws. Both are part of our pulling history and when they are on the same thread I usually run out of popcorn! Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:15PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Bring that thread to the top
|
Fan
|
I can promise you it wasn't Hootman. He may have been the first in your area, bu not the first. Would like to see that thread you mention pulled back up. Bryan Conner himself puts all of this to rest if I remember correctly |
|
Re: First Component
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
Sorry but you can't back up your promise with facts, heck you can't even post your name so your credibility is nonexistent. As for Bryan Connor's statements, he was a pioneer in the sport but Bad Medicine was not the first true component tractor. It was revolutionary and it changed the sport forever, but as was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, it still had a Oliver rearend surrounding all the non-Oliver internal parts. Pioneers like the Connor Brothers and Doug Roberts ushered in the component tractor age as they keep pushing the edge of the envelop with what was possible with a tractor rearend. While their tractors weren't true component tractors they were as close as you could get while still using a tractor rearend housing. As was stated elsewhere in this thread, the rearend housing is the true marker of a component tractor vs an ag chassis tractor. It's not full length frame rails, it's not removal/modification of the transmission housing, it's not a Profab, it's not the internals of the rearend, it's not shortening of the axles or axle housings, it simpy is the housings themselves. Oliver and White (as well as the early 8000 series John Deere that the Wileman's based their early Diehard Deere chassis' from) have the distinction of not having a true transmission housing and they have been allowed to remove the tub for years. A true truck housing or fabricated rearend housing is the defining mark of a component tractor. This is as per the NTPA rule book of both today, and the late 1990's. Tractors like Bad Medicine and Barnyard Beast showed that the housing was simply becoming an outdated remnant for the extremely high horsepowered tractors. As the Hp increased the NTPA wisely looked to the Mod class for a solution. The removal of the housing was the last piece of the puzzle that ushered in a new age in the sport. Component tractors were born and aftermarket/truck rearend housings were legalized for the 1998 season. As for the first true component tractor, yes, that distinction goes to Mark Hootman from Pike, NY. The Hooter Scooter was the first true, 100% component tractor to hit the track (in my area or any other area). He hooked the entire 1998 season with his 3-turbo 496 CID New Holland 8670. Here's a photo of it hooking at East Eden that summer: https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTFwhq9wr_OJsKYV-HEu9BnZBriLqdq7TYIBTD6vs1YvVrAIZcx That tractor is a little unique because of it's engine placement. When the NTPA first made the component tractor rules the NTPA wanted the crank to be in the original location with regards to the rear axle. Mark ordered a custom dropbox transmission but by the time the transmission was built and shipped the NTPA had changed the rules to allow the centerline of the crankshaft to be mounted inline with the rearend. Mark was already so far into the build that he used the dropbox transmission and kept his engine mounted slightly higher in the chassis. That same tractor is still running in NY and is part of Gaétan Yelle's stable of tractors. It's currently called Stray Horse and I believe it still has the dropbox transmission: http://nytpa.com/markhayesstrayhorse.htm Other early component tractors include Dennis Johnson Deutz powered Agco Shagnasty tractor. Shagnasty came out the same summer as Mark Hootman but Dennis didn't hit the track until mid August, I believe the Ohio State Fair was his first hook and Bowling Green was his second. As per a conversation with Bryan Connor at BG that year. The late Marc Clifton was also one of the first Super Stock pullers to campaign a component tractor with his beautiful Engler built John Deere the following year. While I respect pioneers like the Connors and Doug Roberts for their contributions to the sport their tractors were not true component tractors. They were as close as you could get. They were truly awesome machines and they were the reason for the component age and that's why they are both worthy of any pulling hall of fame. For those who are so bent out of shape about being the first at something... Myspace was way before Facebook... Webcrawler was way before Google... Sometimes being first is a mark of distinction, sometimes it's not. I think we can all agree that this sport has some truly great innovators, some were first and some changed the entire sport, and some even did both. Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Jakie Chan the Pulling Fan
|
Fan
|
If you're that worried about my name require registration. Otherwise you sound like a little kid. Yeah, well, at least I sign my name. SO WHAT! If internals dictate component, it's a component. It's all semantically really. The internals are why guys went component. If everybody is doing it, might as well just allow components in all classes. For a purist like yourself though, it must be all about keeping up appearances. I hope one day I have as much credibility as yourself in the pulling world. Hell, you'll probably be in the HOF before Ron Barga. |
|
Re: First Component
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
I'm not the least bit worried about your name, I simply pointed out that without your name your post has no credibility. It's really as simple as that.
A couple of notes: Pulling is all about appearances. That's why they require hoods on component tractors, that's why 2wd and 4wd trucks require bodies on them even though there isn't a single piece that came from an actual truck. That's why Super Farm has stock blocks that are remachined to huge cubes and have all billet internals inside the stock appearing block. That's why many fans are outraged at the any sheetmetal any block rule. That's why 99% of tractors are painted extremely close to stock colors. The list goes on and on and on. Appearances matter. It may be semantics but it's semantics that separates many of the classes because semantic are important. It's semantics that are the entire basis of a rule book because the meaning of those words define the differences in our classes. Semantics matter. To summarize your side of this discussion: You make a promise you can't keep, then you lose the argument, then you say "It's all semantically really", then you resort to name calling, then to top it off you say I "sound like a little kid". All done anonymously of course. You may have credibility in real life but your anonymous posts have less and less. Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Re: First Component
|
jimmie chin
|
"Hell, you'll probably be in the HOF before Ron Barga"..............
So you're the whiner over on the other board.........that explains everything. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/08/2016 04:32AM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: First Component
|
Moderator Registered: 01/11/2009 Posts: 1,576 |
Here's a thought, YES, the Conner tractor was full of the good stuff that you see in a component chassis, it was ahead of its' time no doubt and that it inspires this much discussion to this day is a testament to the tractor's and its' builders impact on the sport. It's on my Mount Rushmore of tractors for sure.
Call it a pseudo-component, a wolf in sheep's clothing, whatever you wish, it still had a veil of cast iron to hold it all together. A component clad with cast iron? Yep. A component in theory but not in appearance or rule? Yep, so said the rulebook parameters. "Mr. Obvious" signed off on it per Bryan Conner's discussions on Facebook. Fan is right---in a sense. Jake, using the parameters of the rule changes set forth is correct on the timeline of the first TRUE component. Fan I'd be happy to tell you that you're right-in a sense-to your face if we knew who you were. Come on in, the water is fine in the lake of accountability, it doesn't hurt a bit. If you're delving into factual information, supplying your name shouldn't be an issue at all. I've made statements on here before good, bad, and indifferent but you knew who it was when I sounded like a smart guy and when I sounded like a dumbass too. Own your words. For those of you who haven't seen the vintage video of Bad Medicine at its' genesis in the Conner shop that's on Bryan's page, it's truly a holy grail of pulling video. It's like watching the birth of a revolution. With regards to semantics and in my line of work, using words for a living, it's quite foolish to use the word "stock" in any sense of the naming many tractor classes, especially if we're going to banter about with regard to the use of the word "component." "Farm Stock" is by far the greatest oxymoron of them all, but thats a story for another time and place. All y'all keep arguing, it is entertaining. Bryan Lively -
|
|
My point is this!
|
Fan
|
The guys are the reason for a component. The durability issue. You have a Doc rearend, Easton, Rockwell, Ace and Fullpull fabricated etc. What I just named were housings that hold the parts that make a tractor component, you know the truck type. Kinda like bolting a truck carrier to the front of the rearend of a 2255. A design so popular that Eddie Kerr in mid south has now implemented it in his SF. If you really want to go back in time and say first true component in any division, including mods, pretty sure that distinction would go to Ken and Jim Miller as being the first to implement truck rearend. What we're hung up on is appearance vs mechanics. My name still doesn't matter. |
|
Re: My point is this!
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
I do NOT have any facts and someone else may. I am strictly going by memory. The original diehards I don't believe we're components. I don't think they built a component of there own until die hard with vengeance which is the tractor that is now the king of deeres. The original tractor which I remember seeing in the late 90's was a 6030 with 7810 sheet metal on it that they ran for a quite a few years before selling it to smithbacks. The second one came out I believe in 2002. I know it had 7820 sheet metal on it before tou could even buy a 7820. That tractor went to boerson if I remember right |
|
Re: My point is this!
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
Sully, your memory and mine agree. I'm going by memory here too but isn't Fast and Furious one of the original Diehards? Also I believe that Mickey Shorters Buck Eater is the other final non-component version of Diehard (one of Boerson's being it's old stablemate). I believe both of those tractors were based off of some 8000 series Deere (despite their 7820 hoods) that didn't have a true transmission housing so they were allowed to remove them and just run a driveline. I also believe that they came with a long wheelbase stock and that their engines were further forward than 60" in stock configuration. Those tractors dominated that summer and they were forced to move their engines back to 60" and to cut the chassis apart and move the front axles back so they complied with the component rules. Those two non-component tractors were like the Barnyard Beast of their day/class. Wileman's definitely did their homework on those two beasts and they out-thought everyone. Innovators with a great eye on design.
I really like this thread because it's interesting to look back on those game changers and innovators who thought outside the box and shaped the modern SS and PS classes. Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Re: My point is this!
|
Registered: 12/30/2015 Posts: 17 |
Since when did Easton build truck rearends? I thought they built baseball bats. |
|
Re: And my point is this.
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
I stated numerous times in my first post that tractors like Bad Medicine and Barnyard Beast were the reason for components. So we agree on that.
Component chassis are not allowed in Super Farm yet you use Eddie Kerr as an example... that proves my point, his tractor nor the Bad Medicine are/were component tractors. In fact, in NTPA you are NOT allowed to use a cast rearend in a component tractor, only in an Ag chassis (as per the rule book), which means an Oliver or White rearend housing with a truck center section is still an Ag chassis. You can disagree all you want about the definition of a component tractor but I'm simply going but what the NTPA, PPL, and The Outlaws use as their definition (I'm pretty sure how they define component is much more import than how "Fan" or Jake Morgan personally defines it... however I'm using their definition based on what they allow on the track). This thread is discussing the first component Super Stock and first Component Pro Stock, not the first to use truck parts or the first to put a truck rearend in a Modified. In fact the very start of this thread is by Doug Roberts celebrating the 20th anniversary of a rule change that he was instrumental in bringing about (thumbs up to Doug for advancing the sport and pushing the boundaries). It's also not a discussion of "appearance vs. mechanics" as you state. You can fabricate a component rearend housing look any way you choose, you could completely box it in and make it look almost identical to a tractor housing but it would still be fabricated and a component rearend. Appearance doesn't really matter in that regard. You can also make a component rearend function in any way you choose, some have outboard planetaries and some have inboard ones. Again, you could make it function exactly the same as a given tractor rearend and even make it so all the tractor internals fit in it but it would still be a component rearend despite how it functions mechanically. As I stated earlier it's simply about using a tractor rearend housing (Ag chassis) vs. something else (Component chassis). I stated that Mark Hootman was the first true component Super Stock, you promised he wasn't. Now, I'm aware that we live in a post-fact America but facts still matter to me. I'm not a true idealist or a true purist in any sense, but I really do care about facts, they are of great importance to me (I know that's not true of everyone but that's just how it is for me). It's of no real consequence who was first but none-the-less it is indeed a fact that Mark Hootman was first to hit the track with a component tractor. Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Re: And my point is this.
|
Donald
|
I agree Jake, this is a good thread to read. I have been pulling 8 years and had no idea what some of these pullers went through to keep these tractors on the track. I was a big fan of the Barnyard Beast growing up and it was the only John Deere that could run with the rest of them. Letters like this of one mans struggles to compete and the changes he went through to have what others had and changing the sport forever should be archived into some kind of pulling history museum. Components would have eventually came but pioneers like this probably made it happen a year or two earlier. Thanks Jake for this pulling forum for everyone to read. |
|
Re: First Component
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 1,521 |
didn't ulmers get the boot in outlaws this season for having a "component" chassis that was built exactly like conners 20 years ago.as I understood the outlaw thread on here,ulmers still had all the correct cast housings but used the component pieces inside??? |
|
Re: First Component
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
Patches,
Don't go and ruin the opinion article I'm currently working on! (Are you some kind of mind reader?) Ulmers machined off a big chunk of the trans housing and substituted a homemade piece in place of the missing piece. I'll get my article done in a day or two. Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Re: First Component
|
Fan
|
As long as its chock full of facts and not semantical ramblings and incessant opinionating I might be interested. Heck I might even read it and reply to it just to get under your skin. This is the most interesting this board or Fonda's board has been in 6 months. The housing doesn't make it a component, the mechanics and functioning do. |
|
Re: First Component
|
oh well
|
Like it or not, we have to go by what the rule book says, not our opinions. The rule book says the housing does determine whether it's component or not. Sure for all intents and purposes it's a component. But the rule book says it's not, so that's what we go by. |
|
Re: First Component
|
another fan
|
Fan,
I am not sure if you are just here to stir the pot and “get under your skin”, as you stated, or if you really believe yourself and just don’t get it. Either way I suggest you pull up the NTPA technical services director’s e-mail or phone # and ask him directly. I believe you would find that despite your passion, you are indeed mistaken on your belief of what a component is or is not. In terms of your "mechanics and functioning" statement, consider the two following scenarios. As was stated earlier, you could build a fabricated housing that takes all the standard ag driveline pieces and it would be classified as a component (OEM functionality) or you could take that same ag rear end and replace all the ag driveline parts with truck, other ag or what ever (different functionality) and it would still be classified an ag rear. There are at least two fabricated rears out there that use bull gears rather than planetaries. Curious, what do you consider these to be in your view? Regards |
|
Re: First Component
|
Registered: 06/30/2008 Posts: 186 |
Bryan, You reference below a video of the first tractor. Please forgive me if this has already been asked, but do you have a location where we may view it? I am really interested. Thank you for your time.
Aaron "For those of you who haven't seen the vintage video of Bad Medicine at its' genesis in the Conner shop that's on Bryan's page, it's truly a holy grail of pulling video. It's like watching the birth of a revolution." |
|
Re: First Component
|
Moderator Registered: 01/11/2009 Posts: 1,576 |
Mmztu, the Conner video is on Bryan Conners Facebook page if I recall correctly. Bryan Lively -
|
|
Re: First Component
|
Moderator Registered: 01/11/2009 Posts: 1,576 |
Bad Medicine video Bryan Lively -
|
|
Re: Bring that thread to the top
|
Wileman's Diehard Deere's were based off of small blocked John Deere Tractors. The first Diehard Deere was sold to Dave and Jay Smithback and Slama's Fast And Furious was the very first Greenline Express that Dennis Boerson ran that also had 7810 sheet metal on that Wileman's built. |
|
Re: First Component
|
Wrong
|
Really you are all wrong Montgumery Wards was a factory built component that's pulled for years crysler engine transmission and a truck rear end Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:14PM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
I was wondering, thought Sid Broughton was one of the first as well. Pulled ATPA for the first bit because it was still not legal in NTPA. By the way this has been a great read. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
Like I said i am going off memory here. The original die hard which basically ran Badger state for a few years when they first started pulling had a lance little big block motor in it I thought. Couldn't tell you what year it would have been. Late 90's for sure |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
The Original Diehard Deere had a Staab built small block engine in it when they brought it out in the summer of 1999, then I believe they got some help from Lemke's before they switched over to a all Riverside Engine program. |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 09/16/2014 Posts: 153 |
Here are some pictures from 1997 of the 4010 case I machined for Tim Engler to put truck differential and drop box in. To save time I did this part of machining rear end housings and making parts as it was March before I received letter from NTPA denied my request to remove clutch housing, etc. That left me just 3 months to do everything including building a new one piece frame with roll cage. He gave me measurements for truck differential and also outside dimensions of steel drop box. So I made differential quills to go from John Deere housing to truck differential and tabs to weld drop box to. I had to cut rear end case into and machine and then cut another case into and machine to right length and weld together. I still didn't finish in time and showed up at Tomah the day after I missed the first hook that Randy Rose had his accident in. I agree with Jake on who was first component. My tractor and the white wasn't, but just the best we could do until component rules came along. The White was close to a component from the factory with outdoor plantitaries and engine in line with rear end after they put truck differential and gear box in it. Especially after they let it take the cast out between rear end and engine. That was what I was wanting. Larry Kline took the clutch housing out of tractor when he bought it from me in August of 1997 and put in homemade can in 1998 as NTPA was still trying to figure out rules that first year. To the relief of small block John Deeres and Fords they finally came off the rule that engine had to be in same line as OEM and let everyone put engine inline with center of rear axle. Here are some pictures. Thanks for the interest in this post. Doug |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Registered: 09/16/2014 Posts: 153 |
Pictures of why I wanted change to component rule. This site only lets you put 5 pictures on at a time. Here is 5 of many from 1996. Thanks, Doug |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Thanks |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
funny
|
You guys are all wrong the AC and Montgomery Wards had factory component years before The Wards had Crysler engines truck transmisions and rear ends |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
Good stuff
|
Doug always post good stuff. I am looking for the measuring chart he posted on this site awhile back. Thought it was on this thread but didn't see it. How do you lol for it? |
|
Re: Component Tractors almost 20 years anniversary
|
rules
|
I think they were with the Light Super Stock info that Doug put on here this past winter or spring. Not sure how to find unless you just keep looking at previous pages. |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,561, Posts: 229,569, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,055, Posts: 225,833.
Global: Topics: 38,561, Posts: 229,569, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,055, Posts: 225,833.
Our newest member BadHabit2
