== Massey-Ferguson made a few models of tractors that way. Our neighbor's girl was killed when one of these tractors descended a hill in "freewheel mode". Driving a heavy tractor with no engine breaking was one of the more stupid ideas to come up with in a while. That feature could be locked out but the girl forgot about it. Her husband had two young kids to raise on his own.
I don't know any perceived advantage to having free wheeling on a tractor would be, but sadly it was ignorance not free wheeling that killed her. I've had tractors, skid steers, and all manner of engine driven equipment, all my life. Unless you know everything about the operation of the equipment, you've got no business touching it. ==
I'd have to see the spec's for that to believe it...
I don't know about M-F having any hand clutch models or not, but either that or the 2-speed power-shift w/ a neutral between is the only way I'm aware of that any tractor would have such a behavior. Since Ferguson wasn't folded into Massey-Harris until the early to mid-50s sometime, it would have had to been fairly modern to have been M-F branded and it "just does not compute". I'm thinking the story has been sanitized in the telling...
Have had several that did have hand clutches and Allis-Chalmers w/ the "Power Director" (their version of the 2-speed power-shift). Never seen any that would free-wheel unless shifted or clutch disengaged.
The MF1100 (as well as the 135, 65, and 165, among others) had "Multipower" as an option. Built from 1964 to 1972. With the multi-power system there is one hydraulic clutch pack and also a ratchet type assembly. When in low multi the hydraulic clutch is dissengaged and the drive goes through a pair of gears into a ratchet clutch which takes the drive to the gearbox. There is no engine breaking in low multi because of the ratchet clutch. When you move the transmission to high multi it locks up the hydraulic clutch and the hydraulic clutch gear drives another gear. Because the drive is now turning faster than through the low-multi ratchet clutch, this now becomes a free-wheeling device. It is for this reason that there is engine breaking in high multi power, but no engine breaking in low multi power. This is also why if you are in high multi going up a hill and you depress the clutch pedal that whilst in gear no roll-back can occur because of the ratchet clutch. ie. both systems are locked together. The hydraulic multi-power clutch is not torque converter, but is merely a multi-plate hydraulically operated clutch pack. The good thing about this is that there is no loss of power through to the gearbox. The clutch is a conventional clutch and so is the 3 speed gearbox.
This is what my SUV does. If I put it in neutral while coasting down a hill the engine revs at the RPM the car's computer estimates will cause the least amount of resistance when reengaged. As a matter of fact as the car gains speed rolling down the hill the engine's RPM increase.
=3D=3D The MF1100 had a pull up bolt on the cab floor which was pulled/pushed up or down to engage or disengage the freewheeling aspect. I know cause I owned one of them...these were the bigger tractors not those puny little Ferguson pieces of shit that were a glorified go cart. The
1100 could pull a 14' cultivator with ease. It had a dual range transmission. I bought mine used for next to nothing and used it until the motor packed it in....oh, and it does compute. I have a service manual which I will sell for $25 if you are interested.
Where in this article does the author consider engine braking lowering the speed of the vehicle? Thus increasing the need for gas because of more frequent and longer acceleration.
Using neutral delays and reduces the need for acceleration and thus increases gas mileage.
This article is a good example for not believing everything you read.
How Does Massey Ferguson Multi Power Work We are often asked how the multi power system on models such as the Massey Ferguson 65, 135, 165 etc. works. What really seems to intrigue people is that the engine breaking system works when in high multi-power, but there is no engine breaking when in low multi-power...
With the multi-power system there is one hydraulic clutch pack and also a ratchet type assembly. When in low multi the hydraulic clutch is dissengaged and the drive goes through a pair of gears into a ratchet clutch which takes the drive to the gearbox. There is no engine breaking in low multi because of the ratchet clutch. When you move the transmission to high multi it locks up the hydraulic clutch and the hydraulic clutch gear drives another gear. Because the drive is now turning faster than through the low-multi ratchet clutch, this now becomes a free-wheeling device. It is for this reason that there is engine breaking in high multi power, but no engine breaking in low multi power. This is also why if you are in high multi going up a hill and you depress the clutch pedal that whilst in gear no roll-back can occur because of the ratchet clutch. ie. both systems are locked together. The hydraulic multi-power clutch is not torque converter, but is merely a multi-plate hydraulically operated clutch pack. The good thing about this is that there is no loss of power through to the gearbox. The clutch is a conventional clutch and so is the 3 speed gearbox.
Interesting...I was not aware of that--there were virtually no Massey tractors ever in this area; they dominated the combine market for a while when the 90's came out but IH red, Deere green and Case orange were the only significant tractor varieties by the early 60s thru the merger wars w/ just a smattering of Allis, M-M and Oliver. Nuow there's Deere dominates in almost everything other than some specialty items.
I'll agree that's a seemingly worthless feature; can't see what it was intended to accomplish useful but certainly wouldn't be good in roading situation.
Grandad bought a little A-C WD45 when he was getting less able but still wanted something he could manage and a full line of the snap-coupler attachments. Since we had so much in the equipment, Dad traded up to a D-17 and I did a _lot_ of row crop work (milo sorghum) with it. It had the 2-speed power ranger w/ the disengaged section between shifting that occasionally would be the cause of trouble in a loaded condition if tried, particularly to shift up under heavy load. In low gear w/ load it might come to a complete halt and in our sandy conditions could then bounce and dig when engaged the high speed and then one had a mess in the field w/ a hole/hill...but it was always possible in a road situation to shift it in w/o needing to clutch so it wouldn't ever run away from you.
How can it NOT be a gasoline consumption issue? Either it save gas or not. Isn't that the point?
If there is a problem with the Popular Mechanics analysis, I'd say it's that they seem to assume you come to a stop at the bottom of the hill. Let's say you're coming down one hill and then going back up another. If you coasted in neutral and allowed the car to pick up additional speed, then at the bottom, that momentum would reduce gas consumption for a brief period when going up the next hill. Of course the problem with that is that you could only pick up a little more speed without things becoming unsafe, you lose engine braking and the gas saved isn't worth it.
Another interesting thing that PM didn't talk about. They said that while going downhill in gear the fuel flow to the injectors is actually zero. If you coasted in neutral, the fuel flow would have to resume so the engine could idle. So, it seems like you could actually use MORE fuel coasting.
As Doug pointed out, that isn't what the article says. Even at idle speed the engine doesn't need any gas as long as it's coasting. The car movement is turning the engine over. It's only when the car slows way down and creeps to a stop that fuel flow resumes.
What was the advantage of freewheeling on a big tractor? I can understand the ratchet to keep it from rolling backwards, but surely they could have done that without the freewheeling.
In the case of my SUV I can shift into "M" - manual and either choose to use a gear that has engine braking, maintain the speed, or even gain speed depending on the the incline.
I see none; I found only the barest mention on the M-F site in the heritage section of the Multi-Power transmission and that was the following...
Sometimes one can find vintage sales literature on such features online but I haven't been able to so far in a relatively short time.
I had thought it was only a dual-speed arrangement similar to the A-C and others; have never run across a live animal of the type and wasn't aware of the free-wheeling nature of the design.
It seems, indeed, perilous in that mode w/ any grade and an implement in tow in particular out of ground for transport, say.
Simplicity. The dual rang and hillholder were one simple mechanism. To make dual range and hillholder without freewheel in low would have required almost twice as much mechanism.
It seems that the free-wheeling was a side effect of the design rather than a design feature, maybe. I'm sure it was somehow advertised as a boon although. :)
The A-C power-shifter accomplished the clutchless downshift as did several other variations (but w/o the hill holder, of course).
That would have had some value in some places but out here on the high plains it would have served no purpose as one would have to hunt really hard to find any hill upon which to practice. :)
For clarification, I meant that only the freewheeling was a worthless feature; certainly the clutchless downshift is useful and in some circumstances I could see the hill-holder (albeit not much call for it around here).
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.