research report: tested: class 8...

Slower is better for harvesting performance butbeware of the trap of added costs and longer hours.

In groundbreaking research, Kondinin Grouphas shown that slowing down to less than 10kilometres per hour could improve harvested yieldby up to one tonne per hectare and increaseperformance by up to three tonnes per hour.

But the trade-off for increasing harvested yield byslowing down means increased operating costs andless timeliness with machines spending longer inthe paddock.

A world firstKondinin Group leads the world with the first

scientific performance testing of the four mostpopular class eight harvesters available in Australia(see Figure 1).

Each machine was directly compared with theother as they ran side-by-side in a crop chosen togive the machines a workout, the first time this hasbeen carried out anywhere in the world.

Claas–Caterpillar 4.3%

Other11.5% Case IH

34.7%

John Deere29.3%

New Holland20.2%

FIGURE 1 Class eight harvester ownership

Machines owned by farmers as surveyed in Kondinin Group’s2006 National Agricultural Survey.Source and illustration: Kondinin Group.

Ben

Wh

ite

A U T H O R S

KONDININ GROUP

TimAndrew

JoshGiumelli

[email protected] [email protected]

R E S E A R C H R E P O R T :T E S T E D : C L A S S 8 H A R V E S T E R S

Harvesting at less than 10kilometres per hour couldimprove harvested yield byup to one tonne per hectareand increase performance byup to three tonnes per hour.

But slower harvesting speedsincrease harvesting costs andreduce timeliness.

Kondinin Group testscompared the machineharvested yield (MHY) of fourclass eight harvesters intonnes per hectare.

MHY is a measure of theactual grain harvested over aknown area at a knownspeed and shows how muchgrain the machine is actually picking up atdifferent speeds.

The New Holland CR970 andCase IH Axial-Flow 8010 hadthe best overall performancewhile the Claas Lexion 580Rscored the maximum MHY.

A t a g l a n c e

Groundbreaking tests of four class eight harvesters have shown high speedsmight not improve harvesting productivity. Kondinin Group engineers Tim Andrew, Josh Giumelli and Ben White, together with consultant engineerGraeme Quick, put the Case IH Axial-Flow 8010, Claas Lexion 580R, John Deere 9860 STS and New Holland CR970 through their paces.

16 Farming Ahead May 2007 No. 184 www.kondinin.com.au

alethea

(c) Farming Ahead

Kondinin Group leads the world with the firstcomparative performance testing of the fourmost popular class eight harvesters available in Australia.

Using a proven scientific method to gauge theharvested yield, each machine ran side-by-side in a crop chosen to give them a workout — thefirst time this has been carried out.

How harvesters performedPerformance tests showed the New Holland

CR970 and Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 overall were ahead of the Claas Lexion 580R and JohnDeere 9860 STS in a hard-threshing Bellaroidurum wheat crop. There are two main measuresof harvester ability: efficiency; measured inmachine harvested yield (MHY); and performance;measured in tonnes per hour.

Coming out on top was the New Holland CR970,which had the best sample and highest throughputof 41.29 tonnes per hour at 12 kilometres per hour.But the Claas Lexion 580R achieved the maximumMHY with 3.24t/ha at 5.34km/h.

Getting the most from the areaEach harvester was tested for its MHY at several

speeds, a measure of the actual weight of graincollected in the bin over a known area (see Table 1).

A high machine harvested yieldresult meant less grain was lost atthe front, out the back of themachine or ground to dust.

The Claas Lexion 580R was the most efficientwith a maximum MHY of 3.24t/ha, which wasdelivered at a speed of 5.34km/h or 6.84 hectaresper hour.

The New Holland CR970 and Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 were only slightly behind at 3.15t/ha and 3.12t/ha respectively. But these yields wereobtained at speeds of 6.34km/h or 8.12ha/h for theNew Holland and 6.47km/h or 7.89ha/h on theCase IH harvester.

The John Deere 9860 STS was down on bothspeed and yield efficiency, recording a maximumMHY of 3.03t/ha at 4.72km/h (6.04ha/h).

Compared with the New Holland and Case IHmachines, efficiency in both the Claas and JohnDeere harvesters decreases quickly as speedincreases (hectares per hour increases) after thepeak MHY is reached (see Figure 2).

Compromise of yield and speedAlthough the peak MHY shows the most grain a

machine can harvest from one hectare, often this isnot a practical operating speed.

With all machines achieving peak MHY at less than8.2ha/h, operating at this speed means harvesting400ha would take four days. For this reason,Kondinin Group engineers used speed and MHY tocalculate the harvested tonnes per hour versushectares per hour to improve the comparison of theoverall performance of the machines (see Figure 3).


17Farming Ahead May 2007 No. 184 www.kondinin.com.au

Harvester Front Machine harvested yield Performance ratings ** (%)(m) Maximum MHY efficiency Yield at 12km/h* Maintenance Safety Cabin Displays Unloading Other

yield speed area throughput yield throughput and repairs auger features(t/ha) (km/h) (ha/h) (t/h) (t/ha) (t/h)

Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 12.195 3.12 6.47 7.89 24.62 2.53 38.93 88 88 89 89 90 87Claas Lexion 580R 12.805 3.24 5.34 6.84 22.16 2.39 36.66 87 86 88 79 100 84John Deere 9860 STS 12.805 3.03 4.72 6.04 18.30 2.18 33.52 80 92 85 83 98 74New Holland CR970 12.805 3.15 6.34 8.12 25.58 2.69 41.29 85 88 91 95 80 82

* The Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 is calculated at 12.6km/h to allow for the smaller front. ** Higher scores indicate better performance.

TABLE 1 Kondinin Group ratings for harvester performance

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Hectares per hour

Tonn

es p

er h

our

Case IHClassJohn DeereNew Holland

FIGURE 3 Performance results of machine harvested yield versus hectares per hour

Source and illustration: Kondinin Group.

4.00

3.75

3.50

3.25

3.00

2.75

2.50

2.25

2.001.0 3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 17.0

Hectares per hour

Tonn

es p

er h

ecta

re

Case IH average lineClass average lineJohn Deere average lineNew Holland average line

FIGURE 2 Harvester efficiency (machine harvested yield)


damage of 0.03%, trash estimate of 0.1% and a testweight of 81 kilograms per hectolitre.

A thorough going-overA review panel comprising Kondinin Group

engineers and harvester operators, includingcontractors from the Australian Grain HarvestersAssociation, assessed the four harvesters.

Panellists evaluated areas such as the unloadingauger, cabin, displays, safety and maintenanceaccess (see Table 1, page 17).

All machines had a high level of standardequipment, with most areas scoring higher than 80%.

Impressive featuresPanel members were most impressed with the

unloading auger fitted to Claas Lexion, awarding ita perfect score.

Panellists also were impressed with the cabin and displays fitted to the New Holland CR970 harvester.

The John Deere 9860 STS scored high marks forsafety and operation of its unloading auger.

These findings are supported by KondininGroup’s 2006 National Agricultural Survey whichshowed farmers who owned these four harvesterswould overwhelming buy the same machine again(see Figure 4).

See Table 3 on page 20 for specifications ofharvesters tested and Table 4 (page 40) for the costof a basket of spare parts.

Full reviews of individual machines appear onpages 25–33.

Harvester testing was a vastundertaking at a busy time of theseason, especially during a year when decent crops weredifficult to find. Farmers need to bear in mindspecific aspects of the researchwhen comparing the performanceof the harvesters tested.

Results showed that at lowspeeds, the efficiency (MHY) of allfour harvesters tested were quite close. But as the harvesterspeed approached 8km/h,differences in the machinesstarted to show.

Figure 2 (on page 17) also demonstrates thechanges in tonnes per hour as speed is increased,with the Claas Lexion 580R and the John Deere 9860 STS falling away more quickly compared with the Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 and New Holland CR970.

This gave a peak theoretical performance of42t/h at 13km/h for the New Holland CR970 in theDurum wheat tested.

Sieving the sampleGrain samples from all harvesters at 10km/h in

the same crop area were tested by a Graincorplaboratory and consultant Graeme Quick toevaluate suitability for both receival and for seed(see Table 2).

Graincorp tests showed although all sampleswere within weight and trash estimate limits, there were small fluctuations which reflected other results.

Screenings were above acceptable limits forDurum classes one and 2 (DR1 and DR2) and thetop Bellaroi Durum wheat category (DRB) in thesamples from the John Deere 9860 and the ClaasLexion 580R harvesters.

Visible damage resultsGrain analysis showed the Claas Lexion 580R

had a visible damage percentage of 1.85 per cent, four times higher than that of the next lowest result.

The New Holland CR970 had the best results ofall the harvesters with screenings of 4.6%, visible


Harvester Screenings Trash Test Visiblemake and model estimate weight damage

(%) (%) (kg/hL) (%)Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 4.8 0.1 80 0.11

Claas Lexion 580R 5.5 0.2 79 1.85

John Deere 9860 STS 5.4 0.2 79 0.42

New Holland CR970 4.6 0.1 81 0.03

Receival limits1 Less than Less than Above —5 0.6 74

1. GrainCorp receival limits for Durum wheat Bellaroi.

Note: Screenings, trash estimate and test weight were givenduring a standard GrainCorp grading test. Visible damage was derived through visual analysis in acontrolled environment. 80kg/hL = density of 0.8 (tonnes/cubic metre).

Source: Kondinin Group.

TABLE 2 Grain samples taken at 10km/h

0 20 40 60 80 100

NoYes

New Holland

John Deere

Claas–Caterpillar

Case IH

Percentage

10%90%

12%88%

18%82%

15%85%

FIGURE 4 ‘Buy again’ ratings

Percentage of farmers who would buy the same class eight harvester again according to KondininGroup’s 2006 National Agricultural Survey.Source and illustration: Kondinin Group.

Farmers comparing machinespecifications often look attonnes per hour as a measureof harvesting performance.

But this figure is not as usefulas it seems, as much dependson the crop, conditions, settingsand machine specifications suchas front size.

Kondinin Group tests aimedto establish machine harvestedyield (MHY), measured intonnes per hectare. This is ameasure of the actual grainharvested over a known area ata known speed and canestablish how much grain themachine is either losing or notpicking up at different speeds.

Testing four harvesters underthe same conditions allows adirect comparison of MHYperformance. Figures such astonnes per hour can becalculated from the MHY andtravel speed. Comparing thesefigures with harvested hectaresper hour gives a truecomparison of performance.

Why use machineharvested yield?


Ph

otos

: B

en W

hit

e, T

im A

nd

rew

, Jo

sh G

ium

elli


Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 Claas Lexion 580R John Deere 9860 STS New Holland CR970Year of model change 2007 2006 2005 2006Front and feedingFront drive Power take-off Power take-off Power take-off Power take-offReel drive Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic HydraulicFeeder house throat width (mm) 1143 1420 1397 1270ThreshingMethod AFX single rotor APS drum, main drum Rotor (STS) Twin rotorDiameter (mm) 762 600 750 559 (each)Rotor length (mm) 2794 1420 3130 2638Drive type Constantly variable transmission Variable hydraulic Variable belt Variable belt (hydraulic control)

with reverseAdjustment Concave distance; rotor Concave distance; drum speed Concave distance; rotor Concave distance; rotorSeparation and cleaningMethod AFX single rotor Separate twin rotor Single rotor (STS) Twin rotorTotal separation area (m2) 2.7 3 1.5 3.7Total cleaning area (m2) 6.5 5.1 4.6 6.5Self-leveling cleaning system Standard Standard (3D) No StandardGrain tankCapacity (L) 12,320 11,500 10,600 11,630Claimed unloading auger rate (L/sec) 113 100 116 106Auger length (optional) (m) 7.3 8.5 (7.9) 6.9 7.3EngineManufacturer Case IH Caterpillar John Deere New HollandType Six cylinders, Six cylinders, Six cylinders, Six cylinders,

turbocharged, intercooled, turbocharged, intercooled, turbocharged, intercooled, turbocharged, intercooled,Tier III-compliant diesel Tier III-compliant diesel Tier III-compliant diesel Tier III-compliant diesel

Size (L) 10.3 12.5 12.5 10.3Power 298kW at 2100rpm; 313kW at 2100rpm; 279kW at 2200rpm; 298kW at 2100rpm;

19kW power rise; 21kW bulge 25kW bulge 15kW bulge19kW unloading boost; 336kW maximum power

Rated fuel consumption1 (L/h) 77 79 68 75Fuel tank capacity (L) 1000 800 1155 1000Traction driveType Hydrostatic Hydrostatic Hydrostatic HydrostaticSpeed ranges (forward:reverse) 4:4 3:3 3:3 4:4Maximum road speed (km/h) 32 30 31 32Tyres (front:rear) 900/60R32:600/65R28 900/60R32:500/85R24 30.5LR32:18.4R26 900/60R32:540/65R30GeneralWeight (kg) 16,103 15,500 15,246 16,706Monitor system (optional) AFS Pro 600 integrated 2 CEBIS harvester management Series 3 Infoview PerformanceWheel base (mm) 3718 3300 3530 3760Price (excluding front) $464,750 $496,100 $479,410 $400,5121. Stationary application at rated rpm. 2. Yield, moisture mapping and guidance ready. 3. Series of monitors mounted around the cabin (Greenstar 2 guidance and yield mapping).

TABLE 3 Specifications of class 8 rotor harvesters tested by Kondinin Group


Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 Claas Lexion 580R John Deere 9860 STS New Holland CR970Concaves $746.32 a $3189.00 b $7490.35 e $745.44 a

Threshing rasp bars $55.43 a $438.00 c $1823.00 f $755.02 h

Windscreen (front) $2459.28 $5348.00 $1693.00 $2459.28 Engine water pump $464.17 $934.00 $1166.66 $464.17 Alternator $1453.57 $1501.00 $2401.96 g $1453.57 Starter motor $1276.00 $1408.00 $1575.90 $1276.00 Turbocharger $3551.43 $4511.00 $2783.58 $3551.43Engine oil filter 98.59 $49.00 $94.34 $98.59 Fuel filter — primary $40.95 $129.47 $67.49 $40.95

— secondary $56.34 $48.00 Not applicable $56.34 Air filter — outer $155.85 $496.00 $223.27 $155.85

— inner $70.62 $401.00 $137.78 $70.62 Hydraulic filter $84.07 $100.00 $72.72 $84.07Hydrostatic filter $79.88 (for both)d $72.72 $79.88 Cabin filter $117.82 $86.00 $72.00 $117.82 Total $9964.00 $18,638.47 $19,674.76 $11,409.03 Prices include goods and services tax. A. Each. B. Complete main threshing concave. C. Per pair. D. Hydraulic and hydrostatic use one filter. E. Set of two AH210351 andone AH 205254. F. Set of 8 threshing elements. G. 200amp. H. Set of rasp bars.

TABLE 4 Cost of a basket of spare parts

Proper pay yields better harvestContract harvester rates are often decided on the

going rate and what was paid in previous years.This changes as machines become more expensiveto own and to operate.

A responsible operator with aneffective machine paid appropriatelywill save farmers money.

Figure 6 shows the rate a contractor needs tocharge and the total cost of harvest, which includesboth the contractor rate and value of grain lost asthe machine travels faster based on the harvestertests as speed increases.

This illustrates that although the actual rate paidto the contractor increases slightly at lower speeds,the full cost of harvest decreases.

A contractor must go faster if paid less to makeends meet but the value of the grain lost at higherspeeds is more than the cost of paying a bit extra todo the job correctly.

Owning a harvester the size of a class eight allows crop to be taken off quickly, at the optimaltime, in the best paddock, at the speed that best suitsthe conditions.

But it can be uneconomical for some farms tobuy such a large machine where the area harvestedeach season does not cover the actual costs ofowning the machine. Added to this is the increasein storage and transport requirements to match thesize of the harvester, which can also place a strainon farm infrastructure.

Calculating costsBased on costs calculated from Australian Grain

Harvesters Association models, the average classeight harvester would need to run about 285 hours orabout 24 12-hour days per year to be a cheaper optionthan having a contractor harvest the crop. This isbecause a contractor, whose costs are higher, willaverage 400 machine hours per year (see Figure 5),regardless of the time spent harvesting each property.

As hours are the main factor in this costing, the areaneeded to cover these hours can change. The followingrule estimates the area needed based on speed:

Area (ha) = 285 x speed (km/h) x width of front (m)10

Only use this guide as an estimate of financialconsiderations governing operating and ownershipcosts, it does not factor in any benefits ordisadvantages of owning the harvester. For morecomprehensive information on calculating operatingand ownership costs, visit www.agha.org.au/cms/index.php?page=costs-calculator.

To own or contract? Weighing up the costsTo own or contract? Weighing up the costs

With the cost of classeight harvesters hoveringat about half-a-milliondollars, it is not apurchase to be takenlightly. Growers need toweigh up the size of theinvestment against theconvenience andtimeliness of owning a machine.


$140

$120

$100

$80

$60

$40

$20

$–0 2 4 6 8 12 1210 16 18 18

Speed (ha/h)

Cost

per

tonn

e

Contractor owned total cost of harvestContractor rate

FIGURE 6 Harvest cost versus contractor rate*

* Based on the contractor’s cost per hour plus 20 per cent, witha contractor averaging 400 hours/year. This is a guide only. Source and illustration: Kondinin Group.

$40

$35

$30

$25

$20

$15

$10

$5

$–0 100 200 300 400 600500 700 800

Hours to harvest

Cost

s pe

r ton

ne

Farmer costsCustomer rate

FIGURE 5 Cost of owning a harvester versus contractor rates

This is a guide only. Finance considerations used in calculating costs: Farm areas are based on a cropping areaof 3000 hectares. Farmer expenses calculated on finance of three-quarters of the retail price of harvester,front and trailer only. Farmer loan calculated on seven per cent over five years with a machine life of 10 yearsand a single repayment each year. Farmer hourly cost does not include registration, public liability insuranceor support vehicle expenses, which would be covered under general farm costs. Farmer-owned trade-in valuecalculated at one-third of the initial price. Contractor expenses are calculated on capital investment inharvester, front and trailer as well as field bin and canola pick-up. Contractor loan calculated on 7% of halfthe retail prices of harvester, front and trailer only over five years with a machine life of five years, with tworepayments a year. Contractor hourly cost includes registration, public liability insurance or vehicle expenses.Contractor trade-in value calculated at half of initial price. Source and illustration: Kondinin Group.


alethea

(c) Farming Ahead



Threshing systems stick to the themeThreshing systems stick to the themeThe cylinder rotary design dominates thethreshing systems of class eight harvesters forimproved feeding and separation of harvested grain.

Single-cylinder rotorsCylinder axial rotors (single longitudinal rotor)

are generally divided into a series of sections,starting with the intake system, which feeds into thethreshing section, then on to the separation area.

Crop intake Most intake systems usually consists of an auger

and is primarily used to pull the crop into the rotorand push it to the threshing section.

Case IH’s Axial-Flow rotor uses impeller bladeson the tapered nose of the rotor in conjunction withthe transition cone to move crop into the threshingsection. As the material accelerates in the cone itreaches the correct threshing speed as it enters thecage, minimising grain damage.

John Deere STS machines have a similar taperedbullet rotor with a spiral intake but use a tri-streamfeeding system to help present the crop to the rotor.

Threshing systemThe threshing section removes the heads from

the straw and centrifugal force throws the heavierheads and any grain extracted to the outside of therotor chamber.

While longitudinal rotor machineshave a laminar concave layout,the bullet rotor has a steppedlayout — narrow at the intakesection, it steps outward at thethreshing section and again atthe separation section.

Grain separationMost of the grain is extracted during separation

with rasp bars rubbing the heads to remove thegrain from the head and sheaf.

In most new harvesters these bars are angled topush the crop through the rotor. The grain thenfalls into the cleaning system where a series ofsieves handles and grades it while air removes thelight chaff dropped from the rotor.

Double-cylinder rotorsWhile the double rotor design operates similarly

to the single-cylinder system, the use of twin rotorsis claimed by manufacturers to increase thecentrifugal force needed to separate the loose grainand heads from the straw and properly presentthem to the separation area.

Unlike the single longitudinal or bullet rotors,the New Holland twin rotor design does not havetapered intakes on its rotors as the feeder widthmatched the rotor width. After the crop isintroduced into the rotors, the twin rotor uses asimilar threshing system to the longitudinal rotor.

After the product has passed through theseparator sections, the grain drops into the cleaning system where a series of sieves for separation.

The Claas Lexion has a twin-cylinder rotor for separation butthreshing uses a longitudinaldrum rotor similar to aconventional walker-style system.

Hybrid designBut the Claas Lexion 580R system is different.

While the separation section of the harvester is atwin-cylinder rotor, threshing is performed using alongitudinal drum rotor similar to a conventionalwalker-style system.

Crop is presented to the accelerated pre-separation cylinder before entering thethreshing drum where the manufacturer claims up to 30 per cent of harvested grain is extracted. The system consists of a thresher and separator,complete with its own concave. The remainingstraw is then passed on to be fully processedthrough the drum and into the twin rotors.

Separation systems on both the Claas Lexion andNew Holland twin rotor were similar but theLexion used the entire length of the rotors forseparation, while the twin rotor only had a sectionof the rotor devoted to separation and the other partto threshing.

Grain removed from the pre-separation system(APS) and rotor drops into the cleaning systemwhere the fan blows out light chaff and a series ofsieves further cleans and grades the grain.

All four harvesters testedwere variations of thecylinder rotary design.The Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 and JohnDeere 9860 STS machinesboth use a singlelongitudinal rotor, whilethe Claas Lexion 580Rand New Holland CR970both use variations of a dual-cylinder rotor. The Lexion is more of aconventional and rotaryhybrid as it uses a pre-separation systemand a transverselymounted threshing drum.

alethea

(c) Farming Ahead

Settings maintained for testsEach manufacturer supplied experienced

operators and specialist technicians to help set upthe machines for the crop conditions.

All manufacturers were given a week ofharvesting similar crops in similar conditions beforethe tests, with a large amount of the test paddockalso available to fine-tune machine settings.

Settings were not altered throughout the tests to ensure the validity of the results, although inactual harvesting conditions settings could changethroughout the day.

Test runs were measured at 400m, which gaveslightly more than 0.5ha runs for the 12.8m fronts.

The crop area used for the tests was chosen forits uniformity and lack of weeds, while wheel trackswere taken into account where necessary.

Cutting height was maintained at 300millimetres to ensure each machine processed aconsistent amount of straw.

Each machine was run at a range of speeds from 2–12km/h.

After each run, a Manitou telehandler was usedto collect the grain directly from the harvester’sunloading auger and the amount of grain harvestedwas measured.

Kondinin Group’s harvester testing was a vastundertaking at a busy time of the season, especiallyduring a year when decent crops were difficult to find.

Performance tests were carried out at Narrabri,New South Wales, in a suitable crop underacceptable climatic and seasonal conditions.

The tests were comparative to the machines forthe specific crop but should not be seen as acomprehensive guide to machine performance inall crops.

Farmers need to bear in mindspecific aspects of the researchwhen comparing the performanceof the harvesters tested.

Putting machines to the testThe four manufacturers each provided a

harvester for testing, with most opting to supply afront as well. Initially, Kondinin Group approachedAustralian front manufacturer MidWest to providea standard 12.8-metre front for the tests but JohnDeere was the only manufacturer prepared to usethe intended control front.


An Australian first: Four harvesterswere pitted side-by-side tocompare performance. KondininGroup tests — an Australian first —saw the machines operate in thesame paddock, at the same speedsand included grain screening tests.


Spotlight on running efficiencySpotlight on running efficiency

Kondinin Group engineers put the four machines through their paces to gauge performanceand operation. A panel of engineers and harvester operators, including contractors fromthe Australian Grain Harvesters Association, also went over the harvesters with a fine-toothcomb to judge functions, ease of maintenance and operator comfort.

alethea

(c) Farming Ahead

The engine is fully enclosed but panels open to reveal unobstructed access for servicing.The cooling fan intake swings out for access andcleaning of radiators.

Unlike other machines, side panels were splitwith two panels used on the left side and three onthe right.

Main panels on either side opened vertically,while smaller rear panels opened like doors, with a small extra panel on the rear right for access tothe ladder. This gives excellent selective access to different parts of the harvester with low stepseither side of the machine. But high winds caninadvertently open or close the smaller barn doorsat the rear.

Lights are fitted close to all major service pointsand a portable light is supplied.

This was the easiest of all harvesters to clean withminimal areas for trash build-up and easy accessfrom the sides and rear.

The machine was well built, with a stronger rearaxle than that fitted to previous models.

OperationPanellists found the machine’s operation easy

and trouble-free. But note the rock trap is optionaland the front attachment is not as positive as others.

Shaft drive directly from the engine powers thefront and feeder. The feeder house length providesadequate clearance.

The front is attached with a single lever lockinglatch with a safety lock.

A rock trap in the feeder house is optional. The manufacturer claims the design of the feederand threshing system reduces foreign object damage.

The modular design of the concaves makes themeasy to remove and change without much heavylifting. A self-levelling cleaning system is standardfor operation in undulating conditions.

A hydraulic fan drive means maximum fanrevolutions can be reached with the engine at idleand the large intake allows for improved cleaningair volume and features a headland return systemthat allows fan speed to be reduced, minimisingsieve loss on turns.

Safety switches on both the seat and ladder shut off the auger and disengage the front andthreshing system.

With a high throughput and peak machineharvested yield, the Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 was asolid performer.

Reviewers praised the cabin layout and use ofhydraulics rather than belts to transfer power to the various harvester mechanisms, although thiscreated a maze of pipes under the side panels.

PerformanceThe machine started testing with only 13

separator and 20 engine hours on the clock.

At 12.195 metres (40 feet), the 2152 draper frontfitted to the harvester was slightly smaller than the12.8m fronts used on all the other machines, so allresults shown use hectares per hour, rather thankilometres per hour, to allow for the variation incutting width.

For example, the corrected speed for maximumperformance at 12 kilometres per hour for 12.8mmachines was 12.6km/h for the 8010 to reach the desired 15.4ha/h. At this speed the theoreticalresult was 38.9 tonnes per hour with a machineharvested yield of 2.53t/ha.

Maximum machine harvested yield was 3.12t/ha,only 30 kilograms behind the New Holland CR970but also down almost one-quarter of a hectare perhour at 7.89ha/h at 6.47km/h.

Grain quality was high, with the 8010 coming insecond with screenings of about 4.3 per cent andvisible damage at 0.11%.

Sample weight was high and trash estimate waslow, making the samples easily acceptable into thetop Durum Bellaroi class.

MaintenancePanel members appreciated the minimal use of

belts and easy access to all areas around themachine. But the increased use of hydraulic drivesresulted in a maze of hydraulic pipework.

The latest models in the range have addressed thisproblem by rerouting and modifying the piping toreduce trash build-up and improve maintenance.

Access to the engine compartment and grain binwas easy and safe but some reviewers felt the rearladder could be stronger. Handrails fold up fromon top of the engine bay and from the bin for easierand safer operator movement.


R E S E A R C H : R E V I E W S C L A S S 8 H A R V E S T E R S

Cabin layout and size.

Hydraulic drives.

Overall performance.

Construction quality (axle andhydraulic routing).

Best features

Monitor location.

Cabin access steps.

Worst features

CASE IH AXIAL-FLOW 8010


Visibility was excellent apart from the locationof the large AFS Pro 600 monitor (a colour touch-screen multi-function display) to the right of thehydrostatic controls, which could obstruct theview of the front.

ContactCase IHwww.caseih.com(02) 9673 7700.

Manufacturer’s commentThe Power Plus Shaft Drive System or the rotor

reduces maintenance cost, allows in-cabin rotorreversing and is only available from Case IH. For serviceability each hydraulic pipe can be removedwithout the need to remove additional pipes. The Pro600 monitor has been repositioned on new machines.

A mini-ringfeeder hitch is standard for towing a comb trailer and swings away during operation.There are inertia brake lights for extra safety on roads.

Lighting was adequate with two high-intensitydischarge lights and two standard work lights onthe cabin and two after-cut lights. Egress lights andbeacons are also standard.

A suitably long unloading auger was fitted with aplastic tip to prevent light collision damage.

CabinReviewers liked the large cabin with well laid out,

simple controls but some criticised the location ofthe large multi-function display.

Access to the spacious, quiet cabin was easyalthough some reviewers found the steps steep.There is ample room on the floor and in storagecompartments behind the operator’s seat andunder the instructor’s seat, which was comfortabledue to the extra space.

The control console is attached to the operator’sseat, with all necessary adjustments laid out withlarge, simple switches. A rotary knob controls thefour transmission gears.

A disappointing feature was two small fiddlytoggle switches for engaging both the front andthreshing system.

Hydrostatic controls were at the front of theconsole with the handgrip also containing theharvester front lift and tilt, reel speed and clearance,auger controls and an emergency stop button.

C L A S S 8 H A R V E S T E R S R E V I E W S : R E S E A R C H

3.75

3.50

3.25

3.00

2.75

2.50

2.25

2.000.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

Kilometres per hour

Tonn

es p

er h

ecta

re Average line

Case IH Axial-Flow 8010


$464,750.

Price

This space is deliberately blank

making them less likely to be opened accidentallyor by unauthorised people.

Accessing many of the belts involved removinginner panels after first opening the sides. While anexcellent safety feature, it could also collect rubbishduring operation.

A hydraulic tensioner on the grain elevatoreliminated the frustrating task of manual adjustment.

Visual guide bars on other belt tensioners wereuseful for maintaining the correct belt tensions.

Speed sensors on all belts ensured all rancorrectly, an essential feature due to the largenumber of belts driving this harvester.

While all the electrical circuits were easy toaccess behind a panel on the entry platform to the cabin, the layout appeared complex and fault-finding could be difficult.

The radiator fan was self-cleaning and liftedvertically to allow open access to the radiators.

OperationThe reviewers liked the threshing and cleaning

systems but were concerned by the lack of safetyfeatures such as the thresher and auger cut-offswitch being on the operator’s seat only.

The machine would benefit from an extra switchfitted to the rear access.

A two-stage thresher engagement reduced thestress on drive components, while the hydraulicallyadjustable concaves were fitted with accumulatorswhich could break-out if the rotors becameoverloaded or a foreign object was ingested.

An air-operated three-dimensional sieve isstandard on all Australian models and is desirablefor anyone working in undulating country.

The cleaning system was well designed andconstructed but slightly difficult to access.

Reviewers liked the solid feeder-house with easyconnections and simple operation and the excellentmini-ringfeeder fitted to the rear axle for towingcomb trailers.

Most panel members felt the lighting was thebest of all machines reviewed, with six high-intensity discharge lights as standard, fourmaintenance lights and one portable light.

While the Claas Lexion 580R recorded themaximum machine harvested yield, the harsherthreshing system increased grain damage.

Panel members found some useful features toaid maintenance such as a self-opening saucer and easy-to-open cross-auger panels but felt theharvester was difficult to set up.

PerformanceThe Lexion’s theoretical maximum performance

of 36.7 tonnes per hour at 12 kilometres per hourmight have been affected slightly by a drop inpower from the Caterpillar C13 engine, which wasexperiencing turbocharger waste-gate problemsduring the test.

But the Claas had the highest yield of 2.4 tonnesper hectare at this common performance point.The theoretical maximum machine harvested yieldwas the highest recorded at 3.24t/ha at a slowerspeed of 5.3km/h (6.8ha/h).

Grain damage was a huge problem for thismachine, with close analysis showing thepercentage of visibly damaged grain was at leastfive times that of other machines.

The GrainCorp tests showed 5.5 per centscreenings, significantly higher than most othermachines and above the 5% cut-off for all butDurum class three (DR3) wheat which has a 10% cut-off.

MaintenanceWhile reviewers found several features that

made maintaining the harvester easier, access tosome areas was still difficult with a multi-purposeladder not only substituting for a more permanentfixture but also replacing access steps around the machine.

While on all other machines access into the grainbin was via the engine bay, the Claas harvester hadno access from the top due to the hydraulicallyopening saucer. A small access panel was locatedon the right side of the cabin.

Large side panels offered excellent access for checking and maintenance of the drivemechanisms along each side of the machine. The panels only could be opened with a tool,

CLAAS LEXION 580R


Highest machine harvestedyield of 3.24t/ha.

Belt adjustments were easy.

Quiet and comfortable cabin.

Hydraulic saucer opening.

Best features

Crop damage during harvest.

Complex to set up.

Too many drive belts.

Difficult bin access forcleaning out.

Worst features


machines but all other manufacturers insisted onusing their own front of a similar size.

Peak machine harvested yield results for the9860 STS were off the pace, with a maximum of 3.03 tonnes per hectare harvested at only 6.04 hectares per hour.

At 4.72 kilometres per hour, only 18.3t/h wouldbe harvested.

Performance at 15.4ha/h or 12km/h was also down,yielding 2.18t/ha for a performance of 33.52t/h.

Grain sample tests showed screenings at 5.4 percent and visible damage of 0.42%.

Review panellists appreciated the simplicity ofoperation and safety of the John Deere 9860 STSharvester, especially the number of easy openingguards fitted at ground level.

But the performance was lacking with lower machine harvested yield and increased grain damage and the cabin was small withreduced visibility.

PerformanceThe harvester tested was fitted with a new

MidWest 12.8-metre draper front which had been intended for use as the standard front for all

JOHN DEERE 9860 STS

ContactLandpower Australiawww.landpower.com.au(03) 9369 1188.

Manufacturer’s commentThe Lexion produced the highest machine yield

recorded at the setting for 6–7km/h. If the settingwere allowed to be changed to match the amount ofmaterial being processed, the versatility, performanceand grain quality from the hybrid system would havebeen demonstrated.

An unloading auger with a flexible plastic endwas long enough to reach past the 12.8-metre frontfitted during testing.

CabinAlthough reviewers said the cabin felt small, it

had a comfortable seat, clear visibility and anadequate instructor’s seat with an in-built fridge.

The cabin was noticeably quiet and free from transmission noises common in some other machines.

But panellists found that although almost allfunctions could be adjusted from the cabin, it madesetting up the machine more complex than needed.

Compared with other machines, there were ahuge number of front and separator adjustments.

As a result, only the hydrostatic and a few otherimportant controls such as the unload auger andfront height were fitted to the seat armrest. All adjustments and a large easy-to-read displaywere mounted on a fixed right-sided console.

Feederhouse dust extraction reduced the dustclouds that can impede visibility, while the cabin airfilter was easily accessed by opening the entire roofof the harvester.

3.75

3.50

3.25

3.00

2.75

2.50

2.25

2.000.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

Kilometres per hour

Tonn

es p

er h

ecta

re Average line

Claas Lexion 580R


Safety.

Simple control layout.

Easy front attachment.

Best features

Performance and cost.

Small cabin.

Poor engine access.

Work lights are optional.

Worst features


$496,100.

Price



3.75

3.50

3.25

3.00

2.75

2.50

2.25

2.000.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

Kilometres per hour

Tonn

es p

er h

ecta

re Average line

John Deere 9860 STS


Panellists noted the concaves were too large forone person to handle easily.

Some panel members felt the cleaning area on this harvester appeared smaller than the othermachines tested and that the choppers couldobstruct the cleaning fan outlet, subsequentlyaffecting grain quality and quantity.

The front was easy to attach with hydraulic pinslocking it to the feeder house and a single pointconnection for all hydraulics and electrics.

Safety features include cut-off switches on the seat and ladder to stop the front, auger andthreshing system.

A stone trap was fitted, which reviewers felt wasproblem-free and easy to use.

The unloading auger was well constructed with aplastic end to minimise damage but it was too shortfor the front fitted and noticeably lower than otherharvesters tested.

Some reviewers were concerned about the plyrating and suitability of the front tyres for larger,heavier harvester fronts.

Unlike all other machines, no factory rear towingconnection is available.

Standard lighting includes six cabin-mountedand two after-cut lights but no maintenance lights.

CabinPanel members liked the simplicity of the cabin

layout and control panel but criticised visibility dueto the reduced glass area of the smaller cabin andthe low overhead console.

Noise from the manual floor-shift transmissionwas an unwelcome intrusion.

A string of monitors on the right-sided pillar andthe large Greenstar 2 monitor mounted on theright side of the roof, also blocked the line of sightof the harvester front.

Monitors were effective and easy to read,although they were fixed and basic in design.

Panellists praised the fact most controls weremounted on a right-sided console.

The layout was intuitive but having the warninglights across the top of the cabin meant they wereout of the operator’s field of vision and notificationscould be missed.

While the entry ladder was well constructed andeasy to climb, the door was narrow and low.

ContactJohn Deere

www.johndeere.com.au

(07) 3802 3222.

Manufacturer’s commentWhile the test focused on spot rates in a single crop

and condition, other factors affecting the efficienciesand overall cost of harvesting such as AutoTrac andhigh unload rate discharge auger were not consideredin this test. Different harvesters perform and responddifferently as crops and conditions vary and moreimportant to operators is the overall experience andefficiency from the start of harvest to the end.

$479,410.

PriceThese results would consign the harvested grain

to Durum class three (DR3) but it would still besuitable for seed.

MaintenanceWhile large, single side panels and a swing-out

ladder gave easy access for maintenance, reviewersfound cleaning the machine difficult due to limitedcross-auger access.

Climbing to the top of the harvester was easy,with the ladder popping out of the rear right-sidedquarter but some panel members criticised thesteps as flimsy.

More space at the top of the machine is providedby a section of extra walkway that opens out.

The engine is close to the walkway and isdifficult to access with limited side openings but ithas a top access panel.

The radiator screen design incorporates a vertical intake, which could collect more debristhan it deflects.

A large, single panel on the left of the harvesterand a panel and stairway on the right give sufficientaccess for maintenance, while steps around themachine help with reaching higher points.

Decals were excellent, with large, clear warninglabels and instructions spread all over the machine.

But the review panel noted the harvester lacked a toolbox.

A useful control panel positioned toward the rear left side of the harvester operates the sievelights, work lights (if fitted) and shoe settings.

Plastic covers are situated around the machine,including those used to access the concaves.

While several belts are used, there was a balance with the use of hydraulics to power someharvester systems.

Belts were easy to check and adjust and were wellguarded with simple-to-remove covers.

Cleaning the machine was an issue with thecross-auger covers under the machine difficult to remove and straw and debris accumulated inmany places.

OperationEasy front attachment and a well-built auger

were some of the better operational features but the heavy concaves and lack of a factory tow-hitchoption were drawbacks.


small section to the rear remaining covered (whichdid not contain maintenance points).

Work lights were fitted in many useful places,including the engine bay.

While the machine was mainly belt-driven, theadjustments and spring guides were easy to accessand automatic tensioners were fitted to many beltsand chains.

Accessing the rotors was more difficult than insome of the other harvesters tested due to the useof steel rather than plastic panels.

A large toolbox is easily accessible at ground level(on the left side). Easy-to-remove bottom cross-auger covers aided cleaning.

Most of the electrical fuses and relays werelocated in the cabin away from dust and debris.

Some reviewers were disappointed withconstruction quality in areas such as the feederhouse and exposed wires.

OperationPanellists praised features such as night lighting

and the standard self-emptying acoustic stone trap,which can be adjusted for sensitivity.

But panel members criticised the shorterunloading auger (fitted as standard) and a poorfront connection layout.

Safety features included a cut-off switch fitted tothe ladder and operator’s seat which stopped theoperation of the front and threshing system.

Panellists criticised the front attachment because the hydraulic coupling, although compact,obstructed the roughly designed locking latch.

A ringfeeder is standard for towing a combtrailer and conveniently swings away whenharvesting.

Standard lighting consists of 10 front lights, twoafter-cut lights, three maintenance lights under theside panels and one in the engine bay.

Unlike other augers tested, this harvester had aclosed end auger where the steel section extendedto the end and grain was discharged from theunderside of the auger. This design was too shortfor the front fitted and was susceptible to damage.

Performance of the New Holland CR970 in thetest crop was exceptional, gaining the highestperformance of 41.3 tonnes per hour at the commonspeed of 12 kilometres per hour (see Table 1, page17) and the best sample of all the harvesters tested.

PerformanceFitted with the New Holland 12.8-metre front,

this harvester achieved its maximum machineharvested yield of 3.15t/ha at 8.1ha/hour. This wasthe fastest result but second in tonnes per hectareto the Claas Lexion 580R.

For results at 15.4ha/h, or 12 kilometres per hour with the 12.8m front, it had the highest MHYof 2.69t/ha and the highest performance figure of 41.3t/h.

The grain sample had the best results of allcollected, with the GrainCorp tests showingscreenings of 4.6 per cent and a test weight of 81 kilograms per hectolitre. Visible damage wasonly 0.03%.

So, the harvested grain would be accepted asDRB, the top Bellaroi Durum wheat category.

MaintenanceAccessing the sides of the machine was easy

and the open design on top of the engine aidedmaintenance access.

While belt drives featured heavily, use of belt andchain tensioners reduced maintenance points.

The rear access to the top of the machine is basicwith a simple vertical ladder and open railings.Compared with opening panels and larger plasticsides on other harvesters, this machine is easy toaccess and move around.

Quality handrails and sturdy steps were fitted foraccessing the bin but it lacked handrails on top ofthe engine cover.

The engine oil filters were awkward to accessthrough a removable panel fitted inside the grain bin.

The engine is largely exposed with the top cover opening for servicing but the stairs andhydraulic oil reservoir hamper access to the side of the engine.

Large single panels made gaining access toeither side of the harvester a breeze, with only a

NEW HOLLAND CR970


Performance.

Price.

Cabin size and layout.

Access for maintenance eitherside of the machine.

Best features

Engine access is awkward.

High use of belt drives.

Steep rear access ladder.

Construction quality.

Worst features


A longer auger similar to that fitted to the Case IH Axial-Flow 8010 is available as an optionand is an end discharge auger with flexible end.

CabinThe large cabin and well laid out controls gained

high marks but some controls lacked flexibility andthe monitor was small.

Although the cabin had a large door, somereviewers found the steps too steep.

The cabin was spacious and there was amplestorage space with bins under the instructor’s seatand behind the operator’s seat.

Visibility from this cabin was arguably the best ofall machines tested.

A large right-sided console contains all thenecessary controls, particularly the rotary gearselector with lock which gained high marks butpanel members criticised the push-button, fixedsetting throttle.

The monitor was mounted on an adjustable armoff the front right-sided pillar, giving flexiblemounting options and the screen, although small,was backlit and easy to navigate. A separate globalpositioning system (GPS) guidance touch-screenwas mounted on the right side of the roof butgenerally was not needed during operation.

The cabin air filter was easy to access, just to theright of the cabin entry.

4.003.753.503.253.002.752.502.252.00

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0Kilometres per hour

Tonn

es p

er h

ecta

re Average line

New Holland CR970


$400,512.

Price

ContactNew Hollandwww.newholland.com(02) 9673 7777

Manufacturer’s commentSince the launch of the CR harvester during 2002,

the manufacturer has encouraged customer feedbackand continued to develop the product. These positiveresults reflect the CR of today. The CR9070 series,released for the 2007 season, features improvementsincluding a standard 7.3m auger, improved engineaccess for daily maintenance and servicing, acollapsible handrail on the engine cover and largecolour touch-screen monitor.

New release

New Holland’s CR970 harvester has beenupdated, with the new model twin rotor CR9070model offering improvements over its predecessorincluding a fuel-efficient Tier III engine, IntelliViewPlus II colour screen, revised grain tank capacity anda longer unloading auger.

The model was released last month after KondininGroup had completed its class eight harvesterperformance testing.

The six-cylinder engine delivers 298 kilowatts (400horsepower) of power at 2100 revolutions per minuteand a maximum of 336kW (450hp) at 2000rpm.

Grain tank capacity has been increased by six percent to 12,333 litres and unloading rates are up eightper cent to 113L per second. The standard unloadingauger is 900 millimetres longer at 7.3 metres andincludes an anti-dribble device. Previously operatorscould add a 900mm extension.

The standard IntelliView Plus II monitor features alarger colour touch-screen, which can be customisedto display the required information at any giventime. The screen includes a memory card slot,allowing operators to save data on-the-go.

Improved engine access through a re-designedengine cover simplifies daily maintenance andservicing. An air cleaner canister draws cleaner airfrom within the radiator and rotary screencompartment for longer filter maintenance intervals.

ABOUT THE REPORT AUTHORSTim Andrew and Josh Giumelli are Kondinin Group engineers andwriters for Farming Ahead.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSBen White, Kondinin Group; Australian Grain Harvesters Association;Manitou Australia; Grainline; Paul and Wendy White, Katrina andAlex Murray and Gordon Palmer, Edgeroi, New South Wales; AndrewCory, Narrabri, NSW; Chris Dellavedova, Maryborough, Victoria;consultant engineer Graeme Quick; Mid-West Fabrications; and FleurMuller, Kondinin Group.


The testers: Kondinin Groupengineers and research stafftravelled to Narrabri, NewSouth Wales, to test harvesterperformance. Pictured fromleft are Fleur Muller, ChrisDellavedova, Tim Andrew,Josh Giumelli and researchmanager Ben White.


alethea

(c) Farming Ahead

research report: tested: class 8...

Documents