I think at this time there was a race for farmers to farm more acres, the one man farmer. No longer could a farmer survive on the land they owned plus a few rented acres. They needed to increase acreage as crop prices fell. The only problem was the wife or kids had to pitch in to get crops in. For instance, one combine, two trucks, one pickup for service tools, one driver. It’s physically impossible to farm as one. And one bad crop year was the end! Now you see 10, 20, 30 thousand acre farms, with a lot of equipment. Many of the big farms today are 3rd and 4th generation and now is big business. The day of the small farmer is just about over. In my area all the farmers owned about 75-100 acres and made a living on small grain, corn, tomatoes and vegetables. Go to North Jersey and look at all the abandoned dairy farms.
I remember when a big time operator owned a few tractors, a straight grain truck, a combine and 100 acres. Now it is giant tractors, fleets of semis, fleets of combines and 1000s of acres.
The 7080s were fine as long as you didn't try to keep up with a 6030. 100 cubic inches was a lot to try and make up for. I saw plenty of these tractors sitting at an independent repair shop with a hole in the block. Same story every time, turned up too far and enough weight to ballast that one and a second tractor correctly.
craig smith After 25 years the shifter bushings would get worn bad enough that getting it into gear completely was a problem, the oil pump had too much clearance on some tractors that if they were turned up real far would be a little light on oil pressure, the drawbar hole would get oblong from all the hard pulling they did, the tires would spin on the wheels and shear the valve stems off the tube if you put too much weight on them to keep from spinning.
The engine in the 6030 was no gem and they had a tendency to snap the front axle off. I farmer down the road had two 5020s. They are the older more gutless version of the 6030 and he didn't have them very long before blowing the engines. They had trouble with the cam driven oil pump. They were dogs in the field too unless you turned them up to at least 250 hp. Then they were animals but then the engine would come apart that much sooner. The 6030 also had some rear end troubles which was compounded if the engine was turned up. The 7080 has a way better rear end and transmission but the 7080 had a weak engine. The cure for that was to rework the pump to slow the rpm down while keeping the HP at 180 PTO or drop in a late model N6 engine. A 7080 rear end will handle 250 hp pretty good compared to a 6030. Give me a 6030, I'll sell it and buy two 7080s and have money left over and own two much better tractors.
SilverGleaner never heard of a 6030 and a weak front axle, as a matter of fact they were the stoutest front/rear end combination of any Deere made at that time. The same rear axle configuration with heavier and larger axle bearings (obviously) was put in the scrapers for crying out loud no 7080 ever had a Scraper on its back. Yes the 5020s were a little bit of a sluggish response of an engine but they were a lugger not a runner.
SilverGleaner Well selling one and buying 2 plus putting money in the bank is a good thing, no matter who you are. If the 5010/5020/6030 front axles, rearends and transmission are so weak, why then are you able to put a Detroit in them that weigh more and have more horsepower and not have issues? Kinzie did it for years, mostly to 5010s because people wanted more power than you could wring out of an old 531 in the late 60s. Deere engines needed oil sprayed under the piston head for cooling, something no one understood at that time. An M&W turbo would liven them up but they could not handle the extra heat, hence the modest gain M&W wanted you to do on them. The 6030s took care of all that plus added an intercooler and a much better injection pump. As long as you didn't roll excessive coal all the time and try to pull what the FWDs did plus kept the oil changed, they were fine at 235 or so for several years. BUT, no power shift. A Hi-Lo like the 7520s would have been ideal. Bummer but they didn't really need it either.
No, the 7080 has great traction and a solid transmission. Of course FWA would have done it good but at that time there weren't too many manufacturers who offered FWA on a tractor that size. Many didn't have a tractor that size in 1974. What caused AC to go down the tubes more than anything was that while Deere was making great profits in the 1970's and which gave them the stamina to make it through the lean 1980's, Allis was stealing the large profits from the ag side and pouring the money into the money losing electrical division, the hydro dam generator, turbine division, the mining division, the over-the-road engine division, the nuclear division, the naval ship engine division and so on and so forth. All those divisions were under pressure during the 1960's and especially the 1970's from the poor economy the rest of the country was suffering from. For example, the naval engine side took a big hit when Carter cancelled contracts that had been in the works where Allis was in the process of building newly designed 20 foot tall engines for the Navy. So Allis had zero money to fall back on when times also got hard for the farming industry.
SilverGleaner I knew of all those other divisions and still occasionally run across some electrical equipment made by Allis or Louis-Allis. Never knew about the nuclear or over the road divisions though. I would like to find some more info on the over the road venture. They weren't the only Ag machinery manufacturer to try that one, only to realize it wasn't the thing to do.
They also had a team, maybe a division but certainly an engineering team, devoted to the tractor pulling circuit back in the 1970's. They made big advances in engine design for pullers.
SilverGleaner you have to remember too that the 7080 at the time was the biggest 2wd tractor in its days before the case 1570 i believe, and in the 1980s tractor the allis cabs are basically the standard cab on all modern tractors. there were some things that allis was really ahead of its time for... the 220 FWA comes to mind 1970 they had that before it became pretty much standard in the 80s
We had a 7080. One of the first ones, with a marroon belly. Never had any issues with it or a 210 we had. Brutes they were.
I think at this time there was a race for farmers to farm more acres, the one man farmer. No longer could a farmer survive on the land they owned plus a few rented acres. They needed to increase acreage as crop prices fell. The only problem was the wife or kids had to pitch in to get crops in. For instance, one combine, two trucks, one pickup for service tools, one driver. It’s physically impossible to farm as one. And one bad crop year was the end! Now you see 10, 20, 30 thousand acre farms, with a lot of equipment. Many of the big farms today are 3rd and 4th generation and now is big business. The day of the small farmer is just about over. In my area all the farmers owned about 75-100 acres and made a living on small grain, corn, tomatoes and vegetables. Go to North Jersey and look at all the abandoned dairy farms.
I remember when a big time operator owned a few tractors, a straight grain truck, a combine and 100 acres. Now it is giant tractors, fleets of semis, fleets of combines and 1000s of acres.
True ,upstate NY is the same way ,good business to stay out of
Good or not, but that is awesome looking tractor with those fat tires.
Good video. Oh wait it's a picture slide show with audio commentary. A big let down for Allis Chalmers standards.
Yep they must have decided to copy the older IH slide shows. They were even worse.
There’s nothing wrong with this type of presentation. It looks great.
The 7080s were fine as long as you didn't try to keep up with a 6030. 100 cubic inches was a lot to try and make up for. I saw plenty of these tractors sitting at an independent repair shop with a hole in the block. Same story every time, turned up too far and enough weight to ballast that one and a second tractor correctly.
The 6030 had there own problems and i'm sure you know what were ! Would you please list them from them from the engine back to the draw bare!
craig smith After 25 years the shifter bushings would get worn bad enough that getting it into gear completely was a problem, the oil pump had too much clearance on some tractors that if they were turned up real far would be a little light on oil pressure, the drawbar hole would get oblong from all the hard pulling they did, the tires would spin on the wheels and shear the valve stems off the tube if you put too much weight on them to keep from spinning.
The engine in the 6030 was no gem and they had a tendency to snap the front axle off. I farmer down the road had two 5020s. They are the older more gutless version of the 6030 and he didn't have them very long before blowing the engines. They had trouble with the cam driven oil pump. They were dogs in the field too unless you turned them up to at least 250 hp. Then they were animals but then the engine would come apart that much sooner. The 6030 also had some rear end troubles which was compounded if the engine was turned up. The 7080 has a way better rear end and transmission but the 7080 had a weak engine. The cure for that was to rework the pump to slow the rpm down while keeping the HP at 180 PTO or drop in a late model N6 engine. A 7080 rear end will handle 250 hp pretty good compared to a 6030. Give me a 6030, I'll sell it and buy two 7080s and have money left over and own two much better tractors.
SilverGleaner never heard of a 6030 and a weak front axle, as a matter of fact they were the stoutest front/rear end combination of any Deere made at that time. The same rear axle configuration with heavier and larger axle bearings (obviously) was put in the scrapers for crying out loud no 7080 ever had a Scraper on its back. Yes the 5020s were a little bit of a sluggish response of an engine but they were a lugger not a runner.
SilverGleaner Well selling one and buying 2 plus putting money in the bank is a good thing, no matter who you are. If the 5010/5020/6030 front axles, rearends and transmission are so weak, why then are you able to put a Detroit in them that weigh more and have more horsepower and not have issues? Kinzie did it for years, mostly to 5010s because people wanted more power than you could wring out of an old 531 in the late 60s. Deere engines needed oil sprayed under the piston head for cooling, something no one understood at that time. An M&W turbo would liven them up but they could not handle the extra heat, hence the modest gain M&W wanted you to do on them. The 6030s took care of all that plus added an intercooler and a much better injection pump. As long as you didn't roll excessive coal all the time and try to pull what the FWDs did plus kept the oil changed, they were fine at 235 or so for several years. BUT, no power shift. A Hi-Lo like the 7520s would have been ideal. Bummer but they didn't really need it either.
Very cool that you’ve saved and shared this sales presentation. Stuff like this needs to be available for future generations to see.
Too much power, not enough traction. Not enough sales, profitability per unit collapses, bankruptcy ensues due to high overhead.
No, the 7080 has great traction and a solid transmission. Of course FWA would have done it good but at that time there weren't too many manufacturers who offered FWA on a tractor that size. Many didn't have a tractor that size in 1974. What caused AC to go down the tubes more than anything was that while Deere was making great profits in the 1970's and which gave them the stamina to make it through the lean 1980's, Allis was stealing the large profits from the ag side and pouring the money into the money losing electrical division, the hydro dam generator, turbine division, the mining division, the over-the-road engine division, the nuclear division, the naval ship engine division and so on and so forth. All those divisions were under pressure during the 1960's and especially the 1970's from the poor economy the rest of the country was suffering from. For example, the naval engine side took a big hit when Carter cancelled contracts that had been in the works where Allis was in the process of building newly designed 20 foot tall engines for the Navy. So Allis had zero money to fall back on when times also got hard for the farming industry.
SilverGleaner I knew of all those other divisions and still occasionally run across some electrical equipment made by Allis or Louis-Allis. Never knew about the nuclear or over the road divisions though. I would like to find some more info on the over the road venture. They weren't the only Ag machinery manufacturer to try that one, only to realize it wasn't the thing to do.
They also had a team, maybe a division but certainly an engineering team, devoted to the tractor pulling circuit back in the 1970's. They made big advances in engine design for pullers.
SilverGleaner Yes I've seen that video. 4 Turbos on one tractor, a double cascade type system I believe.
SilverGleaner you have to remember too that the 7080 at the time was the biggest 2wd tractor in its days before the case 1570 i believe, and in the 1980s tractor the allis cabs are basically the standard cab on all modern tractors.
there were some things that allis was really ahead of its time for... the 220 FWA comes to mind 1970 they had that before it became pretty much standard in the 80s