Calculating Grain Loss

[@Dirtanddieselphotography]

Most underrated combines out there. Love the centennial paint scheme

[@lachfinch6950]

Love them thats all we run here in Queensland Australia

[@SomedayTooPulling]

A farmer I worked for in WNY would say something similar to Your fields will be cleaner when you run a Gleaner. He farmed 1,200 acres of high moisture corn and wheat in the 80,s.

[@twinelmfarmsdarryl8806]

We use that @bushelplus drop pan for calculating losses and it works awesome. We run 2 S98's and often run 1-2 beans in pan. Love the combines, love the drop pan

[@GleanerCombinesTV]

Agreed. They were great in helping us update our existing pans to the dual channel receiver. Great bunch of folks at @bushelplus.

[@deeremeyer1749]

Because ALL the loss lands in a 5' wide strip directly "bottom dead center" under the combine. As if. This IS "calculating" grain loss. Anybody with a clue and no "agenda" uses several pans as well as no pans to MEASURE grain loss and find and eliminate the CAUSE. And measures pre-harvest loss, cutting loss, header loss and machine "leaks" besides the big "leak" at the back of the machine.
"Only" 1-2 beans means your loss "often" DOUBLES (2 is twice as many as 1) and if you never have zero loss with that big of machines in soybeans it's hard to understand why you're bragging, lol.
Bean yields have not doubled and trebled during the SP combine "era" and "bean head" widths have hardly done so and all the "capacity" gains have been in and for "corn & soybean" combines for increased corn yields and increased bean "residue".
The "transverse rotor" or rather the ridiculously long and tortuous feeding "system" used in Gleaners has always sucked for large grains and always will. Which is why the "parent company" doesn't even make flex heads for their own machines.

[@evanevans670]

I counted 7. Would be more accurate if counted in slow motion. I do like Gleaner combines and believe they make cleaner and better grain samples.

[@GleanerCombinesTV]

Good catch. I didn't realize the mistake until watching the video on the floor at NFMS. But, 0.28 bu/ac in really good soybeans is still very low loss.

[@deeremeyer1749]

@@GleanerCombinesTV As if all the lost grain or even a majority of it falls straight down running a chopper-spreader.
Is .28 bushel per acre "very low loss" in 28-bushel beans? Any "header loss"? How about machine loss forward of the discharge loss? Out beyond 2.5 feet either side of machine center? How about the fact that Gleaners discharge "off-center" and do not equally load the "shoe" side to side?
Never mind. You don't know shit about actual grain loss "calculation" if you think any is "only" in your little "demonstration" here.

[@aparecidonogueira6536]

Muito boaok

[@deeremeyer1749]

What's the yield average? How much header loss? The "drop pan" is a joke as far as MEASURING loss vs. "calculating" it. And lets see the "tank sample". What FM? Moisture? Test weight? Damage? Any unthreshed pods and/or "baby beans" make it out of that "cleaner"? That "drop pan" test proves ALL the loss is "machine loss" since both pre-harvest and header loss are left out. And "less than one fifth of a bushel per acre" is the BEST CASE SCENARIO. In those "field conditions" blowing AT least 1/5 bushels to the acre per FIVE FEET of "machine width" (5 feet of pan can't catch residue from dozens of feet of spreader width) is completely unacceptable for a "modern" combine in "mint condition" in a "test plot".
Gleaner "rotary" combines are shit in dirty crops. Always have been always will be. They are "cleaner" for that very reason. Which is why Gleaner doesn't even make a real flex head and never has.