New CLAAS Jaguar with 1000hp????

[Bernhard]

The VW Phaeton was a prestige object for VW. But a family owned company like Claas can´t afford a flop, so I thinke, even like Krone, that they analyse the market before they develope such a big machine.
What average size had a tractor in mid 70´...60 hp, 70hp? And now? What average size had a Forage harvester then?
Ok, You as a contractor must have the knowledege...but the Steernbos isn´t the world. Looks, like you think in smaller dimensions.
2 harvesters means 2 operators and the same amount of stuff for transportation and on the silage stack like You would need for the 1000hp...so where is the fortake of using 2 harvesters???

[AgMachinery]

Seems like the new balers (round and big square) will be introduced in July this year. That seems like a no for the 2006 season, but yes for 2007.

[Josh A]

First off, just to stay on topic, as cool as that Big-X is, and as much as I'd like to see a Claas one, who can afford/justify something like that? Probably just custom operators, and how much would it cost to design and build these things, will enough units be sold? As far as those that have multiple ones, such as Claussen's and their 3, its probably best to have a few, rather than one big one. Sometimes you don't need the big one, you can fill multiple trucks at once, in different places maybe, and if one breaks down, you're not crippled, with the silage on the ground.

Now, on to my question. Does any manufacture come out with net wrap for large squares?? You would think it would be natural, net wrap for large squares would be soooo easy. Mind you, they're expensive enough as it is, how you can justify 100,000 just for a baler is beyond me... you got to be pretty big. I only know of one in the area, and he's over half hour away. He does some field's nearby though, for the big grain farmers. He's got a TV140(or maybe TV145 we're not sure), a JCB industrial telehandler, and at least 2-3 9030 bidirectionals with forklifts mounted on the front. And a LF JD7000/7010 2wd for baling. They stack the bales in huge stacks, about 50 x 50 x 14. Pretty impressive to see actually.

We'll never get to go to big sqares, way too difficult. Our whole set-up would need to be redone, and our supplier's would be down to a single one. Right now we've got good relationships established, and rarely do we need to look for feed or bedding, they usually come to us with an offer first. They've all got the big(gest) round balers, mostly the new Deere's, so it's all based on quality.

-Josh

[pudding]

who can afford it?

what happened when the first 100hp tractor was built, what happened when MFWD in tractors became available...........

i often comment like that as well......but i have learnt if you don't have it you can't sell it, .........you can't tell someone they don't need it in there operation until they have decided for themselves........

i say bring it on.........where is it...........the cougar we thought was to bigs is selling........maybe not many, but its sold more then what it would of if it wasn't built

you know how to put net wrap on a square bale, i often pondered how to do it after someone in the develop ment of farm machinery said if i knew someone they would like to talk to him lol.........

[DL]

Josh
I think you'll find your netwrap theory on big sqare balers is a little flawed,but hey I could be wrong.....
Perhaps if Vicon had gone down that road instead of using wire the HP 1600 might still be in production.
DL

[eppie]

DL, I have seen used Vicon HP 1600 machines on the market, with a modification done so that the sharp ends of the wire bind was pushed downward into the bale. The same contractor also offered their wrapper that could wrap Vicon bales.

It has been done, but somehow we dont see more of it.. Maybe it is the scale of operations in Europe, most bigger European farms run their own self loading hay wagons with pit silage, so they dont switch their total machine setup, also because a HP1600 is more expensive than a forage wagon.

Another problem is the disability to feed these bales with TMR wagons because they are so rock hard. Usually only the vertical screw auger mixers can take them. At my friend's they used Vicon bales stacked under a sheet of plastic, for years. I can remember that tearing down these tough bales with a hay fork is top sport

[Jon B]

Who can afford a Big X?

Who can afford 3 forage harvesters either?

It all depends on what your trying to do. In the case of a Claussens - www.claussenfarms.com for those of you scoring at home - I'd imagine their typical job isn't large enough to justify one Claas 900 or Big X. Gerards 300 cows is probably as large of an operation as they would serve, but they would have a few jobs on the go at once. So its a quantity issue.

On the other hand, the guys feeding the Vreba-Hoff / Van Bakel / Bos Dairy / Fair Oaks in the Great Lakes region, where the average herd is 2000 cows, would probably gain some benefit from having a bigger harvester. They would only have 2-3 clients, but they'd be there 'forever'.

Lets say that each harvester has 4 trucks to fill, and 3 Claas 830 choppers. Well, thats 12 trucks and 3 harvesters = 15 men. Now, go with one 1000hp harvester. You'll likely have similar capacity, and you can likely take 2 trucks out because of increased efficiency. So your doing a similar job with 4 less men @ $12 / hr. The math is there!

Big X-tra large isn't for everyone. But you also don't see a Case STX 530 in your neighbours yard putting in a flower garden either.

[Josh A]

johnny2 said:

Lets say that each harvester has 4 trucks to fill, and 3 Claas 830 choppers. Well, thats 12 trucks and 3 harvesters = 15 men. Now, go with one 1000hp harvester. You'll likely have similar capacity, and you can likely take 2 trucks out because of increased efficiency. So your doing a similar job with 4 less men @ $12 / hr. The math is there!

Well I hadn't expected to be analyzed, but I still stand on the same spot. As you so nicely pointed out, Claussens - with their 3 Claas 800 series - probably would not benefit from it. As you said, Gerard is probably one of their largest customers, and yet they still only bring one. At the same time, they can have the other harvesters in two other counties with other customers. If one harvester breaks down, they are not stopped, with customers waiting, with silage already on the ground, drying. As Gerard says, it's not like the "small" harvester is slowing them down any, the Claas is moving plenty fast, they don't need to try and keep up with a "900" as we have dubbed it. Also, I know Gerard would be thrilled to have one of those monsters in his fields. Alfalfa may not be bad, but you'd definately notice it had been there with the corn.

Now, with a big one, yes there are fewer harvester operators, but it's also like with these big combines sometimes. You've got one combine, and 3 trucks in a line waiting to get filled on the go.

And you have to make sure you can pack the silage fast enough to stay ahead. Even with silage for us, we have 1-2 tractors loading in the field, 2-3 trucks, and a single tractor unloading the trucks and loading the bagger. Sometime's its hard to keep up, and that's with the field 20-30 minutes away. (by driving; not tractor)

Yes, some people will be able to justify them. I'd personally prefer multiple smaller ones, over a single big one.

[Jon B]

Josh

Get your New Holland 707 3pt hitch harvester on your 75hp New Holland tractor then and start chopping 200 acres of corn then

Mmmmm, mmmmmm, that sarcasm does taste good eh!


On a side note, that would be a great day again - chopping corn with a 707. That was a great forage harvester for what we wanted it to do - 25 acres of silage and 40 acres of haylage a year. It was one of my first jobs I did on the farm!

[Josh A]

johnny2 said:

Josh
Get your New Holland 707 3pt hitch harvester on your 75hp New Holland tractor then and start chopping 200 acres of corn then

Jon
I said small, not non-existant! ;D

I was however, referring to multiple Claas 850s, over a single Big-X 1000 Field Shuttle.

[derek]

yeah i agree with josh, you probly could get 2 s/p forage harvesters for one, and probly get as much done or maybe a bit less, also if one breaks you still ahve another one

[eppie]

As some folks have already mentioned, with grass silage it is a pain in the arse to either get a big enough swath to feed a big chopper, or have the tractors accelerate fast enough and simultaneously with a harvester.
I've been doing drag racing on a field with a thin cut with small swaths... i can tell you it's not easy to keep up with the chopper accelerating up to 30 km/h everytime, on a short field...

Next to that, changeing wagons under the pipe doesnt take more time with 2 smaller choppers, the only thing that could matter is having an extra wagon in the field because loading goes on at 2 different choppers.

On smaller fields even a normal FX 450 cant run at max capacity without throwing sods at the headlands.

[CMunger]

Claas has come up with a 15' direct cut disc mower/header to mount directly to the chopper, and heard they may go to 18'. Eliminates the swather and the rakes. Here they were using self propelled swathers with 15' disc mower headers, then would come behind with tractors and rakes to put two windrows together. Also tried wide draper headers.

[Jon B]

Chuck

Is the quality of forage coming out of that system better then when its been cut and cured for a few hours / day?

I always thought that chopping silage too green is begging for problems - seepage etc

[Josh A]

cmunger said:

Claas has come up with a 15' direct cut disc mower/header to mount directly to the chopper, and heard they may go to 18'. Eliminates the swather and the rakes. Here they were using self propelled swathers with 15' disc mower headers, then would come behind with tractors and rakes to put two windrows together. Also tried wide draper headers.

If it's getting cut at the same time it's getting chopped and loaded into the truck, what happen's to the drying time? We had looked into putting a discbine on the front of our TV145, and pulling a baler at the same time, which is similiar to the header on the chopper, but the silage would be too wet...

Now this is coming from a person who has never run a SP forage harvester: As far as the big ones, if they want to go any bigger, the only way I can see it, is to do like Krone, and make it another Fieldshuttle. I had assumed the Claas prototype we were talking about was a FieldShuttle as well, but if that's the one on the first page, the picture, then... I can't see any reason for it being bigger. The only reason I can see a bigger one, is as I said, a FieldShuttle, one where they go and unload at the edge of the road, into the waiting trucks. One machine in the field. Just like a combine, it goes, does it's thing, then goes and unloads into the trucks at the edge of the field. Otherwise, I just don't see how they intend on beefing up the chopper, and leaving the rest to work itself out. It's kinda like having a big 4wd, with a 10-foot disc, in a European field. It's like the Big Roy, ya they had it, but at the time it wasn't practical.

-Josh
I sure talk a lot about stuff I know nothing about, eh?