- Joined
- Oct 23, 2003
- Messages
- 8
- First name
- Bobby C
-
Hello.
In order to download file attachments or view image attachments in full size, you must be registered/logged in and have a level 2 member account.
No worry, its all for free!
For more details - click here.
Zetor and John Deere
- Thread starter bcrosehill
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2003
- Messages
- 4,020
- Location
- Laag Zuthem
- First name
- Renze
Machinery:
1976 5718
1978 5718 35kmh: Work in progress
1967 3011
The great green goat ate from the hand of Zetor .
Look here License models worldwide - https://zetorworld.com/forums/Zetor_license_models/ or click "about zetor" and then "licensees" in the menu on your left hand.
They sold the Zetor 3320-7340 and the 85 and 9540 as Deere 2000 series in Latin America, where Zetor had no sales channels.
Agco uses reinforced transmissions for these more demanding conditions in Latin and South america. Deere was smart and bought standard Zetor tractors (including the engines, usually Deere insists that the party they buy the tractors to rebadge, fits Deere engines) The Zetor rear ends are tough enough for the most demanding conditions...
Just for you who doubt it: Deere never had any influence in any decision made in Brno, just the paint scheme. They never owned anything in Brno, and the Brno works never got contaminated with parts from the galloping goat.
Look here License models worldwide - https://zetorworld.com/forums/Zetor_license_models/ or click "about zetor" and then "licensees" in the menu on your left hand.
They sold the Zetor 3320-7340 and the 85 and 9540 as Deere 2000 series in Latin America, where Zetor had no sales channels.
Agco uses reinforced transmissions for these more demanding conditions in Latin and South america. Deere was smart and bought standard Zetor tractors (including the engines, usually Deere insists that the party they buy the tractors to rebadge, fits Deere engines) The Zetor rear ends are tough enough for the most demanding conditions...
Just for you who doubt it: Deere never had any influence in any decision made in Brno, just the paint scheme. They never owned anything in Brno, and the Brno works never got contaminated with parts from the galloping goat.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
- Messages
- 147
- First name
- Steve
Also I was told in the machinery classes at college years ago that John Deere used a copy of the Zetor Crystal "Rabit and Tortoise" Torque Multiplier under licence.They just developed it a bit more with self adjustment and extra fancy bits on that John Deere owners must have on their expensive machines .Our lecturer was making fun of Zetors and other Eastern European machinery but had to admit that the Zetor Torque Multiplier was a very good invention and much better than the MF and IH versions!
.Our lecturer was making fun of Zetors and other Eastern European machinery but had to admit that the Zetor Torque Multiplier was a very good invention and much better than the MF and IH versions!
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2003
- Messages
- 4,020
- Location
- Laag Zuthem
- First name
- Renze
Machinery:
1976 5718
1978 5718 35kmh: Work in progress
1967 3011
Yes i can imagine it.. Indeed the Zetor Crystal torque amplifier was much beter and evolved than the rest, back in 1968 when they introduced it on the Crystal.
Deere's system on the 80's hi/lo power synchron trannies was not a direct copy. I dont know about Ford, but MF used a freewheel clutch in it, if the multipower clutch was engaged it multuiplied speed, when it was released it freewheels till the speed of the freewheel clutch matched the speed of the shaft, then it catched on. Like a bike, if you are driveing and stop the pedals, the bike is not driveing your feet on the pedals, you can keep your feet still while the bike is drveing.
Zetor used a planetary gear with two clutches: one band clutch around the ring gear, and one clutch inside the planetaries. The clutch inside the housing was continously engaged by springs, and disengaged by oil pressure. At the same time the oil pressure would engage the band clutch around the planetary ring gear. So even if oil pressure wasn't there (engine off) at least one of the clutches would be engaged.
On Ford Multipower, if the control mechanism wore out, it would freewheel for about 5 seconds before the next step would engage. This is because both clutches needed the oil pressure.
Zetor's system is absolutely trouble and maintenance free (i have never ever heard of a Zetor torque amplifier failure) because there is no need for a regulator mechanism. It was operated by ONE oil remote, pressurised or not would mean shift or not. Not a tricky set of valves that needed adjustment or were a weak part.
Deere indeed copied the idea of the two clutches, one pressure engaged and the other disengaged. But that was 15 years later, in the early 80's......
MF used just one clutch and a latch/camwheel construction. Ford did use two clutches but the problem was the operating system that needed calibration.
I dont think that Deere's system was a license, i think they just copied/stole it (as they always do...) Maybe they added electro-hydraulic control switch in the main gear lever ?
Deere's system on the 80's hi/lo power synchron trannies was not a direct copy. I dont know about Ford, but MF used a freewheel clutch in it, if the multipower clutch was engaged it multuiplied speed, when it was released it freewheels till the speed of the freewheel clutch matched the speed of the shaft, then it catched on. Like a bike, if you are driveing and stop the pedals, the bike is not driveing your feet on the pedals, you can keep your feet still while the bike is drveing.
Zetor used a planetary gear with two clutches: one band clutch around the ring gear, and one clutch inside the planetaries. The clutch inside the housing was continously engaged by springs, and disengaged by oil pressure. At the same time the oil pressure would engage the band clutch around the planetary ring gear. So even if oil pressure wasn't there (engine off) at least one of the clutches would be engaged.
On Ford Multipower, if the control mechanism wore out, it would freewheel for about 5 seconds before the next step would engage. This is because both clutches needed the oil pressure.
Zetor's system is absolutely trouble and maintenance free (i have never ever heard of a Zetor torque amplifier failure) because there is no need for a regulator mechanism. It was operated by ONE oil remote, pressurised or not would mean shift or not. Not a tricky set of valves that needed adjustment or were a weak part.
Deere indeed copied the idea of the two clutches, one pressure engaged and the other disengaged. But that was 15 years later, in the early 80's......
MF used just one clutch and a latch/camwheel construction. Ford did use two clutches but the problem was the operating system that needed calibration.
I dont think that Deere's system was a license, i think they just copied/stole it (as they always do...) Maybe they added electro-hydraulic control switch in the main gear lever ?
