I don't know about HP but it sure is a nice looking Cat!!

Hi Bleedinred,
seems a standard D6D SA is 125 Drawbar HP or 140 FwHP
and a standard D6C SA is 112 Drawbar HP or 125 FwHP
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Eddie B

PS This data from my No4 and No8 Caterpillar Performance Handbooks.

From info I have....
Typical 3306 NA would be 125 flywheel hp.
Typical 3306T would be 140 flywheel hp

Depends on what upgrades got done and serial numbers.
Early 17R's started out with D333C

Bleedinred, is that the same tractor that was in the Growers Guide? Looks like a dandy, and that extra roller should improve the ride. Mine can be a little choppy sometimes. Over all I'm very happy with mine.

Bruce

Bruce, it probably was, came from Prescott. I don't know too much about the deal since I have been gone from the place for a while. It's 3306 with tighter turbo housing than the one on the D5. Looks pretty good aside from a little detail work, has new tracks, rollers & sprockets I believe.

Thanks to all for the numbers, was thinking more hp than that but stock settings were always fairly conservative. Will post pics when it goes into service.

I'm under the impression that Ag Cats are higher hp than std dozer tractors...
I asked about HP earlier in this thread because I didn't think my D6c would pull the equipment I was seeing in the pics.


Reply from North Idaho Farmer
"our D6C is somewhere in the 250 engine hp range, our D6B we know for sure is about 140. The D6B would just barely pull the 8 bottom plow in tough conditions and it was a slow job. The D6C will pull 8 bottoms in the toughest conditions easily, running in 5th & 6th all the time. Our JD chisel plow set in about 6 inches deep will pull harder than the moldboard running 8" deep. "

Hi D6c10k

The ag implement loading on ag crawlers varies widely with the soil and the steepness of the fields. We had a late D6C 74A with the D333 engine. When we rebuilt it we set it up about 20% over stock (120 hp) to about 145 hp. We also had an HD11AG that was supposed to be 125 hp at the draw-bar. We had 2 identical John Deere 21 ft offset drag discs with 26 X 1/4 blades that these two tractors pulled. In our country we probably averaged about 4+ mph with those implements digging 5 to 6 inches deep the first time over. Seldom would the D6 ever get into 2nd gear or the HD 11 into 3rd. It had to be a pretty good pull to do that. It was interesting to watch these two tractors working in the same field. We farmed the hills in a circular manner and which ever tractor was in the rear, it would always catch the front. They performed identical.

The farmers in the PNW were ahead of us in their thinking when it came to efficiency and loading on the tractors. It seemed that they would jack up the horsepower a bunch, lighten the load by 15%, put it in high gear, take off and never shift. I wish we had done that method. Less shifting is easier on the equipment and operator. Higher more consistent speed gives a better more consistent tilling of the soil. We were always told that anything over 4 mph would take out your undercarriage. While true, the under carriage costs didn't seem to outweigh the advantages of more consistent higher speed. You just have to be careful that there isn't too much load placed on the tractor so as not to take out the rear end.

My cousin got it right. He took an HD11 and put a 6V71 at about 200 hp and with an 18 ft disc, he never shifts. Up or down hill. We call that rig "Power-No-Shift".

Also, If you have never had any experience with a direct drive crawler, you will find that in a towing configuration they are much more capable/efficient than a power-shift.

You are right when you question if your 10K would pull the loads that NIF describes. It will pull the load but very slowly and inefficiently. The TC power shift is absolutely the right tool for dozing/ripping and digging dirt and rock while the direct drive works perfectly for tillage.

In the converse, I now have a direct drive D6C 74A that is equipped with a blade and soon rippers and I cringe every time I bump into a rock here in the Sierra Nevada. As such I run with one hand on the master clutch most of the time. It is a kind of a 4 handed rig to run.

Casey

I have a 9U D-6 with a 1673 cat motor in it stamped on a tag on the fuel pump housing 230 horse power.I also have a Allis-chalmers HD-11 with a 6V-71 in it,both of these are farm cats.The D-6 will almost run circles around the A-C with the same load.To be fair the A-C weighs more and the engine is pretty tired.Really enjoy running the 9U,put it in 4th and never shift all day,uphill,downhill all the same.Lot of these were used in my area.Now every one has switched to wheel tractors and these can be picked up fairly cheap.Seen them with 6-71's,D333's and 3306's,called them hotrods.

larstog- what county are you located in? I have heard of a few of those hotrod D6s, saw a D6B that had a wet deck and a 3306 dropped in. The way you do it sounds like it would work fine. The issue comes when people take those high hp cats and try to pull a load that requires 1st and 2nd gear on the hills. People have destroyed final drives quickly doing that.

Bleedinred- that is a great looking cat, I wonder how much it weighs with the nose weight and extended frame. Did it get modified to have Variable HP? I know the earlier D6Ds could be modified to be like the later Ds to have more HP in 4th gear and up. I think 240 hp was standard in the upper gears for variable horse D6s but I could be wrong. As long as the tractor runs in higher gears most of the time 250 is pretty safe, some of the D6s went up to 300 but did run into problems there.


To all who read this thread here is a little update about how things are going. Maybe I will get some pics together to post sometime. We had a pretty mild second half of January and first half of Feb. We had a lot of water moving down the local creeks in mid Jan. when a good portion of the snow went off. Our local creeks went to the highest stages they have been since the hundred year flood in Feb. of 96. The bigger creeks down in the canyons and the rivers did not flood too bad though. Most of our winter wheat melted off for a few days at least but there were still a few north slopes and flats near the timber that have not seen daylight since mid November. Starting the 15th of February we have been getting hammered with snow. This past weekend it was below 0 and darn cold for this time of year but then by Monday night it was warm and snowing again, we had 16 inches fall in less than 18 hours into Tuesday morning. Right at 3ft of snow on the level total which is well above normal for the first of March. Some of our lower ground obviously does not have as much snow but with our recent acreage expansion our lower ground is not much of a percentage of our total farmland. I still think our winter crops could do pretty good if this snow goes off nice and slow and hopefully within a few weeks. I already found snowmold in the wheat but it shouldn't be too bad hopefully.

We have made some new equipment purchases and are still shopping for more. I will maybe post some pics later.

Here's a few shots of the early runoff in NIF's area. Potlatch "Creek" , a tributary to the Clearwater, ran up to 17,000 ft/s, almost doubling the Clearwater's size. The main vineyard irrigation pump (middle pic) was a foot under water before it reached the crest. We're glad the water didn't take out any vines, enough work in a normal year and it looks like no sustained damage occurred except for that pump.