AGCO Cutters

[FarmerJDC]

Okay well I was talking about the general price of the whole header. I wasn't specific enough apparently

[DirectCedar]

This is what i'm talking about.. this is what I mean when I say it's cheaper to make a belt than an screw/auger...... a 30' belt costs $653 but a 30' auger costs $4500. very big difference.

That's a 12.5' belt. It has to go back again in order to go round and round. You need two of those plus the short perpendicular centre draper. The centre belt is usually more expensive per ft because it is heavier since it carries more load per ft than the side drapers. Plus you have a short transition feed auger between the centre draper and the feeder house. So it all adds up. But yes, the total parts cost is still somewhat less than the full-length feed auger you listed.

Unless the draper header is equipped with a "pea auger" at the top back of the table for keeping bushy crops like peas and canola moving on the belt. Those things are optional and cost about as much as the standard full-length feed auger you listed. But without them, in fluffy or bushy crops, drapers can lose most of their advantage of uniform feeding vs. an auger header.

I'm only nitpicking all these details since you love arguing so much

[FarmerJDC]

Lol this wasn't even the threads topic

[lefe1]

This is what i'm talking about.. this is what I mean when I say it's cheaper to make a belt than an screw/auger...... a 30' belt costs $653 but a 30' auger costs $4500. very big difference.

That's a 12.5' belt. It has to go back again in order to go round and round. You need two of those plus the short perpendicular centre draper. The centre belt is usually more expensive per ft because it is heavier since it carries more load per ft than the side drapers. Plus you have a short transition feed auger between the centre draper and the feeder house. So it all adds up. But yes, the total parts cost is still somewhat less than the full-length feed auger you listed.

Unless the draper header is equipped with a "pea auger" at the top back of the table for keeping bushy crops like peas and canola moving on the belt. Those things are optional and cost about as much as the standard full-length feed auger you listed. But without them, in fluffy or bushy crops, drapers can lose most of their advantage of uniform feeding vs. an auger header.

I'm only nitpicking all these details since you love arguing so much

that's not a 12.5 you better read it again 41" and read all the pics before you spot off. and your the one that started to nitpick when you quoted my fisrt post.. all I said was it cheaper to make belts than it is to make a screw/auger. and i'm done with this topic. goodby

[DirectCedar]

Lol this wasn't even the threads topic

Haha yes it is interesting how these things get so derailed

To the OP:
As has been stated, the Massey Powerflow is not a conventional auger header. It does have a feed auger, but it also has a short perpendicular draper that carries the crop from the knife into the auger. I am suspicious that the additional feature of the short draper is what makes the price comparable to a full draper header.

Massey traditionally marketed the Powerflow as having more uniform feed and higher capacity (like 10-20% more) than a straight auger header. i.e. a 16' or 18' powerflow was pitched as having the same capacity as a 20' straight auger. In Europe and the UK where width constraints are common, this had obvious advantages. In other regions less so. I've actually run a 1990s Powerflow header and it did a very good job but we weren't running it side by side with a conventional auger header so I can't speak to the actual capacity difference.

In game I think the differences between the two are just aesthetic, since they are rated for the same operating speed, and that's about the only thing that differentiates header performance in the game.

[DirectCedar]

that's not a 12.5 you better read it again 41" and read all the pics before you spot off. and your the one that started to nitpick when you quoted my fisrt post.. all I said was it cheaper to make belts than it is to make a screw/auger. and i'm done with this topic. goodby
[/quote]

I assume you're trawling here but doing such a mediocre job of it I can't help but reply.

Read your own picture again. It says: 41" x 303.913" LH/RH Side Draper Belt.

41" is a standard depth for header canvasses. So are 40", 40.5", 42" and I think the new huge Macdons use 50".

303.913" divided by two subtract a bit to get around the rollers, is approx. 12.5', which would be extremely close to the length of each side draper on a 30' header.

I never replied to your original comment; that was someone else entirely. My only reply to you was where you incorrectly identified the parts that you posted yourself.

You aren't keeping straight what you wrote yourself, and you aren't keeping straight what other people did or did not write back to you.

And of course I'm nitpicking. I said that directly. Because you do the same thing and its hilarious to watch you respond when you get it back.

Anyway thanks for the fun coffee break

[lefe1]

HAHAHA

[GenXFarmer]

Auger heads also flex in the real world.

The draper's single biggest advantage is ability to evenly feed crop into the combine feederhouse . This prevents slugging the threshing system and also enables harvest in "tough" conditions allowing more hours per day of harvest.

Prices of things in the real world are not directly correlated to cost of manufacture. If someone designs a new combine head that beats everything else in every performance metric, they should charge more for it even if it costs less to build. Cost <> Price

If FS19 was modeled after reality, one shouldn't be able to harvest soybeans in the dark with an auger head while the draper, which should be priced at least 25% higher, can harvest well into the night.