CNH Shoe Hangar Position

[Sodbuster]

Instead of posting on the Friday report I'll start a new thread. I'm running a 9230, CR9080 and a 9.9 elevation. The 9230 and 9080 are on the S/B position and the 9.9 looks the same but with no block as posted by Biglentil, I'm assuming that the above arm connected to the bushing has 2nd hole higher on the arm or not? The 2nd pic is our 9.9 with no block so am assuming it's in the SB-C position.

[Guest]

stuff like this is excellent info !!!!!

[furrowtickler]

I will check ours , I am curious now as well

[Hamloc]

First off I believe any elevation or on the newest models, a Belgium made Revelation will have the opti-clean small grains sieve and will require no change.
Only Grand Island made machines will require the change. So if your New Holland has 3 letters initiating your serial number, made in US and is most likely in the more aggressive shake position.
I have done this change to both a CR 9060 and CR 9070. Certainly beneficial in canola. For some unknown reason I have yet to do this to my 2 Case ih combines. You can get the print out of this change from your New Holland Service manager. Case one will look at you like you are crazy.

NH service bulletin issue number 0112-H4

[fjlip]

Tell us what difference it makes in cleaning/saving.

[Quadtrack]

So I asked this exact question at the CaseIH combine clinic right before harvest. The CNH guy says the block should not be changed on red combines-it ought to be in the CB position always. Moving it to the SG position would shake the shoe apart.
He said this was part of the NH/CNH merger that was only meant for NH combines
One farmer there said that yes, in fact the shoe on his 9230 blew apart after moving the block. $25k to fix.
I don’t know if this is all correct but I guess if you have a red combine, make sure you know what you might be getting into before making this change.

[Herc]

One farmer there said that yes, in fact the shoe on his 9230 blew apart after moving the block. $25k to fix.

What didn’t blow apart on a 9230……

[biglentil]

So I asked this exact question at the CaseIH combine clinic right before harvest. The CNH guy says the block should not be changed on red combines-it ought to be in the CB position always. Moving it to the SG position would shake the shoe apart.
He said this was part of the NH/CNH merger that was only meant for NH combines
One farmer there said that yes, in fact the shoe on his 9230 blew apart after moving the block. $25k to fix.
I don’t know if this is all correct but I guess if you have a red combine, make sure you know what you might be getting into before making this change.

I wonder if that farmer failed to move the bolt location at the top of hanger to the proper location?

So why would CNH even include the machined aluminum blocks engraved SG ⬆️ and CB⬇️ with the longer bolts if it wasn't meant to be used? And also why is that exact shoe in the SG position from factory in some NH models?
Doesn't make sense.

Have about 500hours in the sg position on more than 1 machine and zero issues. If anything the up down action of CB is harder on seives and the shoe than the back and forth action imo. Think about it lateral inertia as opposed to vertical inertia acting on the shoe and seives. Shake a laying flat piece of tin supported on the edges up and down vs back and forth laterally, then tell me which technique will make it fail first. Doesnt change the speed just the throw and honestly makes the combine feel smoother in the operators seat imo, less up down tire bounce. But please do your own due diligence and make up your own mind. I chose saving the half a bushel an acre of canola and by my calculations its more than paid for itself. After 3000 acres of canola in SG, by my testing, it would have saved approximately 1500bushels give or take and that would pay to have a new shoe installed. I'm sure CNH would just hate to have to sell me a new $25k shoe.

[Hamloc]

There is a lengthy post on this topic on Combine forum titled “Adjusting flagship shaker throw for small grains.”

As for the differences I noticed. In wheat or barley I didn’t notice any change. In canola the sample was cleaner and according to the monitor losses reduced. I didn’t have a weigh wagon then so I wasn’t able to do any provable testing.

[Quadtrack]

I wonder if that farmer failed to move the bolt location at the top of hanger to the proper location?

So why would CNH even include the machined aluminum blocks engraved SG ⬆️ and CB⬇️ with the longer bolts if it wasn't meant to be used? And also why is that exact shoe in the SG position from factory in some NH models?
Doesn't make sense.

Have about 500hours in the sg position on more than 1 machine and zero issues. If anything the up down action of CB is harder on seives and the shoe than the back and forth action imo. Think about it lateral inertia as opposed to vertical inertia acting on the shoe and seives. Shake a laying flat piece of tin supported on the edges up and down vs back and forth laterally, then tell me which technique will make it fail first. Doesnt change the speed just the throw and honestly makes the combine feel smoother in the operators seat imo, less up down tire bounce. But please do your own due diligence and make up your own mind. I chose saving the half a bushel an acre of canola and by my calculations its more than paid for itself. After 3000 acres of canola in SG, by my testing, it would have saved approximately 1500bushels give or take and that would pay to have a new shoe installed. I'm sure CNH would just hate to have to sell me a new $25k shoe.

Interesting yes I don’t know all the details on the farmer that had the shoe issue. Perhaps something wasn’t done right. Seems to be conflicting info from the CNH rep - to your experience. Will have to look into this further.