ploughmaster

From what I recall being told by a (well known) retailer at the time, their story was that the Siku licence was granted by JD Europe (i.e. Germany) and that JD management in the States knew nothing about the Siku licence until it was a done deal, and I was told they were apparently not best pleased. This should perhaps be regarded as hearsay, it not being the type of information that such companies would air in public [img alt=]http://www.farmtoysforum.com/forum/Smileys/default/wink.gif I was under the impression that Siku can't directly import and market their JD toys into North America (may be our North American friends could confirm whether that is the case?). There may be further restrictions on what they can model because of possible conflicts with Ertl (not that Siku and Britains/Ertl compete directly - the difference in quality and price means that Siku and Britains don't really compete at the same level)

That's just twisting the argument . I do not understand why they are suddenly considered to be in competition with UH because they appear to have made a toy which also appears to be a good model. It is still a toy, and it will sell for half the price of UH. Siku, on the other hand, do appear to setting themselves up against UH from the appearence of their most recent releases (Siku are also nearer to the UH price bracket). They won't be able to compete with UH on quantity, but could give them something to think about quality wise. Incidentally, if Ertl and JD were to fall out over the 32nd licence (which is unlikely to happen this side of hell freezing), I would think that Siku would benefit from having their restricted licence extended, rather than any other toy/model maker getting it.

Ros is a valid comparison, but as has been repeatedly pointed out (but still some refuse to listen!) Ertl/Britains are primarily designed as a toy, and cannot be directly compared with the likes of UH and Weise which are designed as models. Whilst the UH 32nds are undoubtedly very good models for their price, I would strongly argue that the Ertl precisions are of far better quality than either UH or Weise. On the toy front, only the recent releases from Ros acheive a higher standard for the similar price as the Britains. Wait and see what the new MF 7480 turns out like in the flesh. From the pictures we have seen, it looks almost as good as the UH 7499, and will be nearly half the price (and for the majority of 'toy' buyers, the price matters - they are not all wealthy farmers and can't afford Siku or UH type prices!) Dream on

Which comment shows again that you do not understand the exclusive licencing deal which exists betwen Ertl and John Deere I honestly don't think UH see much potential in the 'toy' market at all - it would mean competing head-on, and on equal terms with the toymakers, which is what they have largely avoided by going for a market that had previuosly been the preserve of specialist model manufacturers. UH saw them as an easy target. Interestingly however, one or two toy makers appear to be starting to try and compete head on with UH). The market that UH are aiming at are the 'easy' targets like DBP, Tyro, Autodrome et al. Not difficult to achieve when someone else is paying the upfront development costs, and you only have to market the product (a very unfair advantage that I understand UH have over the other toy and model makers) Pretty meaningless to be honest - pretty much all the major toy and model makers have licences for AGCo products (MF, Valtra, Fendt, Challenger). This is precisely why Ertl have a stranglehold on the licence. Where do you get the impression that JD are missing out in 32nd scale?? Just take a look at the range of what Ertl produce every year. Take a look at the Ertl John Deere catalogue, the range goes way beyond toy/model tractors in the scales you have mentioned. Ertl would not willingly give up their exclusive licence because they have everything to lose. Likewise, John Deere are highly unlikely to take the licence (or part of it) away from Ertl, because there is no one else able to supply the breadth and depth of toy ranges for them. Don't make me laugh. UH are flimsy and blown together compared with the precisions (and in 16th in particular, highly inaccurate!) You can argue (and fantasise) all you like. I can't see UH being granted a licence by JD any time soon (or indeed at all). Note to Moderator: This is all getting rather a long way from the original topic - would these posts be better put into a seperate thread??

I'm afraid you need to open your eyes and look at the real world! Any pushing aside of Britains has been done almost entirely by Siku. Nonetheless, I think you would probably find that if you examine the sales figures, Britains is still the runaway market leader!! UH have no influence on the toy market. If you seriously think UH are going to get a JD licence just like that, you seriously misunderstand the licencing relationship that Ertl have with JD. It is also the case that the Ertl/JD relationship centres on 16th, and when you look at the quality and detail on Ertl's 16th JD production (particularly the Precision range), and then look at the number of new and different models Ertl produce for JD, I doubt if UH will ever come close to competing with them.

UH will have very little effect on Ertl/Britains core market, which is toys. This will be even more pronounced in America where the regulations regarding toys are much tougher (a lot of the items in the 'Britains' catalogue would carry a 14+ age grade in the US, whereas they are 3+ in Europe; this is why Ertl issue basic 'shelf' editions over there). The UH stuff is collector only, and I think a lot of North American collectors will find the 16th UH unacceptably flimsy compared to the kind of models they are used to. 32nd is still very small fry in the US (I think a high proportion of the Ertl US 32nd issues end up this side of the Atlantic ), so UH won't be making huge sales in that sector either. Neither will they will have much effect on Britains/Ertl collector editions unless they acquire a general licence for John Deere, and I very much doubt that is likely to happen anytime soon! As to what would have become of Britains if they had not been taken over by Ertl (it was not a merger!), you do not have to wonder; We know exactly what was going to happen; Britains Petite were rapidly running out of finances (i.e. nearly bust), and had fallen into the ownership of a French mining equipment manufacturer who were not in the slightest bit interested in toys. If Ertl had not bought Britains Petite, the company would have been closed down and the Britains Farm range would have ceased to exist (and the rights to the W Britain name would have gone to a US toy soldier manufacturer). This was what appeared to be almost a done deal at the time!

see post 5 in this thread: http://www.farmtoysforum.com/forum/index.php/topic,29682.0.html They are in the 'Big Farm' range (companions to the JD 6430 that came out last year)

I am not a great fan of rubber tracks, but they do spread the weight over a bigger area than wheels and tyres do. Where the theory falls down with the likes of the big Challengers, Quadtracs and JD on tracks, is the much greater weight of the machine - I'm not sure what that Challenger weighs, but a fully fueled up Quadtrac weighs in just shy of 25 tonnes without the weight of all the muck stuck to it (and of course the weight of the drivers lunch bag). In the case we see here, there is the added effect of the Free Flow drill which are a very dead weight pull in themselves. On the subject of drilling winter wheat into frosty ground, I would say it is a pointless exercise. A couple of years ago I drilled wheat straight behind the plough on some ex-beet land. Drilling spread over two days and there was a very sharp frost overnight. I had drilled almost up to where the plough had got to, just leaving a strip varying from about 0.5m to 1.5m. This was very frozen the next morning when we resumed (that mornings fresh ploughing came up the same as it had done the previous day of course). That strip that was drilled into frozen soil took nearly twice as long to emerge, didn't tiller and never caught up. At harvest, the grains appeared much smaller and we felt there were less of them, and we were thankful we didn't drill the whole field into frost. On a side note, there also appeared to be a small (negative) difference in the crop where the frost had been poughed down.

Not to mention the green combination drill and what appears to be a very nice condition Ford 7710 . Ofr perhaps someone took a liking to that Knight demount sprayer?. Still fairly strong money though.

Not highly strung at all to be honest. Perhaps using a smiley or two would convey the 'jest' more effectively I don't collect sets, and although there are a couple of those which have colour variations in which I am missing, I am certainly not willing to pay anywhere near the sort of astronomical amounts that I expect they will sell for (unless of course, I do actually win the lottery )

Tonights Euromillions would be better

No doubt a number of other people also want them just as much as you do. What makes you think you have the right to a free run?? And to be honest, considering what is in a couple of the big sets, and what the same/similar sets have sold for in the last few months on eBay, and even if you are only bidding on the 8 large boxed sets, I doubt if £1000 in total will be anywhere near enough

These are not actually missing. The Ertl 7820 only came out as a new version late last year - 2009. The book only covers up to the end of 2008 (hence the title "Pocket Guide to Britains .....Tractors 1998 - 2008" The two JD's you mention are not missing either as they never came within the scope of the book. David had to draw a line somewhere, and as the JD 6200 and 6400 were Ertl only issues, dating from before the takeover of Britains, and had never been issued as either a Britains or Ertl/Britains, they were not included.

Crikey, that's cheap!!!

It was available from 1989 to 1990 (as was the Ford New Holland Gift Set 9536).

I had forgotten the 8100 . The 7400 did pre-date it though, and was built by EVA in Belgium using a 6600 back end mated to a 6 cyl Ford 2714E 'Dorset' truck engine (with a cast hull to support it), and was only marketed in France as a slightly more powerful non-turbo alternative to the 7600. The 8100 was later developed from the 7400, using the same engine (for France at least)) but with steel side rails to maintain rigidity and with the power increased for other European markets (they had the 2715E engine) to 115 BS hp (which would be about 110 DIN hp) and mated to a 6700 back end. It was launched in July 1978 at the National Grassland demo (obviously aimed at powering forage harvesters!). At that power, the 8100 was the next model up rather than an alternative to the 7600. It was soon replaced by the 8200 and ultimately the 8210, at which point we had the 7910 introduced at the same power as the 7610/7710 at 103 BS hp (or 98 DIN hp).

Quite a few interesting machines there, and some good pics. I seem to think the Ford 7400 came about as a result of a peculiar French aversion to turbochargers. The 4 cyl turboed Ford 7000 and the later 7600 were most unpopular with French farmers of the time, and Ford came up with this 6 cylinder alternative especially for the French market. The rest of us didn't get a 6 cylinder alternative to the 7600/7700 until the 7910 was launched.

Good man I thought someone might have seen one.

That looks very like it Thank God for monogerm seed! For those who not familiar with beet, the beet family normally produce multigerm seed - really a fruit or cluster of seeds all stuck together. This results in several plants growing from one fruit. Years ago the number of seeds could be reduced by a rubbing process which broke the clusters up a bit, but you would still get multiple plants from each 'seed'. The advent of the precision drill meant that you no longer had a long line of closely spaced beet plants, but had clusters at intervals which still had to be 'singled' by hand. Then in the late 60's, along came monogerm seed (in the shape of Monohill from Hilleshog and then Sharpe's Klein Monobeet) which produced single seeds and removed the need for hand singling.

I'm not sure whether the later Deutz trailer is a different green or not, but mine has silver grey wheels, rather than yellow.

I think you will find it does have an insert, but it is plain. The forage harvester was unusual in that it retained the straw box right up to the late 80s - I don't think it changed until the model changed colour to green (does any one know of a green one in a straw box or an orange one in a rainbow box?) At that time the rest of the implements had gone into the Rainbow Banded boxes, which usually had a plain insert, thus the forage harvester had a plain insert too. Why it was still in a straw box when they were phased out for the rest of the implements around 1980, I have no idea. All I can think is that they had a lot of straw boxes in stock and they simply used them up. I don't think this model was a fast seller, which may explain why it took so long?

Ooooh, intrigued now

I took it that Jez is referring to modern European 32nd scale toys and models. Spec Cast are mainly 16th and 64th vintage US types.

I will have to go for Ertl/Britains as that is what I collect (I have neither the space nor financial resources to collect other brands any more). Although I confess that I am not John Deeres number one fan Siku have come on a lot recently, and their recent JD offerings have been excellent, but I think most of the Ertl/Britains John Deeres are pretty good on the whole (and often significantly cheaper). I would think Ertl will remain the principal 32nd scale licensee for JD for the foreseeable future (and judging from their recent efforts re MF7400, we may see further improvements in the manufacture of Ertl JD toys in the future too) Wiking sit in a rather higher category, being rather more super detailed models. Which one you pick will to some extent be governed by whether you want/can afford more expensive, detailed models, or well detailed toys.

Thats odd, the brochure gives the dimensions of the 6480 and the 7480 as being the same (on the same tyre equipment - was the 6480 you measured on different tyres?). The only significant difference given is the weight, with the 7480 unfueled weight of 6345kg being 875kg heavier than the 6480. Thde 7465 and 7475 are 4 cm smaller though, due to smaller standard tyres