Square Baler Min HP - All Over The Place!!!!!!

As I posted over the weekend, the deal or lack thereof for a JD 348 wasn't something I was interested-in, so I'm window shopping again.

 

Spend some more time today with JD, MF and NH brochures and WOW - the hp requirements are all over the place!

 

Punching out the same 14" x 18 inch bale too!

 

New Holland BC5070 = 75hp minimum (3715 lb baler)

 

New Holland BC5060 = 62hp minimum (3400 lb baler)

 

New Holland BC5050 = 35hp minimum (3085 lb baler)

 

Massey Ferguson 1840 = 50hp minimum (3500 lb baler)

 

Massey Ferguson 1837 = 35hp minimum (3050 lb baler)

 

John Deere 348 = 35hp minimum (3110 lb baler)

 

What's the deal - why so much variance in hp MINIMUM horsepower requirements?

 

40 hp difference between the JD 348 and NH 5070 minimum hp requirements!

 

Remember this post from a few days ago on plugging a NH baler:

 

http://ift.tt/1Pti80f 

 

The International 633 racing around that field was pulling a NH BC5060 with an engine with gross hp of 52.  Gross ain't PTO, so the PTO hp was something less.

 

I'd hate to see what the maximum hp requirement is for the BC5070!  Really - 75hp minimum to put the thing in the field and bale light windrows?  Boggles my pea brain.

 

I've got 50 PTO to work with - the JD 348 is Deere's highest capacity baler and 35hp minimum req'd.  The BC5070 is 10 inches wider on the pick-up than the BC5060, same strokes per minute (at 93) and 13 more hp is required?  The MF 1837 has the same strokes per minute (100) as the 1840 - yet 15 more hp is required and I think they both share the same width pick-up?

 

The ONLY justification I can see for this minimum hp has more to do with the weight of a tractor at a given PTO hp for safety, as in going down a hill - than minimal hp to drive the baler.

 

I've read much about round balers pushing a tractor down a hill or trying to jack knife it when fully loaded.  Anyone had their square baler (without wagon or accumulator) push them down a hill.  I kind of see it a bit in the BC5070 at 3715 lbs, but maybe that's a stretch?

 

So what's the skinny on hp and the above balers, why the big variance in hp requirements? It sounds like I could NEVER run a NH BC5060 or BC5070 or MF 1840 on my little 50 PTO hp tractor and with it, just culled out a bunch of otherwise very nice balers.

 

I understand that when you double and triple up the windrows, crank up the speed and max out the reasonable capacity of the baler, the hp goes up and my 50hp  PTO tractor could never run the baler to capacity.  But something below that without destroying the tractor????

 

Any thoughts?  Just curious,

 

Thanks!

Bill

Square Baler Min HP - All Over The Place!!!!!!