Top
Best
New

Posted by Kaibeezy 20 hours ago

Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price(wheelfront.com)
1880 points | 624 comments
adamcharnock 18 hours ago|
Up until a year ago I was regularly using a Massy Fergusson 135 [0] (Perkins Diesel version), made sometime in the 1970s. It was wonderful! So amazing to drive and use. Clunky and heavy, but you really really felt like you were using a machine. In low gears, if you put you foot down on the accelerator the engine would roar, and your speed would barely change!

And there was no fancy technology in it at all. If I was in the forest and had forgotten the key, I'd just reach behind the dashboard and hot-wire it. The air filter was basically a shisha-pipe that bubbled the incoming air through wire wool and engine oil.

Its fuel gauge didn't work either. You just had to take a look in the tank, or quickly react as soon as the revs started dropping. I ran it dry a few times and had to sit there with a spanner in one hand and YouTube into the other, while trying to bleed all the fuel lines. But they were all on the outside of the vehicle, which made it comparatively easy I imagine.

I've never actually driven a modern tractor, so don't know how it compares. I imagine the clutch is easier on the knees these days!

Anyway, this just felt like the place to share this.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Ferguson_135

adev_ 5 hours ago||
> Up until a year ago I was regularly using a Massy Fergusson 135

There is a tradition in several European countries named Affouage: If you live in a rural area, you can get very cheap (or even free) wood at the condition that you go to cut it yourself in the close-by forest.

Many many people who are doing this practice are still using today Massy Fergusson 135, Renault R98/461, Ford 3000-4000 series, SOMECA or similar low tech tractors.

The reason are simple: They are cheap to operate, cheap to repair (damages happen easily forest environment) and their small size is perfect for the task.

The demand for these things will never die. Rugged environment requires cheap and robust hardware.

If this startup can capitalize on that, they do have a market.

beAbU 17 hours ago|||
I learnt to drive on one of those. I'm a city kid but my grandfather was a wool farmer. Every school holiday we'd visit and I's spend my days literally puttering around the farm, which was pretty huge (~2000ha).

When I started out, 13ish or so, I had to stand on the clutch to get it down.

If you gave it enough beans and dropped the clutch it'll pop a wheelie! (Don't tell my grandpa)

adamcharnock 17 hours ago|||
Honestly, I still had to practically stand on the clutch with mine!

I'd teach someone to drive it and say, "now push down on the clutch". They they would heave and struggle, then eventually succeed and look victorious. I'd say, "well done, it is now half way down! But that's all you need for now!"

EDIT: To fully explain: It has a two-stage clutch. You half-press it and it disconnects the wheels from the engine. If you fully depress it all the way to the floor, it additionally disconnects the power-take-off shaft (PTO) from the engine. The PTO shaft is a spindle on the back of the tractor which drives things like your flail mower, wood chipper, etc.

EDIT 2: Edit 1 was for the general audience, not the parent commenter ;-)

VorpalWay 14 hours ago|||
Why was the clutch so heavy? Did it serve some purpose or was it just due to the limitations of the technology at the time?

I have certainly driven cars with lighter and heavier clutches (I live in EU, automatics weren't popular until recently and are still far from ubiquitous) but I couldn't tell you why every model just doesn't get a light clutch for comfort. A diesel Subaru I drove had a particularly heavy clutch as I recall, so at stop lights I would pop into neutral instead of holding the clutch down for an extended period.

chabska 14 hours ago|||
To deliver very high torque, the clutch plates needs to be pressed very hard together to generate enough friction. This also means that it take a lot of force to pull them apart, if you use a simple lever, as older machines do.

Modern machines may use complex mechanical linkages to make the clutch easy to pull apart but still maintain a firm contact, but that also means higher cost and fragility. Or they use pneumatics or hydraulics to assist, sorta like power steering.

sandworm101 13 hours ago||
That, and design tolerances. A fancy clutch can be light and strong (think ferarri) but farm machines need to work in the dirt/rust and so need larger tolerances. So heavier springs and bigger .... Bigger everything. A slipping clutch in a Ferrari is annoying. A slipping clutch on a tractor means a missed harvest.
slow_typist 7 hours ago||
Plus mechanical release mechanisms of heavier machinery were often designed in a way that the clutch snaps at a certain point (also in order to reduce wear in the clutch).
slow_typist 7 hours ago|||
I once changed a broken release bearing of a truck. It was a relatively simple repair but the very heavy gearbox has to be taken out to do this - which is problematic especially if done on a yard without proper equipment.

Since then I always pop into neutral when standing at a traffic light. It is interesting how many people in manual driving cultures think there would be no wear and tear if they press the pedal down completely.

Of course there is, as there has to be a force translating connection between rotating parts and parts of the release mechanism which cannot rotate. Only when the pedal is left alone, the release bearing disconnects from the rotating clutch.

samiv 4 hours ago||
As a motorcyclist stopped at the traffic light I always keep the gear on and clutch pulled in. Why? Because I have to be ready to take off when the moron driver on the phone behind me fails to stop.
bityard 1 hour ago|||
I do the same thing, and I rationalize it with the fact that the clutch in my motorcycle is is constantly bathed in oil so it can take the "abuse."
_heimdall 1 hour ago||||
I don't ride anymore, but I always did the same at least until a few cars were at a dead stop behind me.
slow_typist 3 hours ago|||
Fair
npongratz 16 hours ago|||
> The PTO shaft is a spindle on the back of the tractor which drives things like your flail mower, wood chipper, etc.

... and kills/maims anyone with lose clothing trying to step over it!

EvanAnderson 15 hours ago||
Oh, god yes.

I mowed using a Farmall H on a family farm when I was about 12 y/o. I don't remember ever having deadly serious conversations with family members up to that point in my life. All four grandparents, aunts and uncles-- it seemed like everybody-- sat me down, looked me dead in the eye, and told me sternly and bluntly "you turn off the PTO and see the shaft isn't turning before you get off the tractor. Every. Time."

All of them knew somebody who lost an arm or leg or got killed when they got pulled into a PTO.

That was probably the first time I'd ever been given the opportunity to operate a machine that would fucking kill me if I shirked on respecting it. I will never forget the tone of that communication.

Ancapistani 12 hours ago|||
Without going too far into the weeds here, IMO this experience is representative of gun rights, zoning, and all sorts of other differences between urban and rural.

Rural kids are put into situations where they are expected to rely fully on themselves, with life-or-death consequences, from a young age. When your pre-teen is driving a machine on their own that could easily kill them or those around them, giving them a .22 rifle is just... normal. It's not at all the same situation as a kid the same age who lives in an apartment and who may have never been in a place where no one would be close enough to hear them if they screamed for help.

I can't wrap my head around the idea that a large number of people who live in cities seem to want to extend childhood through age 25. My daughters are 12 and 17, and between them have over fifty animals directly depending on them for survival. It's just... foreign.

wahern 9 hours ago|||
I think you're generalizing too much. Rural communities take gun safety seriously. Farming communities take farming equipment seriously. Kids grow up internalizing the seriousness of these things, which is communicated expressly and tacitly their whole lives by countless people around them, including their friends. Plus they encounter walking examples of what can go wrong, like a missing finger, burn scars (not careful around bonfires or burn pits), or bullet holes (I knew at least 2 or 3 kids growing up with scars from shot). But put those same kids or adults who are careful with those machines in a similarly dangerous but novel situation, and they'll do dumb shit like anyone else. I'm tempted to argue they're more likely to do something dumb because they have a false confidence from their experience with other dangerous situations, whereas suburban and city kids may be more likely to be too scared to play around with any dangerous machine or situation.

I lived on a farm for a year as a young kid (farmer rented a couple of trailers on his land). I remember one day I was hanging around the hog pen watching the giant hogs mill about, probably contemplating trying to pet one. Mr Austin came by and sternly told me to not to reach through the fencing, then knelt down and showed me his ear, which was missing a big chunk.

MSFT_Edging 1 hour ago||
On the flip side, plenty of Rural and Suburban people are terrified by the city, which kids growing up in the city shrug off.

Rural folks might learn to respect a PTO or the varmint rifle by age 10, but city kids learn how to navigate the bus routes and subway. They learn how to walk on crowded streets, how to live among a lot of different people, including dangerous people(and how to avoid the conflict).

It's all quite interesting. Different kinds of toughness, different kinds of mental fortitude.

mikestorrent 12 hours ago||||
I don't "want" to extend childhood; but where I live makes it a little difficult to let my kids roam the way I did. Go too far one way and you're heading into busy highway traffic hell, go too far the other way and you're heading into hobo territory.

Wish I could move; I could sell this overpriced place and almost retire.... not under my control

rrr_oh_man 11 hours ago||
> not under my control

Why, if I may ask?

mothballed 11 hours ago||
Wife or custody orders, usually
pjc50 2 hours ago||||
The phrasing of "gun rights" in the context that's really about gun responsibilities is a big part of the problem. And I say this from an unusual position; I'm a Brit who was taught to shoot at school (cadets). The urban gun control question is not so much about responsibility as about malice. There's not a huge number of people with murderous intent, but there are enough. And the resistance of rural America to the questions of either "do you actually need a gun?", "are you a responsible person?", and "no, you can't bring that into the city" result in thousands of deaths every year in the city. If they were willing to allow separate rules for different areas, this wouldn't be nearly as heated.

> a large number of people who live in cities seem to want to extend childhood through age 25

This is not great, and a more complicated problem of percieved danger.

jhassell 4 minutes ago||
[dead]
torton 10 hours ago||||
People can have different lived experiences and it's OK; they are differently valuable and beneficial. I'm a certified unc, easily double the age of your oldest, and I have 0 animals depending on me for survival. It means, among other things, that I can simply decide to leave town for a week and don't need to arrange for replacement humans to take care of other living beings -- and this is a valuable freedom to have.
fsckboy 11 hours ago|||
>Rural kids are put into situations where they are expected to rely fully on themselves, with life-or-death consequences, from a young age.

come to the city, farm boy, and we'll give you a corner you can sling the brown from and we see how you do. we find something fo yo daughters to do too*

*i have absolutely no street smarts, country or city, but I do watch Law & Order and know how to pound a nail and know what to grease the maitre d' to get into the hottest restaurants in town. and beyond that i got friends, some of these guys know people who know people, just sayin

worthless-trash 4 hours ago||
Ah yes, encouraging people into shitty situations, the hallmarks of city life.
lukan 2 hours ago||
His tone I did not like either, but his point was that city life is not without mortal dangers either, which I think is fair.
exchemist 4 hours ago|||
I have never driven a tractor, but clearly remember our headmaster giving us this exact lecture when I was about 8. This in a town of 20,000 people where I expect not even 2% of the kids would even visit a farm outside of an organised trip, but clearly an important enough message to be worth broadcasting.
dannycastonguay 17 hours ago||||
He knew :)
PunchyHamster 15 hours ago|||
That seems to be common, the communist-era tractor I was riding was pretty much "stand with full weight and still have to brace by the steering wheel to push it"

Good that at least there wasn't much gear changing, pick one for task and just use it

woods42 16 hours ago|||
My grandfather had one of these, though gas powered. It may have been the Ford model, cannot remember, though his was built I believe in the late 40s / early 50s. One story that still makes me laugh, he couldn't start it one day, and asked my grandmother to give him a pulling start w/ their ford diesel pickup. One look and my about 12 year old self just knew she wanted to be anywhere else but there (some foreshadowing, she had a reputation for a lead foot). Grandpa had already tied a rope from the tractor to the truck, and I believe he was in maybe one of the lower gears ready to pop the clutch after he got up to speed. Grandma tore (yes, tore) out of the yard shifting gears, and she was accelerating down their long driveway headed for the main road as Grandpa started frantically waving his hat trying to get her to stop. I'm pretty sure he never asked her again to help start the tractor. And yeah, the tractor was started, probably in the first 50 feet of that episode.
drfloyd51 10 hours ago||
Never do a job well if you never want to do it again.
gibspaulding 34 minutes ago|||
You say “up until a year ago”, what ended up replacing it?

I’m in the market for a tractor in roughly that size, and am very tempted to just find an old machine in decent shape. I’d be very curious about the decision/experience if you did upgrade to something more modern?

pavel_lishin 18 hours ago|||
My dad had one of these, to support his farming hobby. (He used to joke that we ate fifty dollar cucumbers, and a hundred-dollar ear of corn.)

It came in handy living in the country, when occasionally someone would get bogged down on a dirt road, and this thing would come to the rescue.

andrew_lettuce 17 hours ago||
My grandpa was a high school principal to support his love of farming, not because he wasn't dedicated, but because they wanted to survive
yesbabyyes 15 hours ago|||
We used to have a really old Massey Ferguson, I think TE-20, at the family (moonshine) farm. It was finally retired around 15 years ago and replaced with a MF 165. I hear you about the clutch--sometimes I feel I can't even push it down far enough.

I also love driving it, apart from the fact the hydraulics are somewhat off, so the front/rear lift won't ever stay in position.

bambax 2 hours ago|||
The name of the brand is "Massey Ferguson" not "Massy Fergusson".

The reason I know that is not that I'm a farmer. It's that 20 years ago a bunch of friends and I wrote and performed a parody song of Gainsbourg/Bardot song "Harley Davidson" where the motorbike brand was replaced with the tractor one.

"Je n'ai besoin de personne en Harley Davidson"

became

"Je n'ai besoin de personne en Massey Ferguson".

isolli 7 hours ago|||
My father drove one of those in his childhood. Now retired, he has bought a used one and uses it to maintain about an acre of land (and his grandkids love helping him).

Once, it broke down, and I was astonished to see that there are forums dedicated to this tractor. If I remember correctly, it was a problem with the fuel line that is rather common, and we managed to fix it thanks to these communities.

As I was researching it, I read stories of MF135s found abandoned in a ditch and starting immediately again. A robustness that makes this and other models popular in Africa...

Loughla 18 hours ago|||
Did yours have a foot feed for the accelerator? I've never seen one without a hand feed for the rpm's on the steering column.
beAbU 17 hours ago|||
The fancy ones had an accelerator pedal, but most just had the lever on the steering column.
Tor3 4 hours ago|||
The one I drove (and a much older MF as well) had both. A lever on the steering column, as well as a foot pedal. I've never seen anyone without one elsewhere either, maybe they were only sold that way in my country.
Loughla 13 hours ago|||
Wild. We ran a 175 and 1100 for our daily tractors before Grandpa died and I quit farming (big ass John Deere machines for the real work at planting and harvest though).

They're phenomenal little machines that can do 99% of what you need. It blows my mind that for years, Grandpa farmed with a little Ford smaller than the 175. I can't imagine planting with that thing. The ww2 generation really were tough as nails.

adamcharnock 17 hours ago||||
Mine and a pedal and steering column lever, so I guess I got one of the fancy ones!
Loughla 10 hours ago||
So our main small tractors were a 175 and an 1100. The 1100 had a bucket but I would've killed for a bucket on that little 175. Man that thing was handy. You could drive it through the yard without leaving tire tracks.
userbinator 7 hours ago|||
"Mash the foot feed" is a phrase you'll hear mostly in the southern US, and rarely elsewhere, including HN.
ThaDood 18 hours ago|||
I shamefully have some Facebook Marketplace notifications for some Massy tractors. I'd love one. I don't even have land to use them, I just think they are neat.
bartvk 6 hours ago||
I wonder if it's legal to just park your tractor in a regular parking spot across your apartment. I'm European so we have small parking spots. But would a small tractor fit in the parking spot of the biggest Ford truck?
grosswait 1 hour ago||
Definitely
Tor3 5 hours ago|||
I went through my teenager years driving one of those MF 135 machines. A very versatile tractor. I enjoyed driving tractors (including a much older MF), when I eventually got my car's driver license some years later I found that driving cars weren't really that interesting.

During certain kinds of driving gear shifts became.. tricky. That's when I learned how to double-clutch, something I kept doing on cars as well, for many years after (think going steep uphill on snow and then having to shift into first gear without stopping)

aucisson_masque 14 hours ago|||
Still rocking one over here. The thing had not been maintained for 20 years while still being used, ran several times with almost no oil in the engine, drank gasoil full of water.

And it still works.

Things were made different back then.

I looked up the manual, you got everything you need to repair it. Maintenance is extremely easy. Even have electric schema.

Now my BMW, I looked into the manual how to change a light. It said to go to the dealer lol.

Fuck the modern car / tractor / tools. I blame the people for that, we went from customer that demanded to be able to repair their stuff to people who are now mechanically illiterate. I'm not sure they would even know how to replace a tire on their Tesla :)

That's why manufacturer have all the latitude to do what they do. And that's why it didn't go very far with farmers.

mikestorrent 12 hours ago||
> It said to go to the dealer lol.

It's amazing we let it slip this far. Even cars from a decade or so ago feel much more repairable. I bought an EV and I haven't even seen the motor yet, because I'm going to have to dismantle a bunch of plastic-clipped stuff to remove the frunk, and I've broken enough brittle tabs for one lifetime. God forbid they'd just use actual metal fasteners for this stuff.

aucisson_masque 4 hours ago|||
Yeah that also.

It's even worst tho, one day I layed a little bit against the front of the car and it made a reverse bump in the bodywork right on my ass.

Got a 2000 Suzuki that is full metal.

I think the trend of plastic went around 2000 to 2010 because of regulation on crash, plastic absorbs better the kinetic energy so we don't get our head smashed.

But yeah, no excuse to not make it easy to dismantle. It's the equivalent of Volkswagen using all kind of different screws to hold the plastic protection under the car, so that the average Joe who has standards screw drivers can't bleed his oil himself or change the gasoline filter.

This is maddening but you don't know it when you buy the car. It's only later.

b112 33 minutes ago|||
And example, in the US, is how much the population makeup has changed over time:

https://dailyyonder.com/census-report-unusually-informative-...

Go back to 1910, and more than 50% of the population lived in rural areas. And rural doesn't mean "suburbs". As this trend continues further back in time, I'd expect that people in their 30s may be living in cities in 1910, but we often not born there. They migrated from rural areas to the city.

Which means that city people even into the 50s had a very, very rural background.

So people who grew up on farms miles from any town or neighbours or stores, who had to rely upon themselves entirely, were the ones buying machines. But if you look at today, many people are apartment dwellers, or live in townhomes. They don't even have a place to fix something, let alone the tools or background.

I could fix any small engine before I was 10, work on cars before I could drive, and it's because you just picked up this stuff in a rural area. I guess my point is, if you don't know how to fix anything, and no one around you does except for specialists?

Then you probably won't care about owner repairability as much.

Sad, but probably a likely reason why we're where we are.

asdefghyk 2 hours ago|||
Must be used all around the world. My parents had one on our farm in the 70s. Maybe it is still there- as a "back up" tractor. I remember it well.
jamesinmn 1 hour ago||
I spent the night on Flatéy, a 2km long Icelandic island, in 2024, and there were around a half dozen Massey Fergusons strewn about.

The old church had a mural of Icelandic Jesus wearing a fisherman’s sweater.

bombcar 16 hours ago|||
You'll likely appreciate this then: https://farmboymusic.bandcamp.com/track/we-couldnt-start-the...
uticus 18 hours ago|||
> The air filter was basically a shisha-pipe that bubbled the incoming air through wire wool and engine oil.

What is a shisha-pipe?

numpad0 13 hours ago|||
Class of Middle Eastern tabletop usually-tobacco smoking devices with water based filtering

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hookah

hypercube33 12 hours ago||||
The other name for these filters are "oil bath filters" basically it snorkles the intake air through oil and that sticks to any dust and dirt.
Mraedis 18 hours ago||||
Also known as hookah or just waterpipe.
ozonhulliet 18 hours ago|||
Basically a fancy bong.
hypercube33 12 hours ago|||
I have the original 1940's Minneapolis Moline R and my wife has the original Farmall H and we both currently live in the city (but grew up farming or close to it) so we're not city kids, but somewhere stuck in between. I deeply get the feeling of using a non-tech machine, and how simple it is but intuitive to use. We used a pain mixing stick to check the gas level in our tractors on the farm, I don't think the gas gauges ever worked. You'd have to whack the starter with a wrench since they didn't ever work half the time. They worked over 60 years before they got their first oil change (my grandpa didn't believe in changing them - but my dad and I think it's just because you'll never get the canister filter to seal ever again if you did change it)

Great memories.

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 10 hours ago||
My Ford 2N has exactly two gauges: oil pressure, and ammeter. And the ammeter doesn't work.

But the tractor does.

userbinator 17 hours ago|||
with a spanner in one hand and YouTube into the other

There are so many useful videos on this stuff, but unfortunately the majority of the population still seems reluctant to learn.

stronglikedan 16 hours ago|||
I'm not sure the majority of the population will ever need, or even want, to learn to bleed fuel lines, so I wouldn't consider it reluctance. And I would wager that the majority of the (internet) population does engage in learning activities on the regular.
VBprogrammer 5 hours ago||||
My son recently broke the string on the light cord in the bathroom. I opened it up in perhaps the naive expectation that someone would have designed that in such a way that the string can be reattached. Sadly it wasn't.

In fact when you open the interior plastic piece the whole thing springs apart and everything from the clicking mechanism to the electrical terminals explode in different directions.

Thankfully, someone had uploaded a video of a very similar switch and, after a few cross words (man I hate assembling mechanisms with springs), I had a new overhand knot in the string and all of the contacts, springs and terminals back in place.

I would, without doubt, drive down to a shop and buy a new one next time...

oniony 5 hours ago||
The ones here in the UK have these little plastic connectors on the string. The switch itself has a very short string coming out of it(<10cm), the plastic connector and then the main pull cord. These connectors are simple tubes with an opening that hold and hide the knots. Makes changing the pull cord quite easy, you just feed it through the hole in the connector, tie a simple knot at the end and pull it back into the connector body.

I actually had one of these connectors break on a bathroom light and just 3D printed a new one. But it should be fairly trivial to add one of these to any light pull you already have.

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5140505 (not my design)

VBprogrammer 3 hours ago||
Yeah, for some reason the knot broke on the inside rather than at that connector.
m463 16 hours ago||||
I think this kind of thing is much more commonplace than you think.

Never underestimate a young person and their phone. They not only use youtube or chatgpt to solve daily problems, but date, pay bills, and communicate with their friends using mostly videos/photos/emojis (and occasionally english).

lachlan_gray 15 hours ago|||
Tangential, but made me think of this YouTube channel I like.

I have no plans to own a tractor but for some reason many others and I enjoy videos like this one:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pQO-pVxvKvA

defrost 11 hours ago||
New Zealand tree farmer Marty T has been posting detailed "back from the dead" tractor / bulldozer / grader / etc. restoration project videos for some time.

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVvO1tKKjRQ

* https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrCvcRxFfyzt3vJmctRaN...

etc. Also hydropower from old washing machine parts and other associated stuff you do on the land videos.

mitchell_h 18 hours ago|||
> I imagine the clutch is easier on the knees these days! Modern tractors don't really have a clutch. I mean they sorta do, but it's electronic. Even on sizable consumer positioned tractors(I have a JD 5055, but it applies to almost all the JD models), there's just a lever for forward, N, and reverse. Gear shifters work MUCH MUCH better now.
awesome_dude 16 hours ago||
When I was younger I absolutely HATED changing gear on the tractor - it was a matter of dropping the revs which caused a dive, then a clunk finding the gear, then a jolt as the gear took hold and the revs came back up

I never felt in control of that old beast

rypskar 7 hours ago|||
Changing gears while driving? Are you sure you where supposed to? Many old tractors are without synced drives, so you are supposed to select gear before you start driving. Of course you can change when driving, but then you have to match revs to not get the drop betwen
isolli 7 hours ago|||
Ha ha, that's such a wonderful description, that's exactly how it feels!
c0decracker 14 hours ago|||
One of my early memories was driving a tractor like this hauling potato harvest with my late grandfather when his "big" tractor wouldn't start. Feels like a 1000 years ago...
all2 15 hours ago|||
My father still has one of these in orange and white. I remember when I was a little child and he would start it up, I could feel the concussion of the exhaust in my chest.

An awesome memory. Lovely things, these.

m463 16 hours ago|||
I remember when I was young seeing a combine that had a radio and television in the cab. wow!

Now things have wrapped back around, and nobody would want that, they want less tech and to use their phone, lol.

temp03030 15 hours ago|||
Those are so cool. First motorized thing I ever drove was some 1950s Ford tractor, as a little kid. My uncle showed me how to use it. I almost had to stand with both feet on the clutch and pull myself up to release it, while my brother manned the wheel and throttle separately.
mrexroad 18 hours ago|||
While I love wrenching on cars, I imagine a tractor like this would scratch a different itch—something more latent, leftover from childhood.

Do you still have the Massy?

adamcharnock 17 hours ago||
I do, but a friend is taking care of the farm now. I moved back to the big city lights (Munich, as fate would have it).
mothballed 18 hours ago|||
The smaller tractors now mostly use a hydrostatic transmission instead of a clutch[]. You just move a plate that changes the mechanical advantage of the engine powered hydraulic drive. It's basically another set of hydraulics but for driving the tractor.

[] https://youtu.be/TunlPGZ3UOg?t=69

SanjayMehta 10 hours ago|||
Basic models still sell like hot cakes in India. I see them all the time.

https://masseyfergusonindia.com/massey-ferguson/

ErroneousBosh 16 hours ago|||
I loved the MF 135 my neighbour had. It was great. The injector pump had failed and we'd swapped it with one off a marine version of the Perkins AD3, which had a reasonably "opened up" governor on it. Flat it out could do a whopping 20mph!
malfist 18 hours ago||
> no fancy technology in it at all

It's amazing we can use huge machinery with internal combustion engines and declare it "no fancy technology"

abdullahkhalids 18 hours ago|||
Any technology from before the time of your grandparents, and often parents, is usually perceived to be "not fancy". Because then those elders can't tell you in your childhood what life was like before that technology. So in your lived experience that technology was always there. Reading history later on, doesn't change your emotional experiences.
WarmWash 17 hours ago|||
Freeze LLM progress right here and the future is still totally inconcievable. Humans who have only ever known being able to talk to machines...
pocksuppet 12 hours ago|||
It's already inconceivable since today's teenagers have never not had an iPad.
marsven_422 8 hours ago|||
[dead]
cucumber3732842 1 hour ago|||
Disagree. There's lots of products and goods that have become less fancy as a result of changes in labor/material cost as industrialization ran its course and the old way is considered the fancy way.

Wood furniture joined with glue and pegs rather than inserts and screws. Solid wood furniture at all. Leather and natural fibers gave way to plastics. Ornate castings gave way to simple stampings and simply castings (where things are still cast).

MrMetric 18 hours ago||||
An internal combustion engine may be complex, but it's not fancy. I can see and touch and understand every part of it. I can maintain and modify and repair it. This is not true for fancy electronics and certainly not locked-down proprietary firmware.
elzbardico 56 minutes ago|||
For every modern car I had or used in the last 20 years, the engine itself never was a problem, other than the regular maint, oil, filters, belts, plugs, cables...

Now, electronics problems, albeit relativelly rare, were far more common and fucking expensive.

And then, but this more due to the state of modern roads and streets than the car themselves, suspension issues.

WarmWash 17 hours ago|||
The magic of an engine is less in how it operates, and more in how it was built. At least around the time they started showing up, manufacturing lots of precision metal parts was not trivial.

Although modern electronics take this further, with both operation and construction being utterly complex.

organsnyder 16 hours ago||
One of my vehicles is a 2009 Civic. It continues to amaze me that with minimal maintenance, that 17-year-old vehicle will fire right up with the turn of a key, with hundreds (thousands?) of parts moving in a specific way, many of them with tolerances in tiny fractions of an inch.
bookofjoe 2 hours ago||
2010 MB C300 I bought in 2013 from a dealer after the lease expired, parked outside without a garage or cover since then (Virginia).

About 3 years ago a large branch (about 8" diameter) from an old overhanging tree fell right on the transparent sunroof cover and shattered it into a million pieces. After picking them out of the sunroof mechanism (which no longer worked after the impact) and the inside of the car, I covered the opening with several sheets of magnetized vinyl. Works great, never a drop of water inside since then and it's stayed in place without any attention. Temperature control inside the car at rest or while driving at highway speed is like it was before the damage.

Being old now I never go anywhere since I can get stuff delivered. About every 3 weeks I go out and the car starts right up, I drive a 5-mile loop to circulate the oil and then park it for another 3 weeks. Been doing this for years. I do get an oil change annually.

efskap 18 hours ago||||
Any sufficiently mundane technology is indistinguishable from... furniture?
contingencies 18 hours ago||
Nice one. Added to https://github.com/globalcitizen/taoup
lelanthran 18 hours ago||||
Maybe it is fancy to you now, but with a few primitive hand tools and no docs at all, a HS graduate can take it apart and figure out how it works.

Try doing the same on the ECU in your car. I'll wait.

WalterBright 17 hours ago|||
I learned how engines worked by taking apart, cleaning and reassembling an ancient lawnmower engine so I could use it on my go-kart. I then learned how cars worked by taking one apart and putting it back together again.

Neither of those machines had a transistor in them. It was all basic electricity.

dylan604 17 hours ago|||
> HS graduate can take it apart and figure out how it works.

Sure you wouldn't like a qualifier on that? I've definitely met some HS graduates that would not be able to do this.

lelanthran 16 hours ago||
Wait a few years and no HD will be able to do something similar.

See other story on front page right now: educational scores are trending down and that trend is only going to accelerate now that every student is using LLMs.

throwaway27448 17 hours ago||||
We also don't call a hoe fancy technology, but it is.
malfist 17 hours ago|||
I don't know about you, but my mother is definitely not technology
chii 7 hours ago|||
The hoe wasn't fancy, but the plow was (at the time).
adamcharnock 17 hours ago|||
Yeah, I was introspecting as I wrote that!
seanc 2 minutes ago||
Folks focus on the impact simplicity has on the customer, but it's also worth noting the impact it has on the manufacturer. With a simple product they get a simple business.

- Simple warranty support - No deep bench of customer support staff - No complex financing - Straightforward sales process

Heck, even the website is bare bones.

Hasz 20 hours ago||
I think this is a reaction to the incredibly locked down ecosystem that most of these mfgs are pushing.

However, the tech exists for a reason and is not inherently bad, the issue is the lock-in, the lack of choice and interoperability.

IMO, there is plenty of space for an OEM who can play nice with others, offer an open (and vibrant ecosystem), and keep users coming back by choice, not by lock-in.

whizzter 11 minutes ago||
I think going bare-metal at cut-rate might've been the only way to actually kick-start that. F.ex. ECU's make things more optimal so buyers will be paying extra for fuel in a bad economy, but the lock-down was worse when it was causing downtime.

But tech in general is perhaps in a growing-up phase, we had Arduinos and Raspberry PI's filling a similar need (computer to electronics being needlessly complicated) that was initially filled from the low-end, but now we have faster SBC's and stuff like Framework laptop's that is expanding the range of options for repariable/replaceable/hackable parts up to the high end today and farming equipment is probably destined to get a similar range of options.

An interesting note here is, will cars also start getting a range of more hackable options, mechanics are ingenious already but it's still very much hacks without manufacturer support, but a new manufacturer providing a low-cost base could very well pop up and grow quickly if they establish an ecosystem.

MisterTea 19 hours ago|||
> However, the tech exists for a reason and is not inherently bad, the issue is the lock-in, the lack of choice and interoperability.

These low-tech tractors could become a hot bed for open source experimentation. Nothing stopping someone from sticking a tablet on the dash. You could run GPS harvesting optimization software or some webthing locally. Could be cloud or clever DiY farmers could run their farm off a local instance on a small machine using a WiFi AP atop the barn or whatever.

dylan604 19 hours ago|||
This was my take as well. How many 3rd parties might be able to bring on upgrades/modifications to a "dumb" tractor to make it smart vs only being able to buy a "smart" tractor from one vendor and be forced into it's rules/restrictions/prices
tempest_ 18 hours ago||
Plenty of options for putting auto steer on a dumb tractor already exist.
kube-system 18 hours ago|||
Cheap ones too -- aliexpress has them.

But there's more to agtech than driving a tractor around, a lot of what these big integrated systems do (at the high end) is very data driven -- determining where and how to plant, irrigate, fertilize, etc. There's a lot of integration work beyond just making the tractor drive.

MisterTea 18 hours ago|||
> But there's more to agtech than driving a tractor around, a lot of what these big integrated systems do (at the high end) is very data driven -- determining where and how to plant, irrigate, fertilize, etc.

How difficult is this to implement outside of big ag-tech? I feel that a community of experienced farmers and programmers (or programmer-farmers) could tackle this.

tempest_ 15 hours ago|||
It really depends.

The bigger agcorps have tones of integration.

The machine, from tractor to combine and everything in between often feeds data together to produce a holistic understanding.

Things like - How much fuel was used - Where your tractors and sprayers drove - Soil samples and content - How and where every bit of chemical and fertilizer was applied - What weather hit your field - How much and and the moisture content of every bit of the field you harvested

It goes on an on.

worik 12 hours ago||
> The bigger agcorps have tones of integration.

Yes, but how useful is the integration?

The sprayers/spreaders can be connected cheap computer to achieve most of what you describe.

I used to do literally that but in aircraft. Must be easier and cheaper in tractors

theshrike79 4 hours ago||
It's not complex if you have like three machines.

But if you're observing a fleet of 100+ machines you kinda need some integration and a central location. Which in turn connects to multiple other services like weather, crop markets, fuel prices etc.

lallysingh 14 hours ago|||
I think this has all suddenly shifted with high-quality programming AIs available. How difficult is this to implement with Claude?
kube-system 13 hours ago|||
The software is certainly easier to build, but there's a lot of hardware involved here beyond the tractor. Claude is not necessarily going to make it easier to do soil sampling or measuring field conditions or yield outputs.
AngryData 10 hours ago|||
Farmers would be foolish to rely on an LLM because farming margins are too low to makeup for even a small quick mistake. Many farms will profit 1% on investment over 1-2 decades, although year to year yield can vary 30%.
jfengel 16 hours ago||||
What kind of sensors do those cheap kits come with?

A tractor is a big thing to have rolling around unsupervised. I would want a lot of safeguards. Blindly going from one GPS point to another sounds like a nightmare.

kube-system 16 hours ago|||
The cheapie aliexpress specials simply drive the line they're programmed to drive. They have GPS and a gyro to account for the slope of the land. You're supposed to stay in the tractor while they're operating as a safety... but this doesn't always happen in some parts of the world.
krater23 14 hours ago||
30 years ago you had a hand-gas and clamped the wheel to drive the tractor in a line. Using GPS is a litle bit more safe than that. And I talk about Germany!
defrost 11 hours ago|||
Here you go, local grain farmer (4,500 hectares, barley, grains) reviews a fully automated driverless swarm bot in boom spray configuration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljEKN7CsjnM

dylan604 18 hours ago||||
Right, but that has nothing to do with a vendor making a dumb tractor. Why do we need to dismissively move the conversation from TFA. The data driven approach is made up of several parts, and we're looking at a specific part
kube-system 17 hours ago||
Making a dumb tractor for the use-case of dumb tractor is obviously a winning idea.

I just don't think you're going to effectively compete with big agtech by putting a bunch of parts in a box, shaking it, and hoping you end up with a beautifully integrated solution. Integration hell is the reason big commercial firms dominate when it comes to large integrated systems.

throwaway173738 16 hours ago|||
Why not? They sell telematics systems separately from cars. It’s possible to do this and it might not be too difficult depending on how the system is composed.
kube-system 16 hours ago||
Precision ag is orders of magnitude more complicated of a system than vehicle telematics. Again, driving the tractor is the easy part, and you can already get cheap systems to do this.
dylan604 17 hours ago|||
admittedly, i'm not a farmer nor an expert in data driving farming. but getting a farmer the ability to precisely drive a tractor in a field so that planting seeds, applying fertilizer, and any of the other steps would be a huge win. The settings used when doing that can easily come from bigFarmData gained from other sources. Can it be used even more precisely when everything is gathered/integrated by one company? That's a question that I'm not by default saying yes to, but it seems like you do think that is true. Even if it is true, does that mean the difference from a farmer going broke because his DIY tractor behaved slightly differently than your solution? I'd posit that a farmer only being allowed to play the bigFarmData game by only being allowed to buy from one vendor that is expensive while also forcing any repairs to be expensive will cause farmers to financially unnecessarily struggle.
greedo 17 hours ago|||
The economics of farming (at least in the US) are brutal. Scaling up is really the only way to make a living long term. Some of this is due to equipment cost (look up how much a combine costs), and some is due to competition. It's not unusual for a farmer to be land rich and cash poor.

If you want to see a couple of guys learning how to farm from scratch, visit https://www.youtube.com/@spencerhilbert. Spencer and his brother made a bit of money off games and Youtube and have been starting out on corn, hay, as well as raising beef. It gives a pretty good insight into how pervasive tech is in farming, and how despite that, how much of farming still relies on hard, physical work.

dylan604 16 hours ago||
I'll check out Spencer's channel. For a comedy perspective, there's Clarkson's Farm or Growing Belushi. Even though they are for entertainment, there's a still a lot of info in those shows to not be written off.

However, I'm not as interested in being a farmer at that level. I'm much more interested in the homesteading aspect of farming. I'm not trying to feed the world as much as me and mine and maybe some extra. So not just farming, but also some ranching with sheep/goats/chickens/pigs. I have friends doing this that I'm keeping an eye on. They had a head start as their kids grew up in FFA and are already familiar with raising live stock, and then having them processed to make that part much less daunting.

greedo 16 hours ago|||
I get that. Crop farming is so different than raising animals.
rgmerk 10 hours ago|||
Good luck, but there’s a reason why subsistence farmers move to city slums as soon as they can.
lukan 2 hours ago||
Yes, because doing it with low tech and for money is backbraking. But doing it for fun with other sources of income is a different story.
kube-system 17 hours ago|||
Scale is a huge factor. It makes the most sense to invest in precision ag tech when you have enough acres that the investment pays off. At 5000+ acres, farms are using integrated systems that combine satellite data, on-tractor sensors, soil sensors, drone sensors, in-field weather sensors, with a lot of science to squeeze the most out of the land. At that scale, there's a lot of money invested in a season and you aren't looking for a DIY project, you need production quality product with proven scientific rigor. You probably don't have the manpower to do a DIY project anyway, you are relying heavily on automation and outsourcing. And at the low end, it it more effort to implement any of this than you'll get out of it.

So a DIY solution is aiming for somewhere in the center of the market -- enough scale that it makes sense to bother, but not enough enough money to avoid the headache of DIY. It might make sense for some mid-sized farms in developing economies, but it seems to be a narrow window to me.

andrew_lettuce 17 hours ago|||
Is suspect most farmers would prefer the diy add-on version of these than the single manufacturer integrated one. A modern smartphone and stay of I/o sensors send like it could do pretty much the entire job
pcblues 13 hours ago|||
The kid? :)
dylan604 12 hours ago||
I had to scroll back up to see what this reply was to, to get the full chuckle and yup, I was told frequently by my male parental unit that the top two reasons for having kids was chores and tax deductions. But there's a reason farm families leaned on the large side. The more hands you had helping the less hard things could be while never being easy
mynameisash 17 hours ago||||
Years ago, there was a TED Talk[0] from the guy that started Open Source Ecology[1]. The TED Talk was really cool, but I haven't really followed what they did. It sounded promising to have open-source technology for use in this space.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S63Cy64p2lQ

[1] https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Main_Page

worldsayshi 5 hours ago||
I absolutely love this vision. He's still working towards the goal. It seems that his vision has problems scaling up though. He seems to mostly still drive this himself.
infecto 1 hour ago||||
My bet would be there will be a niche for these tractors at hobby farms but the reality is outside of niche goods and hobby farms, farming is about scale and the machines that companies like JD sell help a lot. Sure the tech is locked down but at the scale those players are running at it’s baked into the service contract to minimize downtime.
PunchyHamster 15 hours ago||||
They have no driving electronics, electronic throttle, ECU controlled injection etc, so you are limited, you can't for example easily make it go constant set speed, because the throttle isn't electronic.

It went a bit too far, optimum would be modern enough to have drive by wire but with open ECU and documentation

dghlsakjg 13 hours ago|||
You can still control a completely mechanical engine to work with set speeds. There are mechanical governors that can do this, or you can get an electronic component that moves the throttle for you. Fixed speed engines with variable load are much older than the transistor.

It is no harder than doing it with an ECU, except that you need to install a servo or speed governor with hand tools, instead of fiddling with ECU code.

PunchyHamster 1 hour ago||
It is far easier for 3rd party stuff to target say open bus protocol rather than a servo + speed sensor pair.
jcgrillo 12 hours ago|||
It has a governor.. The P pump 12 valves (and many other multi-application diesels) come with either one of two different governors, an automotive one which has a high idle and low idle, but unrestricted fueling in between. This is what you want in a car or truck where you're controlling road speed with your foot. There's also the "industrial" governor that essentially maps lever input linearly to engine RPM, and endeavors to maintain its set RPM independent of load. This is the kind you find in tractors, generators, boats, etc.

These governors are basically mechanical analog computers which use the inertia of flyweights, springs, and some very clever linkages to do their thing.

PunchyHamster 1 hour ago||
I know, I used tractor like this. Governor only keeps RPM, not the air-fuel ratio and a bunch of other emission and fuel usage related stuff.

And it's a bit easier to make 3rd party addons when you just have some open bus standard, not "mount that servo on a gas pedal"

jcgrillo 44 minutes ago||
There's a device called an "aneroid compensator" that sits on top of the governor and is used to maintain a fueling profile for a specific density altitude (e.g. limit fuel at higher altitudes on naturally aspirated engines or off-boost on turbocharged engines). This effectively maintains AFR, although it is not a closed loop system. For closed loop control you need to measure AFR directly in the exhaust and compensate, which means you need an electronically governed injection pump. There's no good way to do this with some 3rd party add-on. You'd be much better off just using an electronically governed Bosch injection pump (like those found on 24 valve Cummins or 1998-1999 Mercedes OM606 turbodiesels). But then you incur the encumbrance of the ECU and all the bad corporate behavior that comes along for the ride.

Also note that maintaining a particular AFR in a diesel is kind of a non goal, at least from the perspective of engine performance. With the older style, simple injection systems that are user serviceable you only get one pulse per cycle. So you can't really change AFR without compromising torque output. For a tractor, when I set the lever all the way forward I (the operator) expect it to maintain revs sufficient to maintain 540rpm at the PTO unless it is not able to do so (fueling maxed out). Putting more load necessarily means more fuel in for a given RPM, ergo higher AFR. Note that turbocharging changes this equation a little.

spockz 19 hours ago||||
There are already open source auto pilot and cruise control implementations for cars. (Not all cars are supported obviously!) so to have this in place for tractors off the road seems very doable.

Edit: specifically thinking of https://comma.ai/

Jbird2k 18 hours ago||||
Well open source AutoSteer exists it has a lot of features like rate control built in to it. The system is called AgOpenGPS it’s very popular for retrofitting older equipment with modern technology.
laughing_man 11 hours ago||||
With high end tractors you can have them drive themselves on the rows based on a GPS map that was created when you planted. That's going to be difficult to retrofit.
andrew_lettuce 17 hours ago||||
The beauty here is even beyond experimentation the tech will change repeatedly over the life of the equipment, and you can cheaply adapt to that. There is very little advantage to the modern tractors, beyond luxuries and the finish of a self contained package. Farmers rarely ime prioritize either of these
stackskipton 19 hours ago|||
OEM can change their mind at any moment and there is always going to be an MBA rubbing their hands together thinking about all the money that can be made.

This needs to be solved at government level with right to repair laws and requirement for open standards instead of believing in magic of "free market".

post-it 19 hours ago|||
Now is especially a good time for Canada to do it. Cory Doctorow had a fantastic CBC interview about this. Scrapping anti-tampering protections would harm anti-Canadian tech companies while also building rapport with American farmers who would be able to use Canadian software on their tractors.
throwaway27448 17 hours ago||
Something tells me that the best tractor software would be free, not nationalized.
post-it 16 hours ago||
Yes, free, and created in Canada by developers not burdened by American red tape.
throwaway27448 16 hours ago||
I have a hard time imagining that canada has expertise in tractor software. Let's rein our nationalist tendencies in to something that approaches common sense
dghlsakjg 13 hours ago|||
Canada has the highest percentage of people with higher education. There's no qualifier for that sentence. Canada is the only country on earth where a majority of people over 25 have tertiary education.

It also has a massive agricultural sector. You know how Canada is known as an oil and gas powerhouse? Agriculture is more than double the size of o+g in Canada.

I think the most well educated country on earth, with a massive, highly automated, agricultural sector might be able to reason about tractor software.

throwaway27448 11 hours ago||
[flagged]
realo 16 hours ago||||
Hum... i can understand your throwaway status.

You are certainly aware that we , in Canada, have expertise in software that is quite a bit more advanced than tractor software.

throwaway27448 15 hours ago|||
[flagged]
GlacierFox 14 hours ago||
What's going on here? You're responding like an unhinged AI.
throwaway27448 11 hours ago||
[flagged]
post-it 14 hours ago||||
Do you think we live in fucking igloos bud?
linksnapzz 14 hours ago||
I'm not your buddy, guy!
Kaibeezy 4 hours ago|||
Here’s your Buddy Guy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Guy
tp324325l 9 hours ago|||
I'm not your guy, pal!
dpc050505 10 hours ago|||
I jailbreaked my Canadarm to prune my weed plants using a LLM.
nickff 19 hours ago||||
Ever-more-restrictive government regulations are what allows these OEMs to ‘leverage’ their market power this way. I am not sure that a new regulation can solve it, as these sorts of mandates don’t seem to have worked in any other market.
jmward01 19 hours ago|||
The argument isn't 'more' regulations or 'less' regulations, it is the right regulations. The problem is that big companies slowly allow regulations that don't hurt them but do block competition by aggressively fighting regulations that help the startup (their competition) or help the consumer in ways that make them less money. It isn't hard to be evil and create regulatory capture. You don't actually have to be active in crafting regulation, just be active in blocking the right regulation. General statements that are 'against regulation' play into big companies making things worse.
cucumber3732842 19 hours ago||
These big companies absolutely allow regulations that "hurt" them. Deere doesn't want to deal with farmers who are pissed off that emissions stuff results in a service call at a bad time and can't be overridden, or obnoxious safety stuff that make products less useful outside of their "textbook" application, or something that forces them to expensively certify their product is XYZ or something.

Buuuuut, the cost of implementing that stuff hurts the competition way more, so Deere and friends don't really fight it.

They're trading absolute market size for stronger control over market share. Less people are going to buy their products at the margin if the products are made worse. But those that do will buy it from them, so more profit.

pocksuppet 19 hours ago||
Those are load-bearing quotation marks: you're saying the regulation doesn't hurt them, only "hurts" them. If the regulation hurt them, they wouldn't allow it.
brigandish 5 hours ago||
You're proposing a binary version of "hurt", they are proposing a spectrum. If a regulation hurts company A but it will survive whereas company B, A's main and essentially only competitor stopping A from a monopoly, will go out of business from that regulation, you know that company A won't fight it.
post-it 19 hours ago||||
You're right, the solution is getting rid of swathes of intellectual property legislation, not adding more.
kube-system 18 hours ago||
That's a double edged sword. Investors demand a return regardless of what IP law is. They'll invest in the companies that find some way to protect their investment -- NDAs, stronger technical protections, services-models, etc.
QuantumFunnel 17 hours ago||
Maybe it's time the economy shifts from having to prioritize the investors for everything
kube-system 17 hours ago||
You don't have to prioritize them. You can choose to encourage the rich to hoard their money elsewhere. But there are consequences to every policy decision.
post-it 16 hours ago|||
The rich don't have money, they have assets, and those assets can't go anywhere. It doesn't matter if the rich buy or sell a farm in Canada, the farm is still in Canada.
kube-system 16 hours ago|||
> The rich don't have money, they have assets

Yeah, we're talking about the same thing.... the word for a rich person who exchanges their cash for non-cash assets is "investor"

cucumber3732842 14 hours ago|||
> It doesn't matter if the rich buy or sell a farm in Canada, the farm is still in Canada.

Have we learned nothing from what happened to the US's industrial economy.

If you turn the farm into an obviously poor investment it'll go tits up because neither wall street nor main street is dumb enough to invest money into a losing proposition.

cindyllm 14 hours ago||
[dead]
throwaway173738 16 hours ago|||
We got rich by not prioritizing the needs of investors in the first place. Maybe we need to start prioritizing the needs of the larger society again.
kube-system 16 hours ago||
You certainly don't need economic investment to become "rich" in culture, enlightenment, or humanity, for sure. And there is value to that.

However, financiers played an indisputable role in the current state of economic wealth in today's world.

alexashka 7 hours ago||
Indisputable role in economic precarity, more commonly known as wage slavery.
estimator7292 19 hours ago|||
Remember that those regulations are written by the OEMs they benefit and whom bribe legislators to pass those regulations.

Any argument made without acknowledging this is purely in bad faith. The problem is not regulation that benefits OEMs. The problem is that you can simply purchase regulations that benefit you.

nickff 19 hours ago||
There are many regulations, written by a variety of actors, often in strange alliances. Safety, environmental, and disclosure regulations are often the culprits behind industry consolidation and oligopolization.
uticus 18 hours ago||||
> instead of believing in magic of "free market"

It looks like magic because it works like magic. Surprisingly it is also possible to believe in the magic of "government intervention" though it looks less like magic and more like unintended consequences.

Eisenstein 16 minutes ago|||
The thing is that not doing anything is still a policy decision. Unless you want to go full bore libertarian there will always be regulation. By saying that the market is magic and the government is intervention, then you ignore all of the intervention exists already and just saying you are fine with it.
throwaway173738 16 hours ago|||
Doing nothing and letting the market do whatever is also full of unintended consequences. Your argument is like letting your yard go to weed and accumulate a bunch of knotweed and himalayan blackberry. Yeah you can argue that you didn’t do anything to create that situation but at the end of the day you’re still responsible for it.
narcraft 19 hours ago||||
There's no magic necessary. TFA highlights the exact mechanism by which markets can fill a gap or need via entrepreneurship when incumbents fail to deliver what customers want. It's not guaranteed to happen or work in every case, but there's money to be made by giving people what they actually want.
stackskipton 19 hours ago|||
A lot of electronics is useful, it can reduce fuel use or help with more accurate driving.

Farmers are just pissed they lose the ability to repair the vehicle easily or get stuck with monthly subscription because tractor company has changed the terms and you are praying they don't change it further.

cdot2 17 hours ago|||
A modern John Deere tractor with a robust right-to-repair would still be a pain to do maintenance on. A big part of the reason people want old tractors is because they don't have these additional computer controlled systems which break and require time and effort to fix.
salawat 18 hours ago|||
It's almost as if freedom only exists for those with the money to hire lawyers to make it happen. Farmers are basically screwed in that their location at the bottom foundation level of society really ties their hands in what they can get away with before things start getting tumultuous. Yet get a few factories under your belt and enshittify, and suddenly it's all "your way or the highway". Odd that.
pocksuppet 19 hours ago||||
It would be nice if this could happen more smoothly and rapidly, without some random people having to become experts in tractors from the ground up, and that's what regulations could help with. Say, if it was legal to copy from the best.
ericjmorey 19 hours ago|||
But the company in the article isn't filling the gap. Farm owners want the technology. They don't want to be held hostage over the technology when it needs maintenance, repair, or adaptation after the initial sale.
cineticdaffodil 18 hours ago||||
Honestly do you even need to build a lowtech alternative? Just anounce you will and retire on cartel kickbacks to slow it down?
infogulch 18 hours ago|||
Government regulations weren't necessary for Framework to make the most open laptop product line in history which includes a the 'Pro' 13" laptop chassis which is both backwards and forwards compatible with components that were sold 5 years ago on day 1.
beloch 16 hours ago|||
"Downtime — the thing that actually costs a farmer money during planting or harvest — shrinks dramatically when you don’t need a factory technician with a laptop to diagnose a fuel delivery problem."

---------------

Tractors aren't cars. It isn't merely inconvenient if they are unavailable at crucial times, so ease of repair is critical. Farmers have always done as much of their own maintenance as possible. John Deere has spent a lot of time taking away the reliability and ease of repair that farmers need in order to give them "advanced" features they don't need.

Farmers who want advanced capabilities might now look to build them on top of no-tech tractors with open-source solutions rather than trusting John Deere again. That way, if the "would be nice" tech has problems they can rip it off and get the harvest in without it.

9rx 9 hours ago||
> Farmers have always done as much of their own maintenance as possible.

Well, sure. Maintenance is an off-season job. Its that or sit on the couch watching TV, so you may as well be in the shop getting equipment ready. Even if it takes you longer than an experienced tech, does it really matter? Not really. The winters are long.

Repairs are a different story. When things break, you need it fixed now. Wasting a day trying to figure out how to separate complex, seized parts from each other isn't time you have. You're going to be hiring a mechanic who has done it a million times before.

Of course, more important than who does the work is part availability. Having the human capacity to get something fixed means nothing if you cannot also get the parts you need. I've certainly been caught more than once needing to wait a week on a part, which is not a fun place to be. And this is where John Deere has focused their business: Doing more to keep parts available near to where the farmers are, so that you can get parts exactly when you need them. This is, above all else, why John Deere is the market leader.

> Farmers who want advanced capabilities might now look to build them on top of no-tech tractors with open-source solutions

I have been going down this road and am starting to regret it a bit. The saving grace is that I have found enjoyment in building a system of my own. But if I found it to be a chore, at this point I'd have deep remorse that I didn't just pay someone like John Deere for a fully delivered, highly polished solution. I know the HN crowd tends towards the DIY, but, having actual experience here, I don't see this happening outside of the small subset of farmers who find fun in it. It is a decent hobby for those so inclined, but from a purely commercial perspective the time and effort can be better put to use elsewhere.

Iolaum 6 hours ago||
If you maintain your stuff you know enough to fix some things and you know when you can't and need to call a mechanic (or a friend who knows more and can do it).
9rx 5 hours ago||
You can fix things, but can you really justify the time to do when you need an operational machine?

1. No matter how great of a shade tree mechanic you are, you will never be able to fix it faster than someone who does it every day. They have found all the little tricks and quirks about your machine that your casual maintenance will never uncover.

2. While large farms with full-time mechanics on staff have been known to make deals to warehouse parts in their own shop on consignment, much more realistically for any kind of normal farm you are going to have to drive to the dealership to get the parts you need. Whereas the dealership tech can bring the parts to you. Meaning that you have to travel twice as far, taking twice as long, to get the parts back to your equipment than if you call a mechanic.

The things that are likely to fail under use where there has been proper maintenance tend to be the things that are unpredictable and catastrophic, at very least requiring parts, and most likely requiring advanced knowhow. And at that point, the dealership tech is going to be faster at getting you back up and running, even if you could theoretically pull it off yourself. So, realistically, there isn't much of a compelling case for doing your own repairs when time is of the essence.

Farmers are often willing to accept more downtime to do it themselves out of pride, though. I admittedly often fall victim to that myself, so I get it. But it’s clear that the farmers who are serious about farming as a business aren’t dinking around trying to fix things themselves. It is not economically prudent to do so. Granted, not all farmers farm for business sake. For many it’s more of a hobby or lifestyle and wanting to be a part-time mechanic can play into that.

ianm218 19 hours ago|||
This is probably not this companies vision but it does seem interesting if companies sell "dumb" machines and then consumers can BYO electronics. Like an agricultural version of comma.ai.

Not sure how much appetite there is for that but half price + 5 grand in off the shelf electronics seems like something margin sensitive farmers would do.

Waterluvian 19 hours ago||
Reminds me of how I don’t ever want an infotainment system in my car. I want the peripherals: a touch screen and speakers. I’ll supply my own phone to do the rest.
j45 18 hours ago||
Same for Smart TVs.

Always better short and long term to bring and maintain your own smarts.

-warren 19 hours ago|||
I disagree. While those are great points, I don't think that's the primary reason -- and maybe we're actually saying the same thing.

This tractor will last 50 years (and maybe more). Your grandchildren will be able to still use it. That longevity is the primary reason farmers would be super interested in this.

Some jobs (like mucking a barn for example) don't require a high-tech tractor. Sometimes you just need a workhorse that you can trust will start, run and do the job. Every single time. I still see farmers running old minneapolis-moline tractors from 100 years ago!

tonyarkles 19 hours ago||
My in-laws use a Farm-all H around the yard for a lot of tasks. I don’t know what year it was made, but it looks like they were made from 1939-1954. It just… runs. We basically just do oil changes on it.
sarchertech 19 hours ago|||
That’s part of the issue. But packing a tractor (or car) with electronics and computers does make it inherently harder to work on—even if it’s not locked down.
AlotOfReading 19 hours ago|||
You need electronics and computers for cost-effective compliance with emissions requirements. Emissions limits have been one of the most positive government policies in my lifetime, saving millions of QALYs.

There's lots of other electronics in most modern vehicles, but the public manufacturer rationales for electronic lockdowns almost always point back to emissions concerns because they're so defensible. How do you separate them?

carefree-bob 5 hours ago|||
These are regulations, not laws, and can be changed fairly easily. E.g the EPA recently changed the rules requiring NOx sensors and power downs, which were the most failure prone components of the system, while still mandating the actual equipment that scrubs NOx.

There's no particular reason why a mechanical device needs computers for emissions, as the emissions removing components can still be attached and managed via simpler means. All emissions removing components are effectively physical devices, whether you are talking about carbon filters or PCV valves or particulate filters or the urea fluids that are added to the fuel. None of them requires complex software in order to function. There is no reason why you need to buy an official John Deere branded emissions component that is software locked to tractor and costs 10x the price of third party components that do the same thing.

Also, there is a large room to maneuver between "I want a sensor with some circuitry in it" and "the entire tractor is a proprietary computer with locked down parts". The right to repair movement is not about removing tech, but removing unnecessary proprietary tech that is designed to prevent owners of devices from repairing those devices themselves or with third party components.

iamcalledrob 19 hours ago||||
Perhaps this is naive, but I would imagine that farm equipment is a rounding error in terms of global emissions. Compare the number of tractors to the number of trucks...

I would have expected policy to be pragmatic here, with (relatively) relaxed emissions requirements, since an affordable and reliable food supply is in the national interest? Sounds like that's not the case

AlotOfReading 19 hours ago|||
Emissions regimes are complicated, but US tractors fall into the much less restrictive off-road category. As a result, they're a disproportionately significant contributor to things like NOx. A long time ago the off-road category was >20%, and I'm sure that percentage has only grown as regulations have forced emissions reductions in onroad vehicles.
carefree-bob 5 hours ago|||
The vast majority of offroad equipment is not farm equipment but operates in urban environments. As NOx is an air pollution concern, there should be different regimes for rural areas versus urban areas. Construction equipment operating in urban areas is different from a tractor on a farm.
joecool1029 17 hours ago|||
> but US tractors fall into the much less restrictive off-road category.

Sometimes. Above 26HP tractors do have to have emissions controls like diesel particulate filters now. Below that they don't.

cout 19 hours ago|||
Compare the number of tractors to the number of gas-powered lawnmowers. Which do you think gets better emissions?
iamcalledrob 19 hours ago||
I'd imagine it depends what kind of emissions you're measuring? Are we talking air quality or climate change?

Two stroke engines are pretty terrible in terms of unburned hydrocarbons and are disgusting for local air quality, which is why I'm glad they're being phased out in many areas.

I'd expect these tractors with I6 diesel engines to run pretty efficiently. I'd bet that the CO2 emissions from tractors are tiny in comparison from the emissions from trucks, fertiliser, and transporting the food.

cout 17 hours ago||
Lawnmowers are usually four-stroke, with two-stroke engines reserved for lighter tools like string trimmers and chainsaws.

I would still guess that lawnmowers produce more emissions overall, given that there are so many more mowers than tractors. But they get used less often than tractors, so who knows? Either way, I agree with your thinking process, that the most economical way to reduce overall emissions is to focus on what are actually producing the bulk of emissions.

I don't know how much better cars and trucks can get, and for mowers maybe electric is the answer. Mine is gas-powered, and I know it runs rich. I would love to come inside after mowing and not smell like fuel, so I'm in favor of better emissions controls on mowers.

arein3 16 hours ago||
For tools electric is the answer. To take a chainsaw, the battery needs to be replaced just as often as with refilling the fuel tank. And with newer batteries you might recharge the depleted one as fast as discharging a fresh one. Not sure, just an assumption.

The future for tools is electric 100%.

edm0nd 15 hours ago||
my brother in Christ, electric chainsaws are garbage, have you ever used one? I tried one out to clear a huge 3 foot wide tree that fell on my property and yeah those things cannot hang with gas powered chainsaws in any way, shape, or form. No one is using electric chainsaws for cutting anything significant.

they may have a place in the distant future but in 2026, aint no way.

Toutouxc 4 hours ago|||
I haven't used a chainsaw in a few years, but the last time I did, electric ones with a cord were great. I switched from a proper Stihl chainsaw to a budget electric one with a cord, and despite it being smaller and sort of flimsy, it did cut like crazy, comparable to the gas chainsaw. And it didn't require ear protection, didn't annoy the neighbors and didn't make you smell like a chainsaw for two days.
arein3 5 hours ago||||
Which electric chainsaw did you use?

I haven't used one, but I saw a youtube review from Project Farm. You can check it yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6FM_08066I

The DeWalt chainsaw was similar or better than Stihl, in a different series of tests, including cutting trough 10 inch logs.

There were other brands which would stall or be worse, so it depends on the brand.

jcgrillo 12 hours ago|||
I like the electric saw for limbing and felling small stuff because it's light and quiet but yeah for anything bigger than like 9" or extended work it's not the tool for the job.
PunchyHamster 15 hours ago||||
defeat devices aren't even complicated (they just fake the sensor data to ECU to get what owner needs). Locking down is pointless. Most people are not tuning their cars.

IF we wanted to do it properly, I'd imagine we'd have zero mandatory locks on ECU, just a little closed down black box with sensor installed in relatively tamper-proof way (of course there will always be one, the target is for 90% of people to not bother), logging away and maybe sending check engine light if it detects wrong AFR for too long.

Then you just check that on yearly MOT + any signs of tampering. Then owner is free to tune the engine as they want, provided the exhaust is still within the norms for most of the time.

jcgrillo 12 hours ago||
What would you be accomplishing by trying to control end user behavior like that? As a manufacturer, there are certain standards your machine must meet when it leaves your factory. After that, a whole separate set of standards applies to users--e.g. EPA rules about emissions equipment tampering. As a manufacturer, though, you don't need to attempt enforcement. Leave that to the government, it's their job. Locked down, proprietary hardware and software doesn't ultimately achieve enforcement, it just makes tampering more difficult at the cost of serviceability. This is a dumb trade.
PunchyHamster 1 hour ago||
It's to contain the regulation into little box that controls the emission, rather than span it to entire system making it harder to repair. Then the EPA can have its "proof" the vehicle emissions are fine without compromising entire system for repairs.
jcgrillo 11 minutes ago||
I think you're asking for something magical, like when politicians go on TV and demand safe cryptosystems with government backdoors. Any time you try to do engineering work to hinder users from using devices they own it's a really bad time. That's the purview of law enforcement, not engineering.
jcgrillo 19 hours ago||||
> How do you separate them?

Mandate common interfaces and open hardware. I shouldn't have to buy a $10k dongle to sniff codes. I certainly shouldn't have to buy a different one for each manufacturer.

fragmede 19 hours ago||
The legislation has to be robust. No dice if the dongle is generic and $20 like OBD2 in cars, but that on top of that there's a per-manufacturer set of codes that only licensed dealers have access to the software to read those special codes.
cout 17 hours ago|||
The situation today is at least better than it used to be before OBDII. I much prefer using a scanner to get codes then having to count flashing lights. And back then you'd still have to pay a lot for the manufacturer's code reader. The only advantage was the ROM was small enough to disassemble and reflash with new features. I would not want to do that on a car made in 2026.
bluGill 16 hours ago|||
Most of the codes on a large tractor are j1939. You still want the manufacture database because it often says 'x sensor voltage out of range - check the wiring harness in some not obvious location'
cout 19 hours ago|||
How do you define "electronics" and "computers"? Is a general-purpose computer running Java in the same category as a microcontroller running a tight loop with lookup tables for fuel and spark?
pocksuppet 19 hours ago||
The problem: Once you have a microcontroller running a tight loop with lookup tables for fuel and spark, it's very tempting to make it run a tight loop with lookup tables for fuel, spark, and time since license renewal - and there's no outward difference between the two microcontrollers until one of them stops working. This is where regulations can help: if a manufacturer is afraid of a zillion dollar fine, they won't do that, even if the chance of getting caught is low.
cout 17 hours ago||
While I agree in principle, we went two or more decades with cars powered by microcontrollers, and I don't recall any manufacturers trying to charge for licenses until more recently. There is something fundamentally different about the economy we are now in, I suspect.
pocksuppet 12 hours ago|||
I think the difference is that in the past, companies expected to be punished for obviously evil behavior, but now, they know they can go very far. Toyota got punished for stuck accelerators. Would they get punished for the same thing today? Tesla had stuck accelerators and we all forgot about it.

They're still pushing the boundary today. The Ring Superbowl ad where they announced they're watching you (but they said "your dog") 24/7 apparently got a lot of people to quit Ring, and you know they're crunching the numbers to see if the retention rate is worth the extra surveillance collection.

jcgrillo 8 hours ago|||
They charge for the diagnostic systems. Bigly. For example, Mercedes-Benz's Star Diagnostic System (SDS) is necessary for a variety of repairs and diagnostic procedures. There are varying degrees of workarounds and alternatives but none of them work quite right, or for every model/year/variant. It's not just the embedded system, it's also the interface to it. That's where the really ugly rent seeking crops up. And that's precisely why a tractor with no computers is attractive--not because the embedded software might try to ransom itself (although that's a reasonable fear) but because some horrible rent seeking corporate functionary will do their utmost to cheat you (or your mechanic) out of as much money as possible when it comes time to do any maintenance or diagnostic testing. No computers means that little bastard can fuck right off.
jcgrillo 19 hours ago|||
Exactly. Electronically controlled unit injectors are expensive--like 10x the price of mechanical ones. They're super cool, they can produce like 10 separate metered injection events per cycle. This is great for efficiency, noise, emissions, etc. But I can rebuild mechanical injectors with a bottle jack pop tester I made from $100 worth of parts and a bench vise. There's no wiring harness, no computer.. If the injector is getting fuel, has decent spray pattern, and is popping at the right pressure I know for certain the fuel system is good. With an electronic common rail system I need some expensive proprietary computer equipment to diagnose it, and there's no way I can build a test bench to rebuild those injectors.
LeifCarrotson 18 hours ago|||
You can't build a test bench to rebuild current OEM's electronic common rail injector systems that rely on expensive proprietary computer equipment, but there's no reason that has to be the case.

With a $20 CAN transceiver, documentation and/or config files from the manufacturer, and a bit of Python or something, you could absolutely bench test those electronic injectors. You might even be able to pick your injection events and adjust the metering, supporting the equipment as it ages. I'd love to see Ursa Ag put in a Megasquirt engine controller [1] or Proteus [2] or similar. You can run TunerStudio on a Raspberry Pi and show it on a touchscreen on the dash.

It's possible to build user-friendly, inexpensive and open engine and vehicle controls. You don't need to have zero electronics to not have locked-down proprietary electronics, you just need to build the electronics in the right way.

[1] https://diyautotune.com/products/ms3357-c?_pos=2&_fid=69f494...

[2] https://rusefi.com/index.html#proteus

jcgrillo 17 hours ago||
Controls are one thing, but there's also the problem of generating 20k psi of oil pressure and some thousands of pounds of continuous common rail fuel pressure to actuate the injector. Compared with older MW, M, P, etc. styles it's a whole different beast. Also, we're talking past each other a little--I'm talking about diesel injectors, you're talking about otto cycle equipment ;)
amluto 19 hours ago||||
Surely there’s room for a middle ground. There are plenty of 1990s-era engines that were excellent designs, had no meaningful connectivity to anything except their own ECUs, and could be produced new for not very much money. Some of them were quite modular, too — I know someone who took the drivetrain out of a salvaged Honda Civic and built an entire car (with no resemblance whatsoever to a Civc) around it.

If a tractor with a clean-burning, efficient $7500k engine could be purchased and were designed around the theory that, in 20 years or so, the owner could reasonably quickly replace the entire engine (with a first-party or aftermarket solution), would that be a good solution?

The common tech that has solved these problems nicely (IMO) is network transceivers: SFP and similar modules are built according to multi-source agreements. They contain all kinds of exotic tech, and they are not intended to be serviced at all, but (unless your switch or NIC has an utterly stupid lockout) you can pull it out and replace it with an equivalent part from a different vendor in seconds, and those parts can be unbelievably inexpensive considering what’s in them. (Single-mode bidirectional 1Gbps transceivers are $11 or less, retail, in qty 2. This is INSANE compared the the first time I lit up a 1Gbps SMF link. To be fair, this particular tech may require one to replace both ends if one fails, but if you can spare a second fiber, the fully IEEE-spec-compliant interoperable ones are even less expensive.)

jcgrillo 12 hours ago||
It's not the craziest idea. A tractor is basically just a big hydraulic pump driving a bunch of linear and rotary actuators (commonly called "motors" and "cylinders"). Especially if it's got a hydrostatic transmission. If you design it in such a way that it's relatively easy to adapt different clutches and bell housings, maybe with a little driveshaft and u-joint between the clutch and the pump, you could theoretically accomplish something like this.

However one major sticking point is that (often.. maybe always?) the engine block casting is actually a structural component of the tractor "frame". Unlike e.g. a truck that has its driveline mounted between frame rails, a tractor's "frame" is its driveline . So this might add quite a bit of complexity and cost.

cineticdaffodil 18 hours ago|||
Eh to henerate a decent nozzle takes some precision lazer drilling (e.g.trumpf) or edm drilling (e.g posalux)and some grinding + a quality test bench. Its not that easy having good lowtech solutions either.
jcgrillo 17 hours ago||
Yeah you're definitely gonna want to purchase nozzles. They're extremely precise and manufactured to very high tolerances. I've rebuilt plenty of 30+yr old injectors and haven't yet been unable to find newly manufactured or new old stock nozzles though.

EDIT: I did have some nozzles bored out a little bit once by a shop with EDM equipment. Terrible results, not worth it.

upofadown 17 hours ago|||
Note that that OEM would still have to deal with the minefield of patents created by the John Deere's of the world. I once worked for a company that had to work around an electronic circuit patent to detect a pulse. That was it, that was all it did. But if you used a standard differentiator circuit to detect the pulse created by a optical sensor watching for falling seeds you would violate the patent.

So a prerequisite might involve fixing the patent system...

3RTB297 6 hours ago|||
It goes much deeper than that. The John Deere ecosystem is designed to trap farmers using a combination of the closed ecosystem and financing. They've been at it for years, selling precision agriculture advances as the thing that will maximize all yields and turn profits, and then following up with economic manipulations to create what amounts to tech-enabled sharecropping.

It's so bad the FTC and states had to sue Deere over just the right to repair. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/...

markandrewj 18 hours ago|||
Do you work in the agricultural industry? Farm equipment is expensive, farmers will maintain the equipment as long as possible, which is a long time. Manufactures such as John Deere have tried to make it not possible for farmers to do self repair.

https://youtu.be/EPYy_g8NzmI

9cb14c1ec0 15 hours ago|||
John Deere has lost so much good will among farmers due to their lock-in efforts, it's wild. Unfortunately, many farmers are stuck with them because the only tractor dealership within a reasonable distance is John Deere.
PunchyHamster 15 hours ago||
More that even if there was suitable replacement, that costs money vs tractor they already have. Those machines are in service for decades
drpixie 12 hours ago|||
>> However, the tech exists for a reason and is not inherently bad, the issue is the lock-in, the lack of choice and interoperability.

The marketing excuse for the tech might be features or efficiency, but the reason for the tech is lock-in and minimising product lifetime.

The days when manufacturers had friendly, cooperative relationships with their customers are long gone :( Can we bring them back? I hope so, but am not hopeful.

palmotea 18 hours ago|||
> However, the tech exists for a reason and is not inherently bad, the issue is the lock-in, the lack of choice and interoperability.

The problem is computers and software enable lock-in, because of their flexibility and communications capability. Get rid of them, and you make lock-in much more difficult (or even impossible if you use "standard" parts).

Also, computers and software are complex, and that complexity is not physically visible. If you want something you can completely understand, it's probably a good choice to simplify by cutting them out completely.

tadfisher 17 hours ago||
There's some nuance here. If you care about fuel consumption or emissions, then EFI is the current best way to reduce both, and that requires "computers and software" to operate on the timescales required. I put scare quotes around those terms because you can do EFI on an Arduino, which is at least an order of magnitude more powerful than what automakers shipped in the 80s.

In any case, EFI gives you more control over the engine and vastly simplifies the overall product. I don't know if you've seen the mechanical fuel-injection pumps used by tractor diesels; they are basically tiny engines unto themselves, with their own little block and camshaft [0]. There is an entire world of diesel performance modding with a subset of it dedicated to modifying the Bosh P1700 mechanical fuel-injection pump to change timings, handle higher RPMs, and run higher pressures. I would not call it, or its carburetor cousin in the gasoline world, "simple" compared to computer-controlled fuel delivery.

An open-source ECU project, on the other hand, enabled a hacker to implement Koenigsegg's Freevalve tech on a Miata [1].

[0]: https://blessedperformance.com/ddp-cummins-hot-street-p-pump...

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9KJ_f7REGw

GenerWork 13 hours ago||
>An open-source ECU project, on the other hand, enabled a hacker to implement Koenigsegg's Freevalve tech on a Miata [1].

This is so cool, shame that Freevalve never seemed to go anywhere.

pera 5 hours ago|||
I don't know anything about tractors but our modern world is full of useless and inherently bad "tech" that only exists for the flashy factor.

People are just tired of being mislead and abused by corporations, which is why there is now a market for non-tech products.

Pikamander2 4 hours ago||
The best analogy that I can think of is cruise control on a car.

Do you need it? No. Is it nice to have? Yes.

The strict "no tech" premise of these tractors feels comparable to someone disabling the cruise control feature on their own car because they read an article about BMW locking heated seats behind a subscription.

I don't know much about tractors, but I would think that surely there are some modern benefits that these Ursa tractors are missing out?

However, the article claims that they're selling really well, so maybe at that price point the tradeoffs are still worth it.

pera 3 hours ago||
For cars the classic example of inherently bad tech are touchscreen controls instead of physical knobs.

If you want more examples look into IoT products like smart toothbrushes, many of them now are "AI enabled".

bastardoperator 16 hours ago|||
Just call it what it is, greed. The idiots at John Deer thought strangling their customers to death was a good business model.
jt2190 19 hours ago|||
Ultimately the “lock in” boils down to “when this breaks someone has to pay to fix it”. Automation and tech makes the galaxy of things that can break much larger, and the pinpointing of “who should pay to fix this” much harder. “Lock in” feels like an attempt to simplify toward “only we can fix it”, with the downsides of cost and time.
dilDDoS 19 hours ago|||
Maybe not inherently bad, but clearly not inherently necessary or useful if they're already getting so many inquiries from farmers. Could just be that the tech doesn't offer enough meaningful value when the core mechanical functionality can be achieved at a lower price.
PunchyHamster 18 hours ago|||
The fact tractor isn't locked in means 3rd party equipment have a chance instead of having to sit in locked in garden of a given vendor.

Not sure they needed to go all the way to mechanical injection tho, this is just literally burning money away

laughing_man 11 hours ago|||
If you add a bunch of tech to, well, anything you have to go out of your way to make it not locked down.
foobarian 19 hours ago|||
What if an OEM did the IBM thing and published open specs and software, spawning a whole industry? It's a shame the incentives don't seem to be there for it.
burnte 19 hours ago|||
And there's also a place for OEMs who make the bare machines like this, and other people sell electronics to add!
pcblues 13 hours ago|||
Software or hardware, the lock-down for dollars will blow back.
steveBK123 17 hours ago|||
Framework tractor when
noncoml 13 hours ago|||
It's not only the lock-in, as the document says, its about limiting the downtime.

Sailboats have the similar issue:

When are are in the middle of the pacific and get an egine problem, you want the engine to be low tech enough to be able to fix, or at least patch, yourself with minimum parts.

Yanmar switched its whole lineup of engines to ECU around 2014, but the one without ECU are very much sought after for the above reason.

jmyeet 17 hours ago|||
Unfortunately it's doomed as soon as you read "startup". Why? There are two possible outcomes:

1. This fails, goes away and we're back where we started; or

2. They take the bag and sell to John Deere, who then locks down the tractors in the same way to force you to buy support, official parts and so on. And that'll happen. It's a bait-and-switch so somebody can get rich.

The only solution to this is collective ownership or some other non-profit structure so a handful of owners can't sell out and cash in.

Look to Spain's Mondragon Corporation [1] for inspiration.

[1]: https://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/how-mondragon-be...

rossjudson 13 hours ago||
third outcome:

3. JD buys them, competition works, others notice they can just "build a tractor that's simple", and suddenly there are more competitors to choose from. JD still can't compete, and can't buy them all...or operate on small margins.

jandrese 18 hours ago|||
For the farmers I know the price tag is the first thing they were looking at. So much grumbling about how Deere is using software to egregiously pad the price tag. Looking at a tractor that is going to take 5 or 6 years to pay off instead of 15 is tempting. Sadly Trump is absolutely going to slap a 400% tariff on these if they are even allowed to be imported.
acedTrex 19 hours ago|||
The tech is inherently more expensive though. So if you want to undercut on price you have to cut costs somewhere.
j45 11 hours ago|||
Whom tech benefits is worth keeping in mind.

Tech for improvement for customers vs tech for moats/enshittification, especially when imposed by one side on the other.

The latter is never very good.

ihsw 19 hours ago||
[dead]
jmward01 19 hours ago||
I want this for cars but to keep the modern powertrain. So an EV without the tracking/touch screens, etc etc. Or an internal combustion engine car that is just simple and efficient (and again, no tracking). I'll take the low-tech but nice features like heated seats and power windows still thank you.
jadbox 19 hours ago||
I'd love this. I really don't want my car to be an iPhone with "apps" and random background software on it. The car touchscreen was perhaps the worst design choice in the history of the automobile, and is likely the cause of countless crashes. It's insane when I see car UIs that have the 'cancel / go back' button located in DIFFERENT areas depending on the screen context.
appplication 8 hours ago|||
I always thought of it this way: software engineering/UI/UX to most car companies is a cost center. Something to be minimized, workers to be provided minimal resources and pay. The compensation is not competitive with what you’d find at a tech company, but they’re hiring from the same talent pool.

The effect of this is obvious and felt in the end product.

hypercube33 14 hours ago||||
I favor my 2018 car with knobs and buttons but has car and android auto and a modern turbo inline 4...just wish it had metal valve covers and coolant joints instead of crappy plastic...
throwaway85825 16 hours ago|||
The irony is cars got screens largely due to the backup camera mandate which was intended to be a safety feature. Governments are very bad at understanding unintended consequences.
fineIllregister 15 hours ago|||
- The mandate is for rear visibility. Car manufacturers choose to implement it with the back-up camera. Beyond that, it's obviously safer to be able to see everything behind the vehicle.

- My vehicle has a backup camera with a screen, but has physical buttons for all controls (A/C, audio system). There's no reason cars can't have both.

rootusrootus 14 hours ago|||
> The mandate is for rear visibility

Specifically, 10 feet by 20 feet directly behind the vehicle. I'm actually curious how this could be achieved with only mirrors. That's a pretty big swath for anything with a viewpoint where the driver is sitting.

> My vehicle has a backup camera with a screen

Early implementations just used a screen in the rearview mirror. No need for any kind of infotainment screen.

throwaway85825 14 hours ago||
In rear view mirror display is mostly just on GM products.
rootusrootus 10 hours ago|||
Nah, it was relatively common on base models that did not have a head unit with a screen, and that definitely includes Hondas and Toyotas, for example. The most common type of vehicle to use such a setup were pickups. For Toyota, the Taco and Tundra are the only vehicles I can think of which used an in-mirror screen. Honda did it in the base model CR-Z. Ford, Chevy, and RAM did it on their trucks.
horsawlarway 11 hours ago|||
my 2011 F150 has a rear view mirror backup display, and it's quite nice.

It's there when the truck is in reverse and otherwise just a normal mirror.

Early 2010s actually seems like a sweet spot for a lot of automotive tech - it's decent enough, but "mobile" wasn't really a thing yet, and bandwidth was expensive, so there's no assumption that everything should be an app phoning home yet (iPhone was still brand new).

throwaway85825 14 hours ago|||
When it already has a screen it's much cheaper to get rid of the buttons then. The screen as a requirement is priced in whereas the buttons are not and thus cut.
sparrc 15 hours ago||||
A screen for the backup camera doesn't necessarily mean everything has to be through the screen at all.

Most Toyotas I've seen have a screen for the backup camera and the carplay/music/gps console, but everything else is still knobs and buttons.

This is true on both my 2013 and 2026 Toyotas.

rob74 3 hours ago|||
I last had that on a (rented) Fiat 500: the "standard" controls (including the monochrome LCD in the instrument panel) looked really clunky and old-fashioned, and all the advanced features (audio, navigation, mobile phone connectivity, not sure if it had a backup camera) were via the (third party, Pioneer) entertainment system which was state-of-the-art with a nice high-res touchscreen. That's probably because this was the more expensive version of the car, I guess the "basic" version only has a radio - no navigation, no backup camera, no nothing. Not sure if it's the same principle at work at Toyota, I haven't driven one in a while?
Pfhortune 14 hours ago|||
Also true on my 2020 RAV4 and 2025 Tacoma.

I tried a 2025 Ford Maverick for a year before I traded it for the Tacoma. All the AC/Heat/Etc controls were on the screen. Couldn't stand it. Put me off of ever considering a new Ford again.

magnetowasright 10 hours ago||||
Not all screens are touchscreens. Manufacturers complied with those regs without touchscreens for years. My 2012 mitsubishi's reverse camera is displayed in the rear view mirror; the head unit is a dead simple dot matrix display which I adore.

It's the regulations (or lack thereof) that allow touchscreens in cars as they are that should be the target of ire. Reverse camera regulations or not, the current state of touchscreen car rubbish was inevitable without the existence and enforcement of regulations addressing it.

brokencode 16 hours ago|||
Are you suggesting that governments shouldn’t require safety features because car manufacturers might implement them badly?
throwaway85825 14 hours ago||
The EPA push for fuel efficiency made it easier to hit targets by selling huge trucks instead of small cars.

There is a value in safety regulation but the incentives as legislated have led to negative results. It needs to be fixed or repealed. Not sure there's a clean solution here.

BirAdam 10 hours ago||
Not only huge trucks, but all vehicles got larger.
m01 18 hours ago|||
One example: https://www.caricecars.com (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45823186)
irq-1 15 hours ago||
Another: https://www.slate.auto/en/personalization A basic truck that you can customize.

> BRING YOUR OWN TECH

> Bring the apps you know and love to create the experience you want. Instead of a bulky, distracting, and quickly outdated infotainment system, a Slate can come with something simpler: a smartly designed mount that fits a phone or tablet and a holder for a portable Bluetooth speaker. Heating and air conditioning are included, no need to bring your own fan.

> Your Slate will age gracefully, because it’ll always have the latest tech—yours.

hypercube33 14 hours ago||
No door speakers or mounts for them, like it hasn't been a thing for 70 years irks me to no end
connicpu 13 hours ago|||
Slate are trying to cut cost everywhere they can to provide the cheapest barebones EV truck possible. My Volvo EX30 also lacks door speakers and while it's not top tier it's fine tbh. Volvo just put a giant speaker bar across the base of the windshield.
numbers 19 hours ago|||
it seems like Slate might be trying that but there's no real cars from them yet so they're just renders at this point. but yes, same concept but printers is my wish.
jonah 17 hours ago|||
They have plenty of running/driving mules out there already:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6_9_HHLOSY

(Not for sale yet though.)

fyrn_ 10 hours ago||||
https://www.crowdsupply.com/open-tools/open-printer
insane_dreamer 16 hours ago||||
Yes but not a pickup please
bakies 13 hours ago||
pickup culture sucking the life out of our car industry. give me real cars
calmworm 17 hours ago|||
But they have merch! Hats, apparel!
pythonaut_16 16 hours ago||
Why are you mad that they're trying to build brand recognition?

I get there's been plenty of vaporware cars in the past but by all signs Slate is making real progress towards delivering actual vehicles.

left-struck 10 hours ago|||
There is a golden era of cars, say 5 to 10 years ago that have things like heated seats but no tracking.

Personally I have a 2019 Mazda 3 which has camera vision all around, radar cruise control and heated seats but no lane assist bumping you around or a cellular connection relaying any information.

The only anti feature it has is that stupid idle stop, but that’s easy to permanently disable. It also has car play but doesn’t have a touch screen.

Anyway I’m not saying you should get this car specially but there are cars out there that are like what you want.

therealdrag0 16 hours ago|||
FWIW: Hyundai EVs have physical buttons for everything important. It has a screen for CarPlay but it’s small compared to competitors. (I got the Kona for these reasons)
shit_game 15 hours ago|||
As much as I and (probably) most other consumers agree with you, I don't think the car insurance industry does. Very similarly to how governments being buyers of data from adtech companies makes it an impossibility for governments to enact good privacy laws, there are massive perverse incentives here that place too much money on the table for good things to ever happen; car manufacturers want to gatekeep the sale of our data to insurance companies and governments, insurance companies want to lobby for laws that mandate data collection so that more claims can be denied and profit can rise, and governments are happy to enforce data collection because it strengthens their surveilance mechanisms.
IgorPartola 11 hours ago|||
The problem is that the difference between a low tech and a high tech diesel tractor is mostly emissions and some loss of efficiency. The difference between a low tech and a high tech electric car is a 25 mile range and a 250 mile range, a top speed of 35 mph and 100 mph, carrying capacity and so on.

I recently did a lawn tractor conversion from gas to electric and what I got was in my opinion significantly better and more reliable than a commercial option at 20% of the price but it is limited to 4mph. Scaling it to 5 would require a lot of custom fabrication and a much more expensive drive motor. Once this tech is significantly better and cheaper to the point of being a commodity it will be a different story. For now it just isn’t.

KaiserPro 17 hours ago|||
https://www.telotrucks.com/ is pretty much that

Cheap, fast enough, practical, goofey looking.

tandr 17 hours ago||
by the looks of it... any front collision == instant death?
evilos 12 hours ago|||
They very much designed for collisions. They have an engineer discussing those aspects this video.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv5QwgQUMGY

OkayPhysicist 13 hours ago||||
It's an EV, so what little nose it has is probably all crumple zone (as opposed to having a big ol' engine in the way. Popping the hood on most EVs is pretty funny, actually, because of how little there is under there.
monooso 16 hours ago|||
I know nothing about automobile design, but the Smart Fortwo [1] seemed to solve this problem just fine (IIRC they had a very good NCAP safety rating).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Fortwo

EvanAnderson 15 hours ago|||
Always a good time to share this video re: crashing a Smart Fortwo: https://youtube.com/watch?v=mnI-LiKCtuE
rootusrootus 14 hours ago|||
> IIRC they had a very good NCAP safety rating

3 out of 5, which I think merely qualifies it as "average"

oxag3n 17 hours ago|||
Modern cars evolved in terms of safety, this includes active safety too. All the safety features require OEM hardware/software that locks you in, for example replacing windshield in many models requires dealership calibration.

And with all the distracted drivers looking into their phones while driving, I want more and more cars to get at least emergency breaking systems.

monooso 16 hours ago||
> All the safety features require OEM hardware/software that locks you in...

I'm unclear whether you're stating the current state of affairs, or arguing that such safety features cannot exist without this lock in.

If it's the latter, you may have missed the point. GP was clear they want modern safety and powertrain, just without the tracking.

None of the safety features you mention require the manufacturer to harvest and sell personal data — that's a separate choice OEMs have made, not a technical prerequisite.

oxag3n 15 hours ago||
I was stating current state of affairs. I don't think the point is only about avoiding tracking and personal data harvesting. My 10 years old Honda has emergency breaking and lane assist and it's not connected to the internet, nor I'm servicing it at the dealership to be concerned about data harvesting. I still couldn't enable the system after replacing broken windshield - I had to get it to the dealership so they could re-enable the safety system.
numpad0 12 hours ago|||
People who says this never even consider Nissan Leaf. "Because the charging..." or whatever.

So consumers DO want all-touchscreen disposable cars like Tesla - it's similar to how disposable phones had replaced phones with removable batteries(even among IP rated phones). Wallets vote strongly against consumers.

Nition 11 hours ago|||
The Leaf is one of those cars now too: https://www.caranddriver.com/photos/g65082021/2026-nissan-le...
discordance 9 hours ago||||
I would have considered a Leaf but they have NMC batteries. Also, the earlier versions had terrible battery cooling issues. Give me a Leaf with an LFP and I would buy one.
Toutouxc 4 hours ago||
There are many different NMC battery chemistries, and they are still evolving. It's likely that whatever you think would be a problem (because NMC) wouldn't actually be a problem for you. But yes, the first two generations of the Leaf weren't exactly great EVs and there's a lot of FUD and missing based just on the Leaf.
givemeethekeys 12 hours ago|||
It's just so ugly. Why did they make it so ugly? :(
goda90 14 hours ago|||
I've been dreaming of doing an EV conversion on my 2008 Honda Civic that I barely even drive. No cellular radio, no OTA updates, no touchscreen. I lack the mechanical skills and time though, and I'm not aware of people in my area that do conversions as a service for anything but like high end classic cars(which a Honda sedan is not).
liampulles 17 hours ago|||
I own a base model 2020 Suzuki Swift GL, which I specifically bought because it has no touchscreen. It has a radio with Bluetooth and dials - that is it.

No issues so far.

Unable0841 17 hours ago|||
Check out Slate auto
RajT88 18 hours ago|||
I wonder if we'll see a repeat of what happened in the 60's and 70's: American car companies didn't want to make small and cheap fuel efficient cars, so an upstart (Japanese automakers) came in with exactly that and stole their lunch money.

These days, the big foreign manufacturers are all in the same game as the domestic ones - software nonsense. Tariffs are keeping other foreign competition out at the moment, so it'd have to be a new domestic manufacturer, or an existing one who deviates from the standard auto playbook.

flyinghamster 17 hours ago||
Seeing all the gigantic and very-high-priced Pavement Princess Pickups clogging dealer lots, it's plain that the auto industry in general didn't learn a damn thing. It's easy to point fingers in all directions, but it always ends up that we get the worst outcomes.
throwaway85825 16 hours ago|||
The auto industry is just responding to incentives, the EPA makes it way easier to hit emissions targets the larger the vehicle.
OkayPhysicist 13 hours ago||
Those incentives went the way of the dodo last year. The fine for violating it is $0
throwaway85825 13 hours ago||
It takes 6 years to develop a vehicle. You cant rely on it being 0$ forever, the laws/regulations didn't change.
bakies 13 hours ago|||
People are brainwashed into thinking a pickup truck is the only practical car even though it's the opposite. It's not just EPA regulations, it's what people want.
speedgoose 18 hours ago|||
So a Dacia?
mohamedkoubaa 13 hours ago|||
It can be built but it wouldn't be legal to sell commercially. Closest thing would be a kit car (which I've always felt haven't scaled as much as they theoretically could)
caymanjim 13 hours ago||
Citation needed. What law requires tracking software, touch screens, and vendor-lock-in for automobiles? I disbelieve there is anything preventing the commercial sale so long as it has the minimum safety standards and roadworthiness. Costs money to get everything certified, but it doesn't have to also be enshittified.
mohamedkoubaa 13 hours ago||
Backup cameras are required by law, among other things
mcoliver 12 hours ago|||
So slate.auto?
aardvarkr 17 hours ago|||
Sounds like you just want a car from the year 2000.
yoyohello13 17 hours ago|||
I drive a Honda from 2002 and love it. It’s starting to show its age but I don’t want to get a new car until this one dies for good.
Daz912 6 hours ago||
why would it 'die for good' just fix it??
insane_dreamer 16 hours ago|||
Yes or even better something like a Volvo from the 80s
hypercube33 11 hours ago||
Saturn with an updated i4 please
scuff3d 14 hours ago|||
That's the pitch behind the Slate truck right? Just the basics to make it a functional vehicle and then you add only what you want.
kelvinjps10 14 hours ago|||
a 2010-16 corolla is basically this
stronglikedan 16 hours ago|||
Honestly, all the modern tech, except the tracking and touchscreens, is pretty freakin' awesome.
cmrdporcupine 19 hours ago||
I honestly don't care about power windows (or seats), do you really? I guess one advantage is being able to easily open windows other than your own.

Heated seats and stearing wheel, yes please.

But yep what I want is a Saab 900 "cockpit" car -- everything can be focused on and manipulated (physically!) without my eyes leaving the road or my hand having to explore too much.

But, yeah, electric.

mrexroad 18 hours ago||
I still often think of my old Saab 900’s Black Panel button—physical dark mode.
alexpotato 1 hour ago||
Two things:

1. LOVE this idea as I've always been a big fan of "right to repair" and even at work, FinTech SRE/DevOps, I say things like "we want this to be like a 1975 Ford: you open the hood, look inside, understand it and it's easy to fix. We don't want a 2026 Ferrari."

2. The Econ major/MBA in me wonders how long you can sell cheaper tractors that last forever. I say this b/c it's like trying to sell 100 year lightbulbs: markets are not infinite so if you have everyone buy them in years 1-10, what do you sell after that? The general idea is that you charge MORE for these things since a. "easy to repair" is now an added feature, b. people will buy less of your thing so you need to make more money upfront.

Granted, there is probably some sweet spot and/or "even selling 1,000 == a couple million and that's enough for anyone" but I still like to debate the points

jfil 33 minutes ago||
On point 2: take a page out of John Deere's book, sell branded hats, t-shirts, toys and sell the movie license.
Havoc 1 hour ago|||
On the econ Point I think you’d still have someone come in and undercut it. If you can steal a big share of a 10 year market then it could make sense for a lean startup as a once off sprint even if you know after that it’s dead.

The bulb stuff was a cartel not normal functional markets.

swed420 1 hour ago|||
Point #2 ought to be good reason for us to move past our archaic consumption-based economies into something where less consumption isn't considered a "problem."
ToucanLoucan 1 hour ago||
You probably can’t sell tractors forever but that’s short-sighted: you can sell parts and service that’s reasonably priced. People don’t just refuse to buy OEM parts on principle, they do it because the prices are often outrageous and/or the procedure to do so sucks and/or is arbitrarily restrictive like needing dealer licenses or what have you.

And just because a tractor is low tech and designed to run forever doesn’t mean it won’t still need parts and service. Time comes for us all and that includes your wheel bearings, bushings and seals.

simplyluke 8 hours ago||
Late to the party here, so I don't expect this to get a lot of traction, but I'd like to point out that part of the reason this hasn't existed until recently as an option in the US is because it's functionally illegal for it to exist.

> The 12-valve Cummins is arguably the most widely understood diesel engine in North America. Every independent shop, every shade-tree mechanic with a set of wrenches, every farmer who grew up turning bolts has encountered one.

That's great! I'd point out the 12 valve wasn't introduced until the 90s, but that's kind of immaterial -- it's as simple to work on as any other mechanically injected analog diesel is and they were in widespread use for nearly a century before that. One immediately wonders why we moved away from these and towards more complex options, and why this startup has to remanufacture old engines instead of sourcing new engines. The answer among those of us who care about right to repair tends to be "evil corporations want to make proprietary systems that require ongoing fees!" which is true for John Deere, but also, the EPA mandated DEF/DPF systems + limp modes on all farm equipment since 2014, and the new relaxed standards include complicated rules about what percentage into limp mode they go at different intervals during different periods of time after those notoriously unreliable systems start to have errors. You can't do that without modern ECUs!

I'm all for reducing the harm caused by running diesel engines in the most densely populated cities on the planet (DEF and similar systems are about particulate emissions, not carbon), but we're being naive if we pretend that extending these regulations to farm equipment isn't a huge factor in why that same equipment has gotten more expensive and less reliable over the past decade.

SpaceFarmer 27 minutes ago||
I wish someone would do this for the pickup truck market. Lol, like make a truck for people that actually want to use it just for hauling things. Kind of like trucks used to be in the 1960's and 1970's. Not the modern ones that are more like a luxury SUV that happens to have a tiny truck bed in the back.
stego-tech 10 hours ago||
I've been musing with friends that this is a growing and untapped market. Not merely for analog-only tractors or heavy machinery, but for stripped-down/basic machinery in general. EVs eschewing the myriad of sensors and driver assists that talk back to the cloud in favor of cruise control, local cameras, and a double-din slot for aftermarket head units; cars built for simplicity of ownership and maintenance rather than service revenue extraction; computers that get work done and turn off after, rather than constantly phoning home with cloud accounts and telemetry.

It's nice to see this company doing well for itself so quickly, and I hope they deliver on every promise made while reaping immense success. At the very least, it'd send a clear and unambiguous message that the market for simplicity is there and desperate for products that cater to it.

Cthulhu_ 4 hours ago|
I can only applaud it, however the challenge will be to make it meet modern standards / requirements for things like emissions and safety.
keane 18 hours ago||
Better photos are found on their site: https://ursa-ag.com

Video the press are taking stills from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDR6g9iG9Ds

Interview with more details on trade show floor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9QxeNyKbB4

missedthecue 13 hours ago|
I wonder how sustainable the business model is. Eventually, you saturate the market with your tractors, and if they work as advertised, they are owned and maintained for decades. A lot of people are out there farming with 60-80 year old tractors. I would suspect most of the OEM parts that need replacing are where most wear and tear is happening (the engine). Those parts come from Cummins, not this startup.

In the meantime, they have to maintain a very high fixed cost base in their factory, distribution network, and skilled unionized workforce. I'm really not even asking about how will they maximize shareholder dividends, I just mean how do you not go bankrupt after you sell your first 10,000 tractors.

jp0d 11 hours ago||
> maximize shareholder dividends

This is the whole reason why middle class is dying and power and wealth are being consolidated amongst the rich.

kokanee 13 hours ago|||
The disincentive to provide a durable product is unfortunate. Ideally businesses pair high-ticket one-time sales with low-cost recurring sales of related products and services.
adamtaylor_13 11 hours ago||
Must we sell more than 10,000? That seems like a reasonable check for a small business to take home and go solve some other problem for someone.

The thing is, your reputation will get out there. Folks will want to work with you because of who you are; it'll be profitable (in many ways) even if it isn't a 100-year dynasty.

missedthecue 10 hours ago||
So lay off thousand of employees, shutter a factory, close dozens of distribution centers. Degrowth has real world consequences for real world people, and sustainability is generally good.
hattmall 9 hours ago||
Prior to the idea of planned obsolescence and vendor lock-in / maintenance revenue once you saturate a market the pivot would be to use that infrastructure and expertise to enter other markets. They could still sell tractors but there's tons of other stuff they could make and sell as well, like maybe much smaller tractors for one.
More comments...