('IH(I -1. , No. I( 1)V(TL\TIWII. 
1922
Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station
OI I ii!
Alabama Polytechnic Institute
AUBURN
IllATO CHS(S 1 l si s Bl I)AU-lni IERIIACI
TRACTOR SITUATION IN ALABAMA
By
TRACTOR SITUATION IN ALABAMA
Summary of Tractor Survey Conducted by the Department or
Agricultural Engineering of the Alabama
Polytechnic Institute
By
M. L. NICHOLS
AND
J. W. RANDOLPH
In the fall of 1921 questionnaires were sent to 575
Alabama tractor owners asking them a series of ques-
tions about the operation of their tractors. Replies
were received from 125. Very few of the question-
naires, however, were completely filled out. Questions
of a more or less technical nature, such as those deal-
ing with lubrication, cooling, etc., were answered so
vaguely as to make the results impossible of tabula-
tion. On the other hand a large number of the more
important questions were answered very definitely and
are tabulated in the following report.
The question, "Has your tractor paid you?" was an-
swered by 121 farmers; 73 said "yes;" 32, "no;" and 16
were uncertain. Seventy-four, however, reported it a
profitable investment; 27, an unprofitable investment;
and 20 were uncertain.
The farms on which these tractors were operated
were classified according to acres farmed. The fol-
lowing table shows the relation of acreage to tractor
profits:
Size of farm Number Profit- Unprofit-
Acres Tractors able able
Under 50 ---------- 7 7 0
59 to 100 ---------- 12 9 3
100 to 150 ---------- 15 12 3
150 to 200 --------- 13 8 5
200 to 250 --------- 8 4 4
250 to 500 --------- 16 11 5
500 to 1000 18 13 5
1000 to 2000 ------ 3 2 1
Over 2000 ---------- 4 4 0
Average size was ------------- 364.1 acres
TABLE NO. 1
This table indicates that size of farm is not neces-
sarily the most important factor in determining tractor
profits or losses. On all farms under 50 acres tractors
were reported profitable, and reports from farms from
100 to 150 acres indicate that this size is just as profit-
able as farms of 500 to 1000 acres for tractor farming.
A larger number of questionnaires might change this
summary. However, the above table is sufficient to
show that there is only a loose correlation.
The period of tractor operation was answered as fol-
lows: 11 had used their tractors less than one year;
60, one year; 29, two years; 10, three years; 3, four
years; 3, five years; 1, eight years; and 3 did not report.
The two-plow tractor was the most popular size. The
number of plows drawn follows: 89, two plows; 22,
three plows; 4, four plows; 1, five plows; and three
were not used for plowing. If operated as instructed
by manufacturers these tractors would have drawn
plows as follows: 86, two plows; 31, three plows; and
4, four or more plows. This indicates that Alabama
tractors are not generally over-loaded.
The types of plows in use were: 86, disc; 24, mold-
board; and 2, both. Others did not answer.
REGARDING SIZE
Answering the question, "Would you buy the same
size tractor if buying another?" all but 10 replying
said "yes." Four of 56 smaller tractor owners re-
plying would get a larger size. One out of 22 three-
plow tractor owners replying would get a larger trac-
tor, while 4 would buy smaller tractors.
Of the three-plow tractor owners 11 considered a
disc harrow of 32 discs a correct load. Of the two-
plow tractor owners 34 used disc harrows; 1 reported
a 40 disc harrow unsatisfactory on clay land; 17 re-
ported a 32 disc harrow satisfactory on clay; 2 report-
ed this size unsatisfactory on clay; 1 had difficulty
with 28 discs on clay. All others used a 28 disc harrow
on clay, or a smaller size on sand and reported them
satisfactory, indicating that the type of soil largely de-
-termines the size of harrow to buy. This is due to
footing.
The following table shows the number of profitable
and unprofitable tractors of the different sizes on
farms of different sizes:
4,
2-Plow 3-Plow Over,3-Plow
Profi--Future Profi- Future Profi- Future
Aceres table Tractor 
table. Tractor . table Tractor-
in farmni
5- 50
5-100 -- 1
100- 150 - 7
150- 200 -- 1
200- 250-- 4
250- 500 -- 2
500-1000 -- 2
1000-2000 -- 1
2000,& over 1
TOTAL ____ 19
81
10
7
4
3
10
7
1
1
51.
-I -I ---
10 2_
11 2.
4 1 3
-- -- 4' - 1--
1 9 2 5-
3_ 5 1 4 1
2 1 2.
2 _ 1--
4 0 52 7j 181 1
TABLE No. 2
1
1
i-i
-1
i1---
42
17 
3
2 0 1
201
-i
2
Answers to questions regarding repairs were very
informing. Three had to get repairs from Wisconsin;
1, St. Louis; 1, Cleveland; 10 reported their nearest
supply house from 100 to 200 miles away; 6, 50 to 100
miles; 6, 25 to 50 miles; 13 did not report; and 65, a
distance less than 25 miles, or from a local dealer. Six-
teen reported that they secured supplies from a branch
house, but did not state the distance.
The following table shows the number of days.each
year tractors were used for belt work and for fied
work :
Belt Work Days Field Work Days
No. Tractors No. Tractors
7 None 4 None,
4 0- 5 3 0-10.
5 5- 10 7 10- 20
10i 10- 15 28 20- 40
3 15- 20 17 40- 60
13 20- .30 17 60- 80
2 30-. 40 3 80-100,
6 40- 50 6 100-120
4 
50- 60 
2 120-140 
0 021014
3,;80-100
4 100-150
3 150 and over
Average number days of belt work--------- 35.1
Average number days of field work ------ 50.2
TABLE No. 3
J
Twenty-eight of those, using tractors for belt work
considered them profitable, and 14, unprofitable.
ACRES PLOWED
The number of acres reported plowed by each trac-
tor in 1920 varied from 10 to 600. Only 83 of those
replying gave definite acreages. Ten of them plowed
over 200 acres and 30 over 100 acres. The average.
was 99.9 acres. All but three that plowed over 100
acres reported their tractors profitable.
Seventy-two reported acreages on which disc har-
rows were used as follows: 15, over 200 acres; 33, over
100 acres; and all others less than 100 acres. The av-
erage disked and harrowed was 122 acres.
To the question, "Did the tractor enable you to plow
more land?" 103 replied, 78 answering "yes" and 24,
"no.
To the question, "Has the tractor enabled you to
plant your crop in better condition?" 104 replied, 99
saying "yes" and 5, "no." These are two of the larg-
est factors in profitable tractor operation, and many
who reported their tractors unprofitable said that they
had benefitted them in one or both ways.
To the question, "Has it enabled you to sell any
mules?" 100 replied, 39 saying "yes;" 61, "no." It ap-
pears that with increased power many farmers are
working more of their land instead of substituting
power for mules. The fact that 39 out of 100 or 39
percent could sell mules is rather surprising when the
shortage of power on most Alabama farms is consid-
ered.
The area of fields on different farms was reported
as follows: 41 had all their land in fields over 10 acres,
with only 6 unprofitable tractors; 15 had many small
fields and 4 of them reported their tractors unprofit-
able. Many of the replies were not sufficiently def-
inite to include in the summary.
As to the cost of repairs the following gives the num-
ber and approximate amount of repairs. Many an-
swers, however, were indefinite, and others said they
had no record.
REPAIR EXPENSES
Cost of repairs varied as follows: 25, less than
:$25.00; 7, $25.00 to $50.00; 7, $50.00 to $100.00; 9, $100.00
to $150.00; 1, $150.00 to $200.00; 6, $200.00 to $300.00;
.3, over $300.00.
The average age of the tractors reported was 1.8
years. For 1920 56 reported expenses, the average be-
ing $41.35. Tractors driven by hired men were most
expensive. Two reported that they had junked their
.tractors.
The question, "Have you had any breakdowns?" was
answered by 106 farmers, 72 reporting "yes," and 29,
"no." Two of the 72 had lost much time by break-
downs, the remainder ranged from a few hours to sev-
eral days.
Questions as to losses of time, crops, and money due
to breakdowns were answered too indefinitely to be
worthwhile. Only six gave definite figures. One said
$200.00; 1, $100.00; 1, $75.00; and 3, below $25.00. Fifty-
two out of 97 had their tractors out of commission
when they needed them and 45 did not.
Thirty-eight answered the question, "How many days
did you lose?" Most of them stated indefinite periods.
One said sixty; 1, thirty; 9, ten to fifteen; and others
shorter periods of time. Many gave indefinite answers.
According to 106 reports 42 tractors were driven by
hired men, 13 of which were unprofitable; 34 by own-
ers, 4 of which were unprofitable; 20 by sons of farm-
ers, 6 of which were unprofitable; and 9 by everyone,
three of which were unprofitable. One was driven by
a daughter and was profitable.
Seventeen of the operators had had previous tractor
experience. Ten of them were hired men. Apparently
they were hired because of their experience, but five
of these tractors were unprofitable.
Out of 101 tractor owners 58 answered that in their
opinion average negro farm laborers cannot success-
fully operate tractors, and 43 believe that negroes can
be trained to do so.
To the question, "Can you get increased yields from
your tractor?" 92 replied, 73 said "yes;" 6, "no;" and
13, "doubtful." The balance replied that they "had not
owned their tractor long enough to tell." Twenty-four
gave the percentage of increase of crops, ranging from
5 percent to 100 percent.
MISCELLANEOUS USES OF TRACTOR
Tractors were used for miscellaneous farm work as
follows: 16 reported silo filling; 14, threshing; 24,
wood sawing; 13, feed grinding; 5, cotton ginning; 21,
road work; 11, pulling stumps; 19, terracing; 6, grind-
ing lime; 5, logging; and 9, miscellaneous work, chief-
ly baling hay and cultivating orchards. Nine did cus-
torn work.
This survey was taken during the period of depres-
sion when the farmers were discouraged, prices were
near the bottom, and the implement industry was in
a very despondent mood. Several questionnaires were
accompanied by letters from farmers stating 
that they
thought tractors unprofitable because farming 
was un-
profitable, and that conditions in their opinion 
were
such that no machinery could be made to pay 
for itself
under prevailing conditions. Such replies 
were in-
cluded in-this summary. It is believed that under 
nor-
mal conditions answers could have been 
more favor-
able.
According to this survey Alabama is in line 
with
northern and mid-western states in percent of 
profit-
able and unprofitable tractors.