Source: AGCO News Release

DULUTH, Ga. (August 5, 2010) — AGCO has introduced a variety of new products for tech-savvy professional producers and agricultural retailers.

The new products offer innovative features created through AGCO’s customer-driven research and development efforts. Each piece of equipment is proof of AGCO’s commitment to bringing agriculture customers advanced technology and innovative products that will help each of them be efficient, productive and profitable.

These new products will be on display at industry events and farm shows this fall.

AGCO Introduces Sunflower 1550 Series Five Section Disc Harrows

The all-new Sunflower 1550 Series five section disc harrows are built with ground-breaking technology not found on any other piece of tillage equipment. The patent-pending duplex wing hinges and walking triple tandems are two of the innovative features on the Sunflower 1550 Series that help growers cover more acres and break through the toughest soil environments in the corn and wheat belts. News Release

AGCO Application Equipment Unveils New TerraGator 6303 and 8303 Models
The new TerraGator models 6303 and 8303 from AGCO Application Equipment have been designed to make the industry’s hardest-working flotation applicator even more productive with key features such as the innovative AGCO Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT), AGCO SISU POWER™ 8.4 liter diesel engine, and cab improvements. News Release

New Drive System Strengthens Industry-Leading RoGator Lineup
The experts at AGCO Application Equipment are rolling out five new RoGator high-clearance applicators for 2011. The critical new feature is a proven drive system that AGCO has engineered to deliver even higher levels of performance and reliability in the field.

Rising Diesel Fuel Costs, Tougher EPA Regulations Create Challenges for Farmers
With the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Tier IV interim (Tier IVi) emissions standards for off-road vehicles rapidly approaching, many farmers are concerned about environmental compliance. At the same time, they’re keeping a watchful eye on rising diesel fuel prices and wondering how the engines of these new “environmentally friendly” row-crop tractors will fare in terms of performance and fuel efficiency.

An increasing number of growers have found that new engine technologies can keep emissions in check while also delivering outstanding performance and fuel efficiency. A perfect example is the AGCO SISU POWER 8.4 L engine with e3™ selective catalytic reduction (SCR) clean-air technology that is found in Challenger® and Massey Ferguson® high-horsepower row crop tractors.

The company says it plans to begin shipping the new units to its dealers in March for all three of its brands of high-horsepower tractors - AGCO, Challenger and Massey Ferguson - in the 270-350 horsepower range.

The company is branding the new off-road diesel engine technology as e3, which stands for energy, economy and ecology. The new diesels utilize SCR (selective catalytic reduction) technology that the company describes as "a simple, robust and proven method for treating diesel exhaust emissions to achieve EPA emissions standards."

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
SCR is a proven emission-control system designed to lower emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) from the exhaust gases of diesel engines.
e3 is a post-combustion, after-treatment process that takes place within the exhaust system itself. With the e3 system a NOx reducing agent, or Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF), is injected into the exhaust gas upstream of the e3 catalyst chamber.
When heated, a liquid urea solution, the active ingredient in DEF, turns to ammonia and reacts with NOx from the exhaust to convert the pollutants into nitrogen, water vapor and tiny amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2). The company reports that e3 technology alone can achieve NOx reductions in excess of 90%.

The key to the success of e3 is the fact that it's a post-combustion process. It stays out of the way of what the engine is built to do - provide power. After the exhaust leaves the engine, all that remains is to reduce the nitrogen oxides (NOx). Because only the exhaust gases are treated, e3 SCR technology allows engineers to use the most efficient engine settings for optimum power and fuel economy.

A Proven Technology
AGCO SISU POWER and AGCO engineers selected SCR technology because, the company says, it is widely acknowledged as the most effective and fuel-efficient method of meeting present and future EPA emissions requirements. SCR exhaust gas after-treatment was originally used to reduce NOx emissions from coal-fired power plants and has been widely used in the trucking industry.

In North America, several truck manufacturers have selected SCR, including Mack, Volvo, Cummins, PACCAR and Detroit Diesel, to meet the 2010 emission control standard for on-road diesel engines.

AGCO reports that it is currently used on more than 500,000 diesel-powered vehicles in Europe. It is also the system preferred by leading on-highway vehicle manufacturers including the market leader – Mercedes-Benz as well as BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, Mini, Hyundai, Kia, and Jeep.

Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF)?
Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) is a solution of purified water and 32.5% automotive-grade urea. DEF works with the heat of the exhaust in the catalytic chamber and converts nitrogen oxide (NOx) from diesel exhaust into nitrogen and water.
DEF is metered in precise quantities and then injected, via a Bosch control system, into the exhaust system that includes a catalytic chamber. The DEF is carried in a separate tank on board the tractor and is consumed at a rate of about 3% DEF/gallon of diesel fuel.

It is the equivalent to 3% of the fuel used. Therefore, for every 100 gallons of fuel used, 3 gallons of DEF will be consumed. Typically a farmer will fill his DEF tank every second fuel fill up.
In Europe, DEF is marketed as AdBlue.

According to AGCO, thousands of supply locations are springing up across North America. Since the trucking industry has already adopted SCR technology to meet the EPA Tier IV emissions requirements, availability at truck stop chains is spreading nationwide. DEF will also be available through AGCO, Massey Ferguson and Challenger dealerships.

Soil expert Dave Goorahoo of California State University, Fresno, left, reviews operating programs on a satellite-guided tractor with Chuck Dees, irrigation manager for Stamoules Produce Co. The Mendota-based vegetable farm is a leader in deploying innovative irrigation technology.

Farmers talk about "crop for drop" to gauge the efficiency of food production compared to the amount of water applied. And Chuck Dees, irrigation manager for Stamoules Produce Co. in Mendota, likes to talk about "smart water."

With 14,000 acres of vegetable crops—corn, melons, peppers and broccoli—using water wisely is more than just a good idea. These days, with a three-year drought and delivery restrictions cutting federal water supplies to a mere 10 percent of contract amounts on the San Joaquin Valley's west side, irrigation practices need to be ingenious.

Dees said the company has been researching and investing in emerging irrigation technology for more than a decade and he said, "Every time we get more efficient, it seems to come out at the end. When we make a gain in water conservation, it costs us less money for water. When we use water smarter, we get better yields. When we get better yields, we get a better bottom line."
Reports indicate that in the last six years, farmers in the San Joaquin Valley alone have invested more than $1.5 billion in high-efficiency irrigation systems.

"Strides in irrigation technology are encouraging, but improvements in efficiency are incremental and are a medium-to-long-term strategy," said Chris Scheuring, California Farm Bureau Federation Natural Resources and Environmenal Division managing counsel. "Efficient technology will clearly be one way of addressing water shortages. But farmers certainly aren't able to conserve their way out of the current crisis. And we know California must develop additional water supplies to avoid chronic shortages in years to come."

He added that California farms such as Stamoules Produce continue to support irrigation research and adopt technology, as well as hire highly trained specialists to manage irrigation practices.

Dees said water is a big expense and it's hard to gauge how much water or money farmers should expect for 2010 crops. As a result, it's hard to plan and gain the financing needed to keep farming. Stamoules will be cutting back on planted acreage, Dees said.
"Without water, there is no crop," he said.

The crops grown on the ranch require an investment of about $4,000 an acre to grow and harvest and, Dees said, the farm has made a considerable, ongoing investment in water-efficiency equipment.

For Stamoules Produce, irrigation efficiency includes using buried drip tubing, in some cases drip lines that have been in the ground for a decade or more, set 10 inches deep, just at the root zone for the crops grown on the farm. The drip lines are buried beneath 80-inch-wide beds with two drip lines set 28 inches apart in the center of the bed.

Planting and cultivation on the year-round operation are done with satellite-guided tractors that operate within the furrows and maintain equipment accuracy within a fraction of an inch of the drip lines, but still do not disturb them. Irrigation is triggered by a sophisticated sensor system that takes into account a variety of climatic conditions and crop needs.

Another innovation is the installation of seamless, thin-wall tubing with molded emitters. The seamless design helps prevent rupturing and a 10-mil thickness provides multi-year endurance.

Emitters are molded inside the tubing and Stamoules uses a standard emitter spacing of 18 inches. A large emitter flow path helps prevent plugging and has mini-filters that trap small particles.

"We haven't had a clogging problem," Dees said. "But we still use overhead sprinkling for germination. That's because the precise, computer-controlled system doesn't use enough water to leach salts, which can affect germination."

In the past, the farm used about 3.5 to 4 acre-feet of water per crop. Today the average is closer to 1.5 to 2 acre-feet.
Bell pepper yields, for example, have gotten a particularly big boost using the new technology. Dees said more precise water management meets plant needs at different growth stages and harvest crews can work even while fields are being irrigated.
"Our quality is good right to the end," he said. "Our honeydew melons have yields 25 to 30 percent more using buried drip lines. Sweet corn production increased 15 percent."

Dees said the farm has put 1,500 acres on an air-injection system.
"Not only does it keep the lines and emitters clear, but it also provides additional air to the root zone," he said. "That helps combat compaction."

Soil scientist Dave Goorahoo, who works with the Center for Irrigation Technology at California State University, Fresno, has conducted field trials with Stamoules. Recently he has been working on salinity research and management projects because, as less water is used, salt buildup in the soil is a problem.

"We've been developing a variety of technologies for more efficient water use that take into consideration the variability in fields of soils, crop types, climate and water availability," Goorahoo said. "It's about getting water on the crops in the right amount when it's needed."

With water supply reliability uncertain on farms, he said, "we hope the technology will continue to be a growing part of the solution for agriculture and the state's water supply."

But, he emphasized, automatic systems don't remove the need to check fields in person.
"If you don't understand what's going on with your crops and your land, you can't really manage the technology for its maximum benefit," Goorahoo said.

"Technology is a tool and when used appropriately, such as here at Stamoules Produce, it can not only save water, it also can increase yields and improve profits. But, you've got to be smart about deploying the technology," he said.
More information on emerging irrigation technology is available from the Center for Irrigation Technology at cati.csufresno.edu/cit.
(Kate Campbell is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at kcampbell@cfbf.com.)

Farm Industry News asked Nebraska Tractor Test Lab Director Roger Hoy and Assistant Director Dave Morgan what factors to use to compare the fuel efficiency of different tractors. You can use these parameters to determine how your models rank.

1. Go to http://tractortestlab.unl.edu. Click on “Test Reports.” The Web site shows all makes and models tested at the lab since 1999. (Hard-copy reports for tractors tested before 1999 are available for purchase. Contact Nebraska Tractor Test Laboratory, Box 830832, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583-0832, 402/472-2442, tractortestlab@unl.edu.)

2. Click on make and model of tractor. This will bring up the corresponding test report.

3. Check “Chassis: Type” to determine tractor category (2-wd, front wheel assist, 4-wd, or track). This information is included in the narrative text next to the charts on the site. We ranked tractors in two categories: row-crop tractors (2-wd/front wheel assist) and high-horsepower 4-wd/track tractors.

4. Check horsepower to determine size category. We used PTO horsepower (at rated engine speed) to determine if the tractor belonged to the category of row crop (150 to 200 hp) or high-horsepower 4-wd/track (300+ hp). (See lab chart called “Power Takeoff Performance.”) This is the number used by all manufacturers to verify a claim.

5. Find the rating of horsepower-hours per gallon. The fuel consumption measurement, horsepower-hours per gallon (hp-hr./gal.), has become the standard used for comparing the efficiency of all agricultural tractor models. Measured directly, it means that burning one gallon of fuel in the tractor at full load and at rated engine speed produces a certain amount of horsepower for an hour. The higher the number, the greater the fuel efficiency; that is, more work is being done with a given amount of fuel.

We looked at that rating in two performance tests: power takeoff and drawbar performance. We used results from the “PTO Performance Chart” to establish the fuel-efficiency rankings. The lab says the PTO rating is a good indicator because it is one that is calculated for all tractors and it is always run at the maximum level. However, results from the drawbar performance test are also included, and depending on how you plan to use the tractor, it may be a better indicator of fuel efficiency for some tractors — for example, the very-high-horsepower tractors used primarily for their brute pulling power of, say, deep tillage implements. On the other hand, if the tractor is used primarily for PTO work, then the PTO rating will be your best indicator because it will not be likely to change or won't be as much affected by the size or weight of the implement the tractor is pulling. If you use the tractor for both PTO and tillage work, then consider both ratings in your decision.

PTO performance is measured at several different power levels and speeds, but for comparison purposes, the factor most farmers are interested in is maximum power at rated engine speed. This is the highest power level that the tractor can sustain over a long term and is measured in horsepower. Newer tractors usually have an operating range that includes maximum power at a speed lower than rated. Also, with modern high torque/constant power engines, the power at rated PTO speed is usually similar to the power at the rated engine speed.

Like PTO performance, drawbar performance is measured at different rates of pull and in different gears. Power measured at 75% of pull at maximum power is a reasonable reflection of performance during typical heavy fieldwork. At 75% of pull at maximum power, you will still have some reserve for heavy spots in the field. We list the horsepower-hours per gallon in “third gear” (to show maximum drawbar pull) and “eighth gear” (to show maximum power).

Drawbar tests are conducted on concrete or asphalt test tracks, which allow for consistency in comparison. As a result, the numbers in the test reports are not exactly the numbers you might get in field conditions.
The drawbar ratings listed are for “ballasted” runs. If a ballasted test was not run, then results from the unballasted test (at 1,800 rpm or the lowest engine speed) were used.

In cases where ratings are identical (for example, Case IH and New Holland 4-wd tractors), only one of the tractors was tested and the results serve for both because there was no performance difference between the two.