Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

wheelfront.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 814 posts

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#351

Post by coryrc »

holysantamaria wrote: post #192

What prevents these no tech tractors to be electric?

They get used in burst cycles -- like 10 days straight at harvest time, other times not started for months. Battery cost per kwh used is very low amortized over its full lifespan, but if you only use it to 1% of its capability your costs are now 100x higher.

Now, hang a high voltage wire down from a big-ass catenary, so you don't need batteries, and it'll be cheaper upfront and in use, but nobody does that because of 1. safety 2. if everybody did it the grid would need upgrades

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#352

Post by nothinkjustai »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #26

Danielle Smith never met a corporate shill she could say no to I predict 6 months before John Deer gets the Alberta UCP on the line and gets a law passed that bans "unsafe tractors" (or the like)

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#353

Post by fineIllregister »

throwaway85825 wrote: post #290
jadbox wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

- 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.

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#354

Post by PunchyHamster »

beAbU wrote: post #207
adamcharnock wrote: post #134

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 i…

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)

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

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#355

Post by PunchyHamster »

MisterTea wrote: post #99
Hasz wrote: post #20

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.

> 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 loca…

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

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#356

Post by PunchyHamster »

9cb14c1ec0 wrote: post #350
Hasz wrote: post #20

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.

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.

More that even if there was suitable replacement, that costs money vs tractor they already have. Those machines are in service for decades

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#357

Post by nothinkjustai »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #82

Is part of the appeal due to the fact that being remanufactured engines they don't need modern emissions control, aka Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF)? Farmers hate DEF.

That’s exactly what I was thinking. And it makes me wonder if the future is manufactures repurposing older engines in new shells to bypass the increasingly more regulatory environments they operate in. Kind of a funny thing to think about.

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#358

Post by tempest_ »

MisterTea wrote: post #176
kube-system wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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.

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.

Re: Alberta startup sells no-tech tractors for half price

#360

Post by yesbabyyes »

adamcharnock wrote: post #134

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 i…

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.

Post reply on HN