• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

1979 Tucker 2742

Blackfoot Tucker

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
The wide tracks do have big pros and cons. A narrower track would be nice in many regards but this is a big heavy machine. Would it be efficient with less track?View attachment 96107http://www.forumsforums.com/3_9/attachment.php?attachmentid=96109&stc=1&d=1518539989

In terms of flotation, measured as pounds per square inch (and assuming the length of the carriers x the width of the tracks x 4) the 1600 series despite their narrower tracks actually have the lowest PSI of the rubber belted Tuckers. Yes, the wide track machines have a lot more surface area, but they weigh quite a bit more, too.

For example 1600 series machines used Dana 60 axles. I think the 2742 used much heavier duty axles from IH. The frames are beefier and have many more gussets and frame support members. I think the fifth wheel plates are quite a bit stouter, and the extra grouser length x 124 adds up, too. The 1600 series standard engine was the Chrysler Industrial 318. But a 2742 would have a more powerful (and heavier) engine.

What's uber-cool about your machine is the cab. You have some fantastic possibilities, sir!
 
Top