Would’ve, Could’ve, Should’ve There are plenty of times in life when one can look back and say, “What if…?”. Anyone who is a fan of Allis-Chalmers tractors — and especially anyone who worked for Allis-Chalmers — can certainly justify that thought as it pertains to the A-C Model 8095. To be fair, don’t feel bad if you’ve never heard of the 8095. It was one of those tractors remembered only in history as one that never went into production. Scheduled for release in 1986, the 8095 would have been more than the largest rigid-frame tractor ever produced by Allis-Chalmers. It would have also been the industry’s first 200-horsepower front-wheel-assist tractor … leaving one to wonder, “What if Allis-Chalmers would have survived and the 8095 had been introduced to the market? Would it have changed the future of the company?” As the late Norm Swinford, a member of Allis-Chalmers’ marketing department for 30 years, recalled in his book, AllisChalmers Farm Equipment 19141985, the previous 7000 Series tractors had already established Allis-Chalmers’ credentials as a builder of large, modern farm tractors, and the new 8000 Series had not only upheld that reputation, but had further enhanced it. 46 July /August ISSUE 034
2014
“They had performance, reliability and features equal to any in the industry, and were gaining acceptance as customers learned more about them,” he recalled. “There was one crucial factor, however, that the 8000 Series did not have — that of good timing.” American agriculture was already headed into one of the most severe recessions since the 1930s by the time the 8000 Series was introduced in 1982. So even though the 8000 Series incorporated nearly all the improvements
The Allis-Chalmers Model 8095 and what could have been for both the tractor and the company. b y Thar r an E. G aines
and refinements needed in the 7000 Series, the entire line was handicapped from the start. Of course, the final nail in the coffin for the 8095 was the purchase of Allis-Chalmers Corporation by KloecknerHumboldt-Deutz A. G. (KHD) in 1985. Mechanically, the smaller 8000 Series models were similar to the 7000 Series models, with horsepower ratings coming in at 107.4 horsepower for the 8010; 133.7 for the 8030; 152.4 for the 8050, and 170.7 for the 8070.
One of the best features, though, was a totally new cab with “more of everything,” Swinford said. “It had more room, more glass, more cooling, more ventilation, more seat adjustment, more convenient controls, more filtering capacity — all of which would add up to more operator comfort, convenience and satisfaction.” As one example, the width of the cab at shoulder height was increased from 49 inches to 60 inches. In the meantime, the door width was increased
by nine inches to 40 inches and glass area was increased by 24 percent to 52 square feet. “The climatic environment was vastly improved in the 8000 Series cab, as well,” Swinford continued, noting that the 8095 prototype used the same cab. “Blower output was increased 55 percent for better pressurization and the heater output went to 25,000 BTU. The air-conditioner capacity was increased by 45 percent to assure the specified temperature differential required in hot climates.”
Front-wheel-assist was gaining acceptance on the 8000 Series, too, even though it often took a dealer demonstration to sell the $7,500 option. Engineering and marketing tests had already shown that a Model 8050 with front-wheel-assist could cover 25 to 34 percent more acres on the same amount of fuel. Consequently, an even larger model that could develop more than 200 PTO horsepower and deliver it to the ground with the assistance of a standard powered front axle should have been, as Swinford once described it, “a locomotive without rails.” “Imagine an Allis-Chalmers 8070 front-wheel-assist tractor with an extended frame and a wheelbase of 120 inches with dual 20.8-42 rear tires and 18.428 on the front,” he added. This compared to a 106-inch wheelbase on the Model 8070. Similarly, the 8070 had smaller tires, which measured 18.4-38 on the rear and 10:00-16 on the front. The 8095’s 20.8-42 tires weren’t just large, though. Supposedly, they also were a July /August 2014 ISSUE 034
47