New Holland 489 Haybine Manual

Can anyone explain why the 488 is significantly more popular than the 489? They were both made by the same company of course. Is it just the design of the machine? 489 has the floating head and rolls while the 488 is “all one unit”. Is the gearbox and drive in the 488 superior somehow to the 489? I am looking for haybines, can see the 488’s are maybe 15% more than the 489’s but other than word of mouth, am wondering why the 488 is regarded better than the 489. Does the 489 have some fatal flaw?

I will say 488's are a lot better than 489's! 489's are not easy to work on! I have a 488 and a 469 the 2 best haybines going but the 488 was my back up machine intill the 469 bit the dust had the 469 for years and years! I picked the 488 up at a auction back in 1995 and I still have it today I only had to replace a chain and skid bar and that's it!

The 488 is a much simpler machine, a lot easier to work on. I have a 479 which is very similar to the 488.

Got to come to the Defense of the NH 489 ,I have run serveral different brands , After running them over 25 years , The 489 is My Choice,I would call them the cadilac , But Cadilacs are Junk nowadays , Disc bines inrocky fields BTDT !!!, with 5209 N Idea , Evry time a SINGLE blade bolt breaks ! blade, bolt,Clamp and keeper will run over $15 to replace ONLY ONE SETUP , , unless You want to take the time trying to find trhe parts it thru all over the field , I haveFound them, but its not worth the time , So how can thart be more reasonable to keep one of the discbines running than a NH 489 , BELIEVE me , Tried and TRUE, Dollar for Dollar Year After YEAR, Acre For Acre , TOn For TON of fine Quality hay , and hours of maintenance time the 489 is the Best Machine to cut Hay .

Never run a 488 but have dealt with a 489 for several years. I find it a difficult machine to work on and has a lots of u-joints, chains, belts etc. Our neighbours are still running it but costs them a good chunk of change each year in repairs.

I bought a disc mower conditioner. I like the simplicity. We have rocky fields and it eats knives but they change in seconds vs fighting with the haybine.

Shale said: (quoted from post at 07:38:16 12/07/09) Can anyone explain why the 488 is significantly more popular than the 489? They were both made by the same company of course. Is it just the design of the machine? 489 has the floating head and rolls while the 488 is “all one unit”. Is the gearbox and drive in the 488 superior somehow to the 489? I am looking for haybines, can see the 488’s are maybe 15% more than the 489’s but other than word of mouth, am wondering why the 488 is regarded better than the 489. Does the 489 have some fatal flaw?

Around here there are quite a few 489's that have lost the gearbox outta them. In fact they have a reputation with quite a few farmers particularly the newer units for doing this. Older 489's didn't do this as much for some reason from what the guys I've talked to say. Never dealt with a 489 personally so can't say from experience.

Around here the 489's cost more new so there were a lot more 488's sold. I heard 'a poor man has poor ways' more times than I can recall. Not to say that either machine is 'poor' but we all know people who would drive 3 hours to save 50 bucks.
This post was edited by kyhayman at 08:05:46 12/07/09.

I've seen alot of 489's have issues with the frames breaking I believe where the header pivots. Could be operator error????? They look like they would be harder to work on too but I've never worked on one so I can say for sure on that. I've run 469's and 488's and found them to be ok machines. I don't run 9' equipment anymore but wouldn't mind finding a cheap 479 or 488 for a back up machine.