Combine Concave Showdown: Case IH vs John Deere - Real Farm Results

  Combine concaves have remained virtually unchanged for the past 50 years, despite being the heart of threshing performance in modern harvesting equipment. However, this stagnation in design has created a significant performance gap for farmers using standard OEM equipment. We've witnessed a farming revolution with the introduction of aftermarket solutions like the XPR 3+ system, which allows operators to harvest at 180% capacity compared to OEM machines—with no loss and superior grain quality.

Surprisingly, farmers using these innovative combine concaves report cleaner separation and increased grain capture across multiple crop types. In fact, many have experienced a full combine class improvement simply by installing the XPR 3 system, eliminating the need to spend $750,000 on equipment upgrades. When we compare Case IH and John Deere side-by-side (including models like John Deere S780s, S790s and Case IH 8250s, 9250s), both manufacturers show remarkable performance improvements with these aftermarket concave systems. Throughout this article, we'll examine how these innovative concave designs are transforming harvest efficiency for both machine lines and help you determine which combination might deliver the best results for your specific farming operation.

The Problem with Traditional Combine Concaves

 

Traditional combine concaves present multiple headaches for farmers across various crops and conditions. First and foremost, many farmers face the "plugging predicament" where concaves become clogged during harvest operations. This common issue prevents threshed grain from falling through the concaves, forcing more grain to travel rearward along the rotor. Consequently, this overloads the separating capacity and creates significant rotor loss.

Additionally, grain that falls farther back along the rotor puts unnecessary stress on the combine's cleaning system, substantially reducing overall capacity. The plugging problem becomes particularly troublesome when harvesting high-moisture crops, creating a frustrating barrier to efficient operations.

One of the most significant pain points with conventional concave systems involves the necessity for multiple concave sets. Most farmers require two to three different concave configurations depending on the crop and harvest conditions. These typically include round bar concaves, large wire concaves, and small wire concaves—each designed for specific crop types but requiring substantial downtime to switch between them.

Furthermore, the process of changing concaves between crops can consume hours of valuable harvest time. As one farmer aptly described it: "Think about how stressful it would be if every morning you woke up, you had to change the tires on your vehicle for that day's weather conditions while trying not to be late for work". This challenge multiplies when farmers need to switch back and forth between crops during a single harvest season.

Notably, even with competitor aftermarket options, farmers often face products requiring multiple adjustments between crops, which increases downtime and compromises performance. These traditional systems frequently struggle with consistency when managing high-yield environments or transitioning between different crop types.

The financial impact adds up quickly—rotor loss typically ranges from 2 to 5 bushels per acre. For perspective, on 1,000 acres of soybeans, this loss could represent up to $32,000 in value. Ultimately, these shortcomings create a clear need for more versatile and efficient concave solutions that can maintain performance across various crops without extensive reconfiguration.

How XPR 3 Solves the Concave Challenge

The revolutionary XPR 3 concave system represents a breakthrough in combine harvesting technology by eliminating the need for seasonal concave changes. Unlike traditional systems that force operators to choose between small wire or round bar configurations, the XPR 3 ingeniously merges the strengths of both designs into one versatile solution.

At the heart of this innovation is a uniquely engineered bar that maximizes threshing contact while keeping the rotor full. This patented design slows crop material down, promoting grain-on-grain threshing rather than damaging grain-metal contact. The system features extended-wear threshing bars for greater durability plus a heavier, more robust 3/8" Xtreme separation grate.

The performance improvements are substantial:

Generates 30% more horsepower

Provides 140% more threshing area

Eliminates rotor loss of 2-5 bushels per acre

Increases ground speed by 1-3 mph

Finishes harvest 15% faster

Accordingly, many farmers report completing an additional 40-50 acres daily during harvest—approximately 350-400 acres weekly. This efficiency gain essentially equals upgrading to a larger combine class without the massive investment.

The XPR 3's versatility truly shines in multi-crop operations. For farms transitioning between hard-threshing wheat and high-moisture corn (up to 30%) in the same day, the system performs flawlessly without plugging issues. As one farmer noted: "It closes that window gap for me where it wouldn't be as much moving of the machine during the day as the moisture changed".

Perhaps most impressive is the financial impact. By eliminating rotor loss alone, farmers can save approximately $30,000 on 1,000 acres. Coupled with cleaner grain samples featuring fewer splits, fines, and cracks, the XPR 3 delivers both quantity and quality improvements across wheat, soybeans, corn, milo, sunflowers, and other crops.

Case IH vs John Deere: Which Performs Better with XPR 3?

 

Field tests comparing XPR 3 concaves in both Case IH and John Deere combines reveal fascinating performance patterns. When examining these industry giants side-by-side (S780s, S790s and Case IH 8250s, 9250s), both machines delivered exceptional results with the aftermarket concave system.

The side-by-side testing exported data from John Deere's Ultimate Data and Field Analyzer along with elevator tickets, showing that both manufacturers achieved what engineers called "seed quality" grain samples—even while harvesting at 180% capacity of standard OEM machines.

For Case IH combines specifically, the XPR 3 system seamlessly integrates the best elements of round bar and small wire concaves. The patented threshing bar makes even hard-threshing wheat effortless, producing fewer whitecaps while simultaneously reducing foreign material. Case IH operators report substantial capacity increases compared to standard small wire concaves.

Meanwhile, John Deere users highlight specific operational advantages. One S680 operator paired with a 16-row corn head and 40ft flex draper found that XPR 3 concaves "reduced rotor loss considerably in wheat as well as reduce the amount of power the combine was using". Afterward checking the power cast tailboard, he discovered only two kernels where typically the ground would be covered—illustrating the system's efficiency.

• For both manufacturers, the XPR 3 concaves allow:
• Lower rotor speeds, reducing grain damage and fuel consumption
• Wider concave clearances without sacrificing threshing quality
• Improved grain tank samples across all crops

Equally impressive, one farmer using the system reported fields so clean that "you couldn't find a volunteer plant" where neighboring fields showed "TONS of volunteer corn". This benefit applies consistently across both machine lines.

Ultimately, both Case IH and John Deere perform admirably with XPR 3 concaves, with farmers reporting nearly identical quality improvements. The primary differentiator tends to be how operators adjust specific machine settings to maximize the concave system's capabilities within each manufacturer's unique rotor design.

Conclusion

After comparing Case IH and John Deere combines with the XPR 3 concave system, one thing becomes crystal clear – modern farming has finally broken free from decades of stagnant concave design. Throughout our analysis, we've seen how both manufacturer's machines achieve exceptional results when equipped with this aftermarket solution.

The evidence speaks for itself. Farmers using either brand experience substantially increased capacity, cleaner grain samples, and significantly reduced rotor loss. Additionally, the financial benefits cannot be overlooked – saving up to $30,000 on 1,000 acres simply by eliminating waste makes this upgrade a straightforward decision for many operations.

What truly sets the XPR 3 system apart, however, is its versatility across crop types. The days of swapping concaves between wheat and corn or adjusting for changing moisture conditions have essentially ended. This single-solution approach saves countless hours during critical harvest windows while delivering superior performance regardless of the crop.

Case IH and John Deere machines both demonstrate remarkable improvements when paired with the XPR 3 system. The primary differences stem from each manufacturer's unique rotor design rather than any limitation of the concave system itself. Consequently, farmers can expect similar quality improvements regardless of their preferred combine color.

The farming industry often focuses on massive equipment upgrades to improve productivity. Nevertheless, this comparison reveals how a targeted improvement to the threshing system can effectively transform harvest efficiency without requiring a $750,000 investment in new machinery. For operations running either Case IH or John Deere equipment, the XPR 3 concave system certainly deserves serious consideration before the next harvest season begins.