Sponsored By
indiana Prairie Farmer Logo

How Seed Shut-Off Clutches Pay for Themselves in One YearHow Seed Shut-Off Clutches Pay for Themselves in One Year

Those who crunch the numbers say it's a technology you can't afford to be without.

Tom Bechman 1

May 23, 2014

2 Min Read

Take a close look at the picture with this article. The main rows of the field are to the right. The end rows are to the left. Note there are a few stalks of corn one row and in some cases two rows into the end rows. That's it – there are no more stalks because no more corn was planted there.

This farmer spent the money to equip his 24-row planter with clutches to achieve automatic shut-off. He calculates in seed savings alone on approximately 3,500 acres of crops, he can pay for the feature in one season.

Related: Row Shut-Offs on Planters are Growing Technology


Sound far-fetched? It's not. A University of Kentucky ag economist prepared a pay-off analysis in 2013 for Indiana Prairie Farmer and found that along with auto shut-off on sprayer booms, these technologies pay for themselves as quickly or quicker than any other technologies out there.

Why? Seed is approximately $3 per 1,000 seeds. That's if you buy seed for $240 per bag.  If the shut-offs save you 3% in seed, that's $9 per unit, or 80,000 kernels, saved. You would save more than $5,000 on those 1,750 acres. That doesn't account for extra savings on point rows or fields with obstacles where pairs of rows shut off to avoid overplanting as you go around the obstacle.

That's in a rectangular field. Some objected to the article a year ago because they claimed that in rectangular fields they wouldn't save money. If you walk a normal field and the corn from the long rows goes six to eight rows into the end rows, you're wasting more seed than you think.

Related: Plant the Corn and Respect the Waterway

It also doesn't account for reduced yield on those thicker rows. Most hybrids aren't ready for 64,000 kernels per acre, and yields may actually drop.

Some also believe 3% is conservative, and that 4% or even 5% is a better estimate. Do your own math and compare it to the cost of converting your own planter. If you farm fewer acres, it may take longer. On the other hand if you run a smaller planter, that cuts the cost outlay that must be paid back.

About the Author(s)

Tom Bechman 1

Editor, Indiana Prairie Farm

Tom Bechman is an important cog in the Farm Progress machinery. In addition to serving as editor of Indiana Prairie Farmer, Tom is nationally known for his coverage of Midwest agronomy, conservation, no-till farming, farm management, farm safety, high-tech farming and personal property tax relief. His byline appears monthly in many of the 18 state and regional farm magazines published by Farm Progress.

"I consider it my responsibility and opportunity as a farm magazine editor to supply useful information that will help today's farm families survive and thrive," the veteran editor says.

Tom graduated from Whiteland (Ind.) High School, earned his B.S. in animal science and agricultural education from Purdue University in 1975 and an M.S. in dairy nutrition two years later. He first joined the magazine as a field editor in 1981 after four years as a vocational agriculture teacher.

Tom enjoys interacting with farm families, university specialists and industry leaders, gathering and sifting through loads of information available in agriculture today. "Whenever I find a new idea or a new thought that could either improve someone's life or their income, I consider it a personal challenge to discover how to present it in the most useful form, " he says.

Subscribe to receive top agriculture news
Be informed daily with these free e-newsletters

You May Also Like