To modernize the conventional rice post production technology and reduce grain losses, a transition toward the wet-paddy threshing system has been strongly demanded. The head-feeding type thresher with pneumatic separation has been used dominantly for threshing dried-paddy, but some adverse effects in separation performance for threshing wet-paddy is encounterred. In order to solve the problems, the development of thresher with an additional oscillating sieve to the conventional pneumatic separation has been recommanded. This study was intended to evaluate the separating performance of thresher with oscillating sieve which was attached additionally to the conventional auto-thresher equipped with separation system of blower and suction fan. For different feed rates and rice varieties, wet-and dry-material were tested with threshers attached with and without oscillating sieve. Results of the study are summarized as follows: 1. When the feed rates were 480 and 640 kg/hr, there was no statistically significant difference in power reqirements between the threshers with and without an additional sieve device for both dry-and wet-threshing. However, when the feed rate was 960 kg/hr, power requirements of thresher without sieve were greater for wet-paddy threshing than the thresher with the additional sieve separator by about 20% points. 2. With additional oscillating sieve device, the ratios of total weights of whole grains including grains with branch let and damaged grains to the total output did not show statistical difference among the feed rates. However, with pneumatic separation the ratio was decreased as the level of feed rate increased. 3. The total amount of grains with branchlet (including broken panicle) increased with the moisture content. For both the wet-and dry-material threshing with the additional oscillating sieve, the percent of grains with branchlet to the total output decreased greatly as the feed rate increased. 4. The output of the damaged grains increased as moisture content decreased. Especially, for the dry-paddy threshing, the additional sieve separating device produced more damaged grains than the pneumatic separation at all feed rates. 5. Generally, for dry paddy threshing, the separating performance of the thresher with the additional sieve device was better at all feed rates, showing greater difference with increasing feed rates. 6. Separating losses were greater with the pneumatic than sieve separation for both the wet-and dry-threshing. 7. The overall comparison of separating performance of threshers tested with and without an additional sieve device showed that the former was more effective than the latter for the dry-material threshing. However, for the wet-paddy threshing, the separation performance with a sieve device was better than the pneumatic only when the feed rate was high.