-
This community needs YOUR help today!
With the ever-increasing fees of maintaining our vibrant community (servers, software, domains, email), we need help.
We need more Supporting Members today.Please invest back into this community to help spread our love and knowledge of all aspects of IH Cub Cadet and other garden tractors.
Why Join?
- Exclusive Access: Gain entry to private forums.
- Special Perks: Enjoy enhanced account features that enrich your experience, including the ability to disable ads.
- Free Gifts: Sign up annually and receive exclusive IH Cub Cadet Tractor Forum decals directly to your door!
This is your chance to make a difference. Become a Supporting Member today:
Archive through February 08, 2012
- Thread starter nbartee
- Start date
Help Support IH Cub Cadet Forum:
mfrade
Well-known member
Last year the EPA mandated all oil would lose zinc, sulfer and "ash", part of their get back to purity program. Our tractors are next and then later on human beings will be prohibited! 8-(
proessler
Well-known member
Kraig & Allen, Ditto for me TOO...
hydroharry
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
- Messages
- 4,468
- displayname
- Harry Bursell
Bill J - as best I can see your 8 good ISO-mounts look pretty good to me. As long as they are not "squishy" I'd go ahead and re-use them. I'd pick the 4 best of the 8 for the bottom and the other 4 for the top. As far as which way they go on the steel insert (washer stem) it's your picture "large end up as shown on the left". The ISO-mount has a fine ring of rubber covered steel on the large end. This is the end that goes against the ISO-bar, and that fine rubber covered steel fits just inside the ISO-bar hole, and keeps the ISO-mount in alignment. I keep wondering if you found Charlie's FAQ No. 23. which shows a picture at the very bottom of how the ISO mounts go together. I think you have gotten to it since you keep mentioning you're gonna definitely do the cradle mod. But just in case you haven't seen it yet, you have to click on the FAQ comment at the top of this page, then click on comment at the top of the page that says "... Check out Charlie's FAQ at cubfaq.com", then scrowl down to no. 23 and look at the last picture.
Now, on the 44A and 44C deck, I'm hoping someone else can help with that question but the following may help. It's not clear to me if you have a "sub-frame" for your tractor. It will have a 2 pulley mule drive on the front and towards the back is a fork style set up. This mule drive hangs below the frame of the tractor (i.e. sub-frame). The forks on the subframe should be about 11" apart and these fit into the 2 elongated eye bolts on the front of the mowing deck. Your 1650 should have the 44A deck. Those eyebolts on the front of a 44C deck about 6" apart are set up for an '82 series tractor sub-frame. They do usually have an additional mounting hole so you could move 1 over and make it about 11" apart. But my son had a 44C deck on a 1650 and never could get a really good belt fit so I'd definitely go with the 44A deck housing. As far as the pulley, some 44A had the speed up pulley and some later versions had a pulley to comply with the Lawn Mower Manufacturers Standards for blade speed (slower speed). The pulleys should be for a 1/2" wide belt. Your 44C deck will probably have pulleys for a 5/8" wide belt which was used on the '82 series tractors. Hope this is helpful.
Ok guys, please make any correction comments as neccessary. I can't alway be right.
Kraig (under edit) - I just bought new glasses, but thanks since it still help
Hydro Harry
Old Cubs Never Die
Now, on the 44A and 44C deck, I'm hoping someone else can help with that question but the following may help. It's not clear to me if you have a "sub-frame" for your tractor. It will have a 2 pulley mule drive on the front and towards the back is a fork style set up. This mule drive hangs below the frame of the tractor (i.e. sub-frame). The forks on the subframe should be about 11" apart and these fit into the 2 elongated eye bolts on the front of the mowing deck. Your 1650 should have the 44A deck. Those eyebolts on the front of a 44C deck about 6" apart are set up for an '82 series tractor sub-frame. They do usually have an additional mounting hole so you could move 1 over and make it about 11" apart. But my son had a 44C deck on a 1650 and never could get a really good belt fit so I'd definitely go with the 44A deck housing. As far as the pulley, some 44A had the speed up pulley and some later versions had a pulley to comply with the Lawn Mower Manufacturers Standards for blade speed (slower speed). The pulleys should be for a 1/2" wide belt. Your 44C deck will probably have pulleys for a 5/8" wide belt which was used on the '82 series tractors. Hope this is helpful.
Ok guys, please make any correction comments as neccessary. I can't alway be right.
Kraig (under edit) - I just bought new glasses, but thanks since it still help
Hydro Harry
Old Cubs Never Die
sblunier
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2006
- Messages
- 4,829
- displayname
- Steve Blunier "Mr. Plow" (Central IL)
Harry,
Yes, my engines all blow a little bit of black smoke on a quick no load throttle up....BUT, they respond quickly and positively when a load comes on the governor. At idle, slap the PTO switch and the engines just bark once as the PTO implement spins up....no stumbling. Hit the snow pile with the thrower running at WOT and the engine just barks a little and eats the snow...no need to gradually come into it.
I will admit to having nice tight carbs on my stuff, either little wear, or bushing kits...they are necessary for good tuning and crisp throttle response.
Wayne,
When plowing with a 12hp gear drive and 19T second, you can out run guys with the 16T or 17T second and still not need to be all the way down in grandma 1st. Backing out of the throttle a little fixes that, but like you, I would never do it if it was lugging hard throttled back in 2nd(you are correct, in that case that is exactly why you have gears). On the hydros, if you are pulling it even moderately hard WOT should be used IMHO.
Oil:
Mine get Valvoline 30W in the summer and Motorcraft synthetic blend 10W-30 in the winter. Like many others, I think the new oils have solved our need for "Low Ash" oil.
In air colled engines just remember to "change early, change often" and run a little MMO in the gas....then all should be well
Yes, my engines all blow a little bit of black smoke on a quick no load throttle up....BUT, they respond quickly and positively when a load comes on the governor. At idle, slap the PTO switch and the engines just bark once as the PTO implement spins up....no stumbling. Hit the snow pile with the thrower running at WOT and the engine just barks a little and eats the snow...no need to gradually come into it.
I will admit to having nice tight carbs on my stuff, either little wear, or bushing kits...they are necessary for good tuning and crisp throttle response.
Wayne,
When plowing with a 12hp gear drive and 19T second, you can out run guys with the 16T or 17T second and still not need to be all the way down in grandma 1st. Backing out of the throttle a little fixes that, but like you, I would never do it if it was lugging hard throttled back in 2nd(you are correct, in that case that is exactly why you have gears). On the hydros, if you are pulling it even moderately hard WOT should be used IMHO.
Oil:
Mine get Valvoline 30W in the summer and Motorcraft synthetic blend 10W-30 in the winter. Like many others, I think the new oils have solved our need for "Low Ash" oil.
In air colled engines just remember to "change early, change often" and run a little MMO in the gas....then all should be well
hydroharry
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
- Messages
- 4,468
- displayname
- Harry Bursell
Steve - ya I'm with yah, a little black smoke never hurt anything cept the paint some. As long as there is no stumble or coughing your method sounds good to me, and it's the way I want mine to run.
Now, on the oil I remember ole KenTUCK talking about the zinc already being removed/reduced but it was needed in these engines to keep the valves lubricated. I believe it was recommended to stay with oils that met the old standards of SG or SH, or if you could find it like SF (and I believe NAPA was still selling some brands still listing SF only). Unfortunately if you read the labels on most of the current oils I believe they all say they meet "all" previous standards - that's what I can't figure out. Do they really or does the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) have some work around in the standards that allows this to be indicated even tho the zinc sulfer and ash are no longer in the new oils?
I really hate starting another oil debate, and I'll probably just keep on using the Valvoline SAE30 anyway. They used to have it named "Super HPO" but now it's "Premium Conventional" (I guess cause those items are removed).
Mike - on your EPA info, are you saying the EPA claimed zinc, sulfer and ash were all impurities?
Hydro Harry
Old Cubs Never Die (but they still need a little zinc)
Now, on the oil I remember ole KenTUCK talking about the zinc already being removed/reduced but it was needed in these engines to keep the valves lubricated. I believe it was recommended to stay with oils that met the old standards of SG or SH, or if you could find it like SF (and I believe NAPA was still selling some brands still listing SF only). Unfortunately if you read the labels on most of the current oils I believe they all say they meet "all" previous standards - that's what I can't figure out. Do they really or does the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) have some work around in the standards that allows this to be indicated even tho the zinc sulfer and ash are no longer in the new oils?
I really hate starting another oil debate, and I'll probably just keep on using the Valvoline SAE30 anyway. They used to have it named "Super HPO" but now it's "Premium Conventional" (I guess cause those items are removed).
Mike - on your EPA info, are you saying the EPA claimed zinc, sulfer and ash were all impurities?
Hydro Harry
Old Cubs Never Die (but they still need a little zinc)
HPO = HYDRO POWER ONLY!
I see HPO in Harry's post, but no where do I see a GDR except in yours.
mfrade
Well-known member
Harry, Like lead in gasoline, the EPA decided these "contaminants" needed to be reduced / eliminated! All new flat tappet camshafts are at severe risk at break-in due to the reduced zinc content. Most new car engines have gone to roller camshafts / lifters because of the lower "quality" oils.
Special break-in oils are now required to give time for the new parts to seat. I even use a single quart full time to keep some protection in my older car.
Special break-in oils are now required to give time for the new parts to seat. I even use a single quart full time to keep some protection in my older car.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2005
- Messages
- 812
- displayname
- Binder 1650
Harry - I'm going to try the "good" isolators - thanks for the info. Yes, I have seen the FAQ's you are pointing to. I have read much on the internet about the engine cradle upgrade and plan to do it.
Thanks!
Bill
Thanks!
Bill
MIKE - The zinc, ZDDP, was removed because like the lead in gasoline, it contaminated the cat. converters and increased emission output.
With little or no ZDDP even used broken-in cams/lifters are at risk. But these old Kohlers run so little valve spring pressure they don't need much ZDDP in the oil.
The guys making the most noise about removing the ZDDP are guys with hot-rodded classic cars with high lift cams and lots and lots of valve spring pressure so they can run really high RPM, 6000-7000 RPM. Those engines have 250-300+ pounds of closed spring pressure, Our Kohlers have 42 pounds if I remember correctly. Racers have switched to roller lifters & roller rockers if their rules allow them. Others have bought the ZDDP suppliments to add to their oil.
STEVE B. - Even a 10 HP GD with a 19T 2nd plows very well. The only time I ever had to run in 1st was @ PD #2. There were a few guys with Hydro's that boiled over the ground was pulling so hard. The ground was so hard I had problems getting traction so that slowed me even more. I could have used another 50# of weight.
With little or no ZDDP even used broken-in cams/lifters are at risk. But these old Kohlers run so little valve spring pressure they don't need much ZDDP in the oil.
The guys making the most noise about removing the ZDDP are guys with hot-rodded classic cars with high lift cams and lots and lots of valve spring pressure so they can run really high RPM, 6000-7000 RPM. Those engines have 250-300+ pounds of closed spring pressure, Our Kohlers have 42 pounds if I remember correctly. Racers have switched to roller lifters & roller rockers if their rules allow them. Others have bought the ZDDP suppliments to add to their oil.
STEVE B. - Even a 10 HP GD with a 19T 2nd plows very well. The only time I ever had to run in 1st was @ PD #2. There were a few guys with Hydro's that boiled over the ground was pulling so hard. The ground was so hard I had problems getting traction so that slowed me even more. I could have used another 50# of weight.
Luther, KENtucky is alive and kicking, just exchanged a few emails with him yesterday, but he has not logged in here since October.
mfrade
Well-known member
Close Denny, none of the big 3 are using a flat tappet cam! Spring pressures in the low hundreds (closed) are having failures, My street rod has wiped it's cam. It was a stock 302. I've since converted to a roller cam. I deal with EPA and several state DEP's and far to many of them have anything good to say about combustion engines / machines and lubricants. I know a few who would personnaly love to see us afoot! No exageration(sic), one of their next acts is for us all to prove where our oils are / went! They call it cradle to grave ownership! It's already in place for large consumers, wait'll it trickles into your backyard!
rlowe
Member
Valvoline VR-1 has enough ZDDP to keep my nearly 50 year old Corvette happy...
MIKE - That's BAD Bad news if that cradle-grave oil situation comes into effect.
Hope those people in the EPA commute about 60-70 miles each way like I did for over ten years. An economical car/truck becomes more than a luxury then.
Politicians better accept the fact that the economy runs on oil, and if they want to keep their cushy gov't jobs (at tax payer's expense) they better make sure the country has the energy to run the economy.
The closed valve spring pressure is important on the loading of the cam follower to the cam lobe, but lift and acceleration also effect the instantaneous loading.
Flat lobes on cams has always been a recurring problem. Once you get through the hard outer surface of the nose of the lobe they go flat quickly. Variaions in metalurgy, heat-treatment, etc have all caused the problem to occur again.
I'd say ALL car/truck/heavy equipment engines for the last 15 yrs have had roller rockers & cam followers. I know some imported small engine co's (Kawasaki for sure) have tried plastic cam lobes with poor results. I'm not aware of ANY engine built today that still uses flat tappets or hyd. lifters, but there may be some.
Funny and true story, company I drove over-the-road for also had owner/operators leased on pulling loads. The co's shop did some repair & service work on those trucks if the owner paid for it. One O-O had a "miss" in his 855 CID Cummins 350. He had Mr. Goodwrench look at it. One of the valve pushrods was close to an INCH shorter and all beat up on the rocker arm end. Needless to say the valve was not opening, therefore the miss. Then there was the other Cummins 350 that broke a wrist pin while at speed. The conn rod sawed the entire engine in half. Only thing keeping the two halves together was the top deck of the block & cyl. head and the crankshaft. That was in a tilt-cab truck, all that carnage was happening about a foot from the driver. I drove a few tilt-cab's but tried to stay with conventional cabs.
Hope those people in the EPA commute about 60-70 miles each way like I did for over ten years. An economical car/truck becomes more than a luxury then.
Politicians better accept the fact that the economy runs on oil, and if they want to keep their cushy gov't jobs (at tax payer's expense) they better make sure the country has the energy to run the economy.
The closed valve spring pressure is important on the loading of the cam follower to the cam lobe, but lift and acceleration also effect the instantaneous loading.
Flat lobes on cams has always been a recurring problem. Once you get through the hard outer surface of the nose of the lobe they go flat quickly. Variaions in metalurgy, heat-treatment, etc have all caused the problem to occur again.
I'd say ALL car/truck/heavy equipment engines for the last 15 yrs have had roller rockers & cam followers. I know some imported small engine co's (Kawasaki for sure) have tried plastic cam lobes with poor results. I'm not aware of ANY engine built today that still uses flat tappets or hyd. lifters, but there may be some.
Funny and true story, company I drove over-the-road for also had owner/operators leased on pulling loads. The co's shop did some repair & service work on those trucks if the owner paid for it. One O-O had a "miss" in his 855 CID Cummins 350. He had Mr. Goodwrench look at it. One of the valve pushrods was close to an INCH shorter and all beat up on the rocker arm end. Needless to say the valve was not opening, therefore the miss. Then there was the other Cummins 350 that broke a wrist pin while at speed. The conn rod sawed the entire engine in half. Only thing keeping the two halves together was the top deck of the block & cyl. head and the crankshaft. That was in a tilt-cab truck, all that carnage was happening about a foot from the driver. I drove a few tilt-cab's but tried to stay with conventional cabs.
Similar threads
- Locked
