Archive through July 18, 2016

[digger]

So I drug the beast out today and moved it to the shop up the hill to get ready for the make over.
It's a move in the right direction, LOL

 

[jbaker]

Charlie,,

 

[pfeenstra]

To go along with the AG's discussion..
Here is my 1250 with AG's and tri-ribs.

 

[jclazar]

Charlie, that's an amazing piece of equipment!! Have you thought about hydraulic lift for the IH 42" push blade??

Jason W, Your Carlisle's seem like a great choice! I had all the intent to buy my Firestone Flotation AG's this fall, but ended up with a 125 for a few bucks under the price of the rear tires. I like those Firestone Gum-dipped your running, I have a nice set in 8.5 on my 125 and keeping them on it. Save your's and throw a set of chains on'em for winter seat time work! I'm planning on more 125 shop time before work in the morning!!!

On another note, lots of airline traffic. I'm in the nice country of South Russel, OH, so I'd never give up my shop time with my 125 to go to the RNC!

Have a good morning guys!

 

[jchamberlin]

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 10:27 AM Nic Bextermueller reported that I "hit a nerve" when I wrote that I thought "the 82 series was well intentioned."

Well, let me expand on that theme, if I may. Each series of Cub Cadets seemed to solve problems of the previous generation, but also introduced a few of their own. In my opinion, the much-maligned Quiet-Lines improved of the hydrostatic shifter of the wide-frames, and as has been pointed out, the enclosed engine compartment is a more sophisticated approach to a machine marketed for use by the entire family. The 82 series ditched the iso-mounts, retained the compartment and added the spread frame in order to accommodate the opposed twin cylinder engine. And this is exactly where I have a problem.

The 782 which I was given, with its Briggs & Stratton 16 HP motor, died on me, even though I cared for it most tenderly, and lavished a lot of money on it. The M18 I purchased to replace it (buying an entire tractor to do so) ran afoul of the correct police, and the Cub Cadet M18 I purchased to replace it turned out to have a cracked block, it is now in pieces awaiting a rebuild.

On the other hand, the 149 I purchased in desperation to find a working Cub Cadet I could actually use, has never let me down. I haven't had to take the engine apart except to replace the head gasket, and I only did that because it was using and leaking oil. Because its a wide-frame, I don't have to worry with the iso-mounts, I just run the mess out of the thing and I'm the envy of my neighbor, whose JD tears its deck up each time it mows.

So, Nic (and Steve), like a computer tech once said of a Dell computer, "What use is it to have the fastest, most powerful *** if its laid up in the shop and you can't get parts?"

(I should be able to get an "Amen" on this point from Shultzie, check out the thread, Need to re-power my 982 (dropped a cylinder on the Onan) in the CCC and MTD Machines & Equipment section of the Forum.)

Again, I think the 82 series was well-intentioned, but they just didn't have the engine to deliver on the promise. The opposed twin design, from what I understand, delivers the most power per pound of any design; but it is not generally the most long-lived. [I'm thinking Subarus I have known, not Porsches.] The V-Twin with overhead valves is a better match for a tractor. If I were buying an 82 series tractor today, I would factor in the cost of a NEW V-twin motor, especially one made by Honda.

As an aside, the Q-L was the longest running series, but it also saw the most "value engineering:" the sheet metal gauge thinned out, aluminum replaced cast iron, etc. etc.

Finally, Marty, I'm not sure what the differences are between the 70 and the 100, other than the size of the engine. I was merely restating what I thought had been a consensus years ago on this forum, that everyone had agreed the 100 had the best styling of all the Cub Cadets. Your 70 looks awesome.}

 

[jwiggins]

Charlie -

-----------------------------------------------

Paul F -

Man that 1250 Looks "GOOD"

Very NICE!!!!!!!

--------------------------------------

Jeff B -

Row crop or Standard?


Either / Or,,,,,,, Big oLe IH Green Thumb's UP!!!!

 

[jwiggins]

John L -

"more 125 shop time before work in the morning!!!

I'd never give up my shop time with my 125 to go to the RNC! "

 

[dschwandt]

Gonna be HOT HOT HOT Here this week and then probably warm up some for the weekend!!

So, I'm gonna fill the fridge, turn UP the A/C and lock myself in the shop to make room for the 147 I stumbled across on my way back from Spring Valley on Sunday!

That is until Wed, when then Confederate Air Force B-29 is supposed to fly into Dubuque Airport. I'll bet it's on it's way to Oshkosh for the weekend!! Supposed to be giving???, rides (I'll bet!! if that were the case, I'd be 1st in line!!) but for big buck$ I'll bet. Heck if I had THAT kind of scratch, I'd buy another Cub!! instead.

 

[jstertz]

Paul F--nice looking setup!

JC--Amen! I went through the work of installing a M20 on my 682 only to have it run decent for about 20 hours (more in the Cubbie 682 thread in restorations) and then start to act very strange like the governor was about to let loose. I'm not saying that those Magnum series motors aren't good because the low hour M15 I put in the Cubbie works like a dream. My uncle has one in his 1872 and it too is going strong. I will say that they do not have the amazing durability track record of the original K series single motors. Smoother? yes. more power? Yes. More durable? NO. Some of that can even be traced to the simplicity of the K single design vs the more complex twin. I'll always likely have at least one Magnum Twin in my set of tractors but it is easy to like a tractor that you jump on whenever it is needed, start it, and go to work!

David S---they are predicting some really hot weather up here just in time for the EAA fly-in here in Oshkosh. That bird will likely be headed this way. It gets crazy here for a
Couple of weeks as our population goes from 65K to about 200K! Brings good money into the area though. We are about two or three weeks away from the "Farm Day" at my uncles. I need to get the steering box fixed on the Mule (a 100) before then so it is ready to turn some wheat stubble under! I also need to back half the Cub-Z (a 125)and install a new hydro gasket so my son can plow with it! Kinda wish I had AC in my shop!

 

[jwiggins]

ALL my "NERVES" are leaning toward the 149 cuz that's the Only Cadet I've Ever had ANY Experience with!!!

So Far I LOVE IT!!!!!!!

But I do LIKE the Non Insulting discussion concerning which models are "Better" or not quite as good as other Models!

This Discussion of different models and features of each that appeal to each individual naturally is based on their personal experiences. The discussion concerning REASONS for Likes or Dislikes is Actually Very Informative to someone like me who has much less Experience with Other models than the One I Own!!!!

It keeps the forum Alive,

I wouldn't consider, AS MUCH AS I LOVE MY 149, someone's comment "About my 149" in any way whatsoever a Personal Insult or attack! Would it Strike a Very Sensitive Nerve, Of Course it would,

Every one has their own opinion for their own Reasons!

More Importantly than wether your argument is Red vs Yellow vs Mo Power vs Longevity vs Hydro vs Gear vs Wide vs Narrow vs Steel vs Aluminum vs Cast Iron vs ETC, Etc,etc,,,,, IS <font size="+2">WHY</font> you Prefer the One vs the Other!!!!!

And "THOSE Reasons you Prefer one over the Other" is why this Forum Exist!!!!!!!

These Discussions will be read by hundreds if not Thousands of people for Years into the Future,,,, Most all of this info is considered by many, Myself Included, as Invaluable!

 

[kmcconaughey]

Jason, here's my take:

<FONT SIZE="-2">IMO, FWIW, YMMV, My $0.02, Yada, Yada, Yada...</FONT>

 

[hydroharry]

Jason - very well said!!!!!

.
When you stumbled across your 149 you happened upon one of the best all around IH Cub Cadets you could find. The 14hp Kohler K321 provides lots of power to do just about what ever you will want. And even tho it has balance gears it doesn't tend to thro them out a window as much as the 16hp K341 is known for.

Now, I'm gonna ask this again - when are you gonna grow a herd? With all this discussion and your efforts I just can't believe you still don't have at least 3 or 4 units. With your skills maybe you could pick up from barely running units. Just have your son cut the grass while you're enjoying yourself out searching for units or working over you new finds.

Jeremiah - just to add to your 82 series info, you may have overlooked the Kohler 17hp KT17 (now known as a Series I version) that came in many of these units. The engine was very short lived for many owners and replaced many times under warranty. Apparently it's oil starved on some slight slope use (although I don't know if it's direction specific). I also don't know how long it took Kohler to come out with the KT17 Series II but understand it's a complete engine re-design and not just a pressured lube version of Stage I. I also don't know the engine life of the Series II and would like to know.

However, after having said all this I can add my son has two 782's and both retain the original Series I engines, and both still run great. I'm hoping to get more comments on this particular engine and the failures, etc.

 

[rfuller]

Just noticed the parts look up does not show the large pulley that drives the front PTO clutch.

Where do I find that on the look up? It's for my 149.

 

[sblunier]

Series II Kohler Twins are basically Series I motors with pressure lubed rod journals and a higher pressure oil pump / relief.......almost no difference beyond that......so they are not completely different engines, rather upgraded engines.

Mag series twins are Series II engines with magneto ignition in place of the coil and points....most also had fixed jet Walbro carbs.

Knock on wood, I have personally had very good luck with Mag twin engines, Series II engines, and the K series singles. I like being able to plow without loosing my teeth to a 16hp Kohler single rattling around in a 169, or FLOPPING around in a 1650, so my Mag twins suit me.

A couple other significant 82 series improvements that are easily overlooked......Much heavier lift rockshaft components, heavier and simplified manual lift components, easy access metal grill screen that doesn't melt, larger fuel tanks, and most important HUGE improvement and simplification of the hydro controls and friction adjustment.

I have owned a wrenched on a lot of Cub Cadets....I love my 82 series twins, but I would take a good strong 149 as well....solid no-nonsense machines! You can keep ALL of the narrow frames......if the tunnel cover doesn't come off, I don't want to wrench on it....EXCEPT for the 100...special spot in my heart for them (ran one for hours on end as a kid). QL's are also of no use to me, IMHO a black eye in between the soild xx8/9 series and the 82 series....trying to get there, but not getting it quite right on lots of accounts.

...They are all better than a belt drive Deere 110........

 

[hydroharry]

Rob F - I believe it's No. 49 under the engine parts listing (not the PTO listing)

 

[tbergh]

here is my new to me 1967 cub cadet 123

PHOTO 1

PHOTO 2

PHOTO 3

 

[rfuller]

Thanks Harry, I looked there but completely missed it. I thought it was the starter pulley.

 

[rbeem]

Jeremiah C

I agree with your assessment of the 82 Series, which in no way reduces how much I like them.

They have undeniable shortcoming; but I do too and my wife still loves me, most days....
The 149 is IMHO the best when it comes to all around usefulness VS durability and power.

Many of us, as I, have owned them up and down the model lines. I'll work on a wide frame any day of the week!

(Yeah, I still troll here)

 

[hydroharry]

Rob - glad I was able to help. Also, I see Charlie has brand new ones. They are kinda pricey compared to used, but used ones are often bent when removed if not done with a proper tool. So, as is often "sorta" said:
"You can take a risk (going used and maybe have to replace it a few times) OR you can pay the price (for new)".

Steve - Mr. Plow - I had heard none of the parts interchange between KT17 Series I and II, but it sounds like you're saying most of them should. Also, do you have any specifics on the Series I failure? Does the oil starvation occur on all slopes? If not, is it only when going up/down or sideways? I'm anxious to let my son know. He's not on real flat ground.

Thad - just had a look at your new to you 123. I couldn't get all the links to open but it looks like the dash pedestal got changed at some point. In a few pics it's black on the sides (my initial thinking is the black paint was covering up the battery acid corrosion) and other pics it's yellar and a different yellar than the rest of the tractor so it was probably changed out. 123 was Top of the Line, 1st Hydrostatic by IH, and a very tough tractor. Nice find.

 

[sblunier]

Harry,

The Series I vs II has many different components due to the changes in lubrication, but they are minute differences.......the engines themselves and the concept of the design (short of lubrication) is the same. If I dumped out a whole pile of I and II parts out, including blocks, you would have to be pretty up on your KT's to pick out the different parts, and even then many would be undistinguishable without a mic.......they are that close.....

Series I lubed the rod journals via oil jets that shot down on the rods from the cam......on side hills these didn't work very effectively. Also, since the oil pressure was only intended to lube the valve train, cam, and main bearings, the pressure was fairly low (5-15 psi IIRC).

Series II engines use a drilled crank to lube rod journals "at the source" and upped the oil pressure to 40-60 psig.

I view that whole issue as a symptom of transitioning from splash lube to pressure lube in small engines.......trying to do it "halfway" resulted in poor results.......the correction to "all the way" made for a good engine.