Tom,
Kraig won't be here till tomorrow, will I do!
Kraig won't be here till tomorrow, will I do!
-
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 March 22, 2006
- Thread starter thoffman
- Start date
Help Support IH Cub Cadet Forum:
PS!
I get GD tired of fightin the 50K pic size too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I get GD tired of fightin the 50K pic size too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Looks like I missed out on a couple of image posting opportunities. 
(
Charlie, Roland, thanks for covering for me.)
Michael, I do believe that the early 38" timed decks were built without greaseable bearings but they were added shortly thereafter. The reason I state this is because the Operator's Manual states nothing about greasing the bearings, however there is a manual for replacement bearings and spindles that states to grease the bearings after every 10 hours of use (Some of drawings that Charlie posted are from this manual). Also there are at least two versions of the Operator's Manual for the decks and the early version has a photo of the deck WITHOUT the holes for access to the top of the spindles. (BTW, neither of the two versions of the Operator's Manual states anything about greasing the spindle bearings and the exploded views in the back don't show a grease zerk.) Here is the photo:
Michael, does your deck have the holes in the guards? If not you may have a rare deck.
( Charlie, Roland, thanks for covering for me.
) Michael, I do believe that the early 38" timed decks were built without greaseable bearings but they were added shortly thereafter. The reason I state this is because the Operator's Manual states nothing about greasing the bearings, however there is a manual for replacement bearings and spindles that states to grease the bearings after every 10 hours of use (Some of drawings that Charlie posted are from this manual). Also there are at least two versions of the Operator's Manual for the decks and the early version has a photo of the deck WITHOUT the holes for access to the top of the spindles. (BTW, neither of the two versions of the Operator's Manual states anything about greasing the spindle bearings and the exploded views in the back don't show a grease zerk.) Here is the photo:
Michael, does your deck have the holes in the guards? If not you may have a rare deck.
I just checked and the exploded view drawings in the back of the manuals are different even if they both don't show zerks, note the guards.
Old.
New
Old.
New
tbordeleau
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2005
- Messages
- 89
- displayname
- ted Bordeleau
Hydro operation observations:
I finally fixed the hydro trunnion linkage per standard procedures published here et al, and observed that even with new springs, caps, and proper slot dimensions, I could move the hydro input arm (goes into the hydro unit) a significant amount (which would obviously vary the tractor speed, the thing I'm trying to fix) by hand, because the pivot-plate that the dash lever actuates was rocking out-of-plane on it's pivot. So I ran a spring from the forward end of the long slot in the pivot plate across the top of the hydro to the opposite (right) frame rail, and Voila! the out-of-plane play was eliminated, as was the play at the hydro input arm!
The difference in driving was phenomenal.
HOWEVER, I noticed a characteristic that as I thought about it, seems inevitable, given the design:
As I was pulling a 400-lb lawn roller up short, steep sections of my lawn, the tractor would slow down considerably, and I would have to move the dash lever to maintain vehicle speed, then back off again as I levelled off. Here's what I think: Normally, like when mowing, the trunnion spring system would be sufficient to hold the hydro input arm in position, maintaining speed. However, under heavy load, like pulling a 400-lb roller uphill, the load would try to reduce tractor speed, thereby moving the hydro input arm appropriately AGAINST the spring system, compressing it, and reducing tractor speed. Additional spring pressure is required (additional dash lever) to counteract the slowing effect of the load. If the spring system were not there and the linkage was fixed, it would act like a geared drive, with no loss of speed, except for inherent losses within the hydro unit.
Is this assessment correct? Just trying to understand my new toy and it's personality.
I finally fixed the hydro trunnion linkage per standard procedures published here et al, and observed that even with new springs, caps, and proper slot dimensions, I could move the hydro input arm (goes into the hydro unit) a significant amount (which would obviously vary the tractor speed, the thing I'm trying to fix) by hand, because the pivot-plate that the dash lever actuates was rocking out-of-plane on it's pivot. So I ran a spring from the forward end of the long slot in the pivot plate across the top of the hydro to the opposite (right) frame rail, and Voila! the out-of-plane play was eliminated, as was the play at the hydro input arm!
The difference in driving was phenomenal.
HOWEVER, I noticed a characteristic that as I thought about it, seems inevitable, given the design:
As I was pulling a 400-lb lawn roller up short, steep sections of my lawn, the tractor would slow down considerably, and I would have to move the dash lever to maintain vehicle speed, then back off again as I levelled off. Here's what I think: Normally, like when mowing, the trunnion spring system would be sufficient to hold the hydro input arm in position, maintaining speed. However, under heavy load, like pulling a 400-lb roller uphill, the load would try to reduce tractor speed, thereby moving the hydro input arm appropriately AGAINST the spring system, compressing it, and reducing tractor speed. Additional spring pressure is required (additional dash lever) to counteract the slowing effect of the load. If the spring system were not there and the linkage was fixed, it would act like a geared drive, with no loss of speed, except for inherent losses within the hydro unit.
Is this assessment correct? Just trying to understand my new toy and it's personality.
Bryan,
Start our own forum!
Not only NO, but he double L NO!
But 75k pics sure would make life easier for everyone that post pics!
Start our own forum!
Not only NO, but he double L NO!
But 75k pics sure would make life easier for everyone that post pics!
bmcmeen
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2002
- Messages
- 2,106
- displayname
- Bryan D. McMeen, Keeper of the Holy Hy-Tran
Aw c'mon Charlie, you have such a way with the public!
I can see where 75k would be a benefit, although resizing/cropping pictures will ALWAYS be an issue for those who believe that their PC's should require no more technical knowledge to operate than their toaster
I can see where 75k would be a benefit, although resizing/cropping pictures will ALWAYS be an issue for those who believe that their PC's should require no more technical knowledge to operate than their toaster
Kraig: I've got two TC-82's. One is Revision 5, dtd 5-63 and the other is Revision 6 dated in 64. Both show the grease Zerk. It's # 35 in Rev 5 and # 13 in Rev 6. Both versions also show the holes in the pulley covers for access to the zerks.
Both TC-82's show 470489-R91 as the the Spindle Shaft & Bearing Service Package. It lists a 271282 fitting (zerk w/30 deg elbow).
I have an Original made the first week of Jan 1962 and it has the zerks and the covers with the holes. The deck is original to the tractor. All else on the tractor is factory original and I believe the deck is also.
Looks like a "sometime in 1961" change over to zerks, greaseable bearings, and open top covers.
Can we fix the changeover date closer???
Myron B
CCSupplyRoom
Both TC-82's show 470489-R91 as the the Spindle Shaft & Bearing Service Package. It lists a 271282 fitting (zerk w/30 deg elbow).
I have an Original made the first week of Jan 1962 and it has the zerks and the covers with the holes. The deck is original to the tractor. All else on the tractor is factory original and I believe the deck is also.
Looks like a "sometime in 1961" change over to zerks, greaseable bearings, and open top covers.
Can we fix the changeover date closer???
Myron B
CCSupplyRoom
Bryan,
I'll refer back to what Ron White said last night on TV.
You Can't Fix Stupid
I'll refer back to what Ron White said last night on TV.
You Can't Fix Stupid
Myron, I have scans of a "2-'61" revision TC82. (You should have a copy on my CD#3 in the "Manuals" folder.) there is no grease zerk shown in the parts or mentioned in the listing. The drawing does show the holes in the guards.
Michael, your query about the oil pans was answered when you first asked, by Lonny (Scroll down the page to where you mentioned that you were given a 12hp). There is an oil pan that is for the 10hp that has a flat bottom that will bolt onto the 12hp but you'll have to cut the "dipper" off of the connecting rod. You may also want to check that 12hp to see what size the crank shaft diameter is in case you want to mount a PTO to it as there are several versions that were made for various uses Cub Cadet had a spec, JD had a different spec as did other manufacturers that used Kohler engines. There are other's here that can better answer the "what fits" question then me. This is about as much as I know, or think I know. )
)
Question for whomever can answer it. Will a model 26 carb from a 12hp Kohler work *OK* on a 14hp Kohler?
rbedell
Well-known member
Ted B:
I have always been interested in reading, why people have this misguided notion, that the Hydro Lever on a Cub Cadet, is similar or equates to a “cruise control” feature on a vehicle.
When a gear drive Cub goes up a hill, the Cub’s motor and speed will decrease. More horse power or down shifting is required to accomplish the task at hand.
The hydrostatic transmission is no different. By placing the hydro lever in one position, all that is done is that the Swash Plate is moved to a position to establish a certain hydraulic oil pressure. Now, going up hill (or down) will require more (or less) horsepower and/or hydraulic oil pressure.
The Cruise Control feature on a vehicle, will automatically speed up the engine RPM’s , down shift the transmission, or both. In order to maintain speed like a “cruise control” the hydro lever will have to be moved accordingly, it’s just that you have to do this manually.
All the above is in consideration, that all the Hydro Linkages and internal parts of the Hydro Unit itself, are in good and proper working order.
I have always been interested in reading, why people have this misguided notion, that the Hydro Lever on a Cub Cadet, is similar or equates to a “cruise control” feature on a vehicle.
When a gear drive Cub goes up a hill, the Cub’s motor and speed will decrease. More horse power or down shifting is required to accomplish the task at hand.
The hydrostatic transmission is no different. By placing the hydro lever in one position, all that is done is that the Swash Plate is moved to a position to establish a certain hydraulic oil pressure. Now, going up hill (or down) will require more (or less) horsepower and/or hydraulic oil pressure.
The Cruise Control feature on a vehicle, will automatically speed up the engine RPM’s , down shift the transmission, or both. In order to maintain speed like a “cruise control” the hydro lever will have to be moved accordingly, it’s just that you have to do this manually.
All the above is in consideration, that all the Hydro Linkages and internal parts of the Hydro Unit itself, are in good and proper working order.
Kraig,
Not quite optimum for wide-open-throttle performance but for everyday usage, I think this substitution is fine and may result in a slight improvement in fuel economy, if that's important.
Not quite optimum for wide-open-throttle performance but for everyday usage, I think this substitution is fine and may result in a slight improvement in fuel economy, if that's important.
