has anyone ever seen a RJ lift like this?

[clemedc 29]

I bought this RJ at the big show and I was wondering if anyone has ever seen a lift like this before? Does anyone know why its different?

[buckrancher 2,675]

?

Edited July 6, 2013 by buckrancher

[clemedc 29]

Ok thanks. Did you get my PM regarding pulleys?

[Ride Away59 101]

That lift lever was not modified its a original lift lever. A true rj59! I was the owner to that Ride Away Junior..

[VinsRJ 721]

Ride Away 59 speaks wise... that is an original lift indicator for a late 59 RJ...

[clemedc 29]

It looks to be Factory cut

[clemedc 29]

Thanks VIN that seems to be a little known fact.

Clem

[AMC RULES 36,945]

We need a pinned thread to capture all them "little known RJ facts"     

Seems there's a bunch of 'em. 

[Wheelhorsestory 210]

If you read the Ride-Away Junior chapter in my book, you will find the answer to this question. This chapter is loaded with details in every sentence.

 

Yes, the member RideAway 59 is 100% correct. This is an original lift lever as it came on later 1959 models. It probably has the solid, wider seat, and fenders as well. This is a rare tractor that was a transition of sorts from the RJ58 tractors made in 1959. It is my belief that there are not many of this model, as soon thereafter the 1960 models were produced. After Cecil had to redesign the front axles, he made other improvements as well.  Please, please, please keep in mind that they're are not definite model year regularities until the 1960 model year.  Please don't go by casting numbers to determine a date of manufacture either. That has nothing to do with the date at all.  Although many will argue my facts, I am certain they are correct. This information was told to me by the man who made these tractors with his own two hands.

 

Great Post. I hope everyone is reading their book carefully(LOL)

Michael Martino

[AMC RULES 36,945]

If casting numbers are no help, and there are no "definite model year regularities"...

how does one go about determining the correct year of production.      

[squonk 38,913]

This is the supposed "59" RJ that I had last year. Looks like it may have had the same lift. Probably should have kept the little rascal!

[Wheelhorsestory 210]

Great Question Craig,

 

The 1958 Ride-Away Juniors were the first Ride-Away Junior manufactured with the Uni-drive transmission. These continued to be manufactured through 1959. I have seen many, many variations as they used whatever parts were on hand. If you look up the date of manufacture from your engine's serial number and it states that it was made in 1959, it can not be a 1958 tractor.  The Ponds did not stock a huge amount of parts at any time, so I doubt if any 1959 tractors have an engine that was made in 1958, although there may be a few.  Wheel color, decals, etc. can not really be used for exact information.  In the DVD with my book, there is a video of the Pond family playing with a 1958 tractor that has black rear wheels. Why?  Because those were the rims that were on hand when it was made. There also were variations in the hitch style, rear axle hubs, etc.  The same is true of the tractors made in 1955-1957. I have even seen an original RJ58(not 1959) that had the decals from a 1960 tractor. The decal designer probably sent over some samples and the Ponds tried them out to see if they liked them. Now, the reason I say the casting number on the transmission can not really determine the year is simply because I asked this question of Mr. Pond and he told me that they did not cast anything to record the year of production.  I suppose the company who cast the transmission case could have cast the year of production on the casting, but as I said it was not something the Ponds ordered done.  I don't read too much into the early production years as some do. I am just happy to see someone enjoy their miniature tractor.

 

Thanks for this topic. I appreciate your interest in the historical aspect of year of manufacture. I am so happy to see such a great forum as Red Square. When I got into the hobby, there was absolutely no information about these little machines.

 

Enjoy every variation for what it is,

 

Michael

[AMC RULES 36,945]

Thanks for the quick reply Mike.    

So, taking your advise and having just read the RJ chapter...

I see one needs to be adept at decoding Kohler, Clinton, and Briggs numbers to be able to make the best educated guess. 

Provided the tractor in question is still wearing it's original engine after all these years. 

[buckrancher 2,675]

Sorry not buying it  you wouldn't double cut a part when you don't  have to ( waste of money)

If that part was made originaly to fit on a RJ 59 it would only be cut on the top side not on the bottom as the ponds were not making 400 surburbans yet

what that part tells me by looking at it. The cuts on the top side for The RJ was done after the fact ( as the part was originally made for the 400 surburban first then modified to

fit a RJ ) or a retro kit for owner dealer modifcation to the RJ lift

 

Brian

[clemedc 29]

I think it's now safe to call it an original Wheel Horse RJ59 part.

clem

[AMC RULES 36,945]

  I don't know Clem...Brian has a good point.  

Having just looked through all the member picts uploaded into the pict gallery...

http://www.wheelhorseforum.com/forum/19-1955-to-1964/

I see none of the '60-'61 model Suburban's have their lift sectors notched on both sides.  

What's up with that, why is this the only one...so far?   

[wallfish 15,919]

Sorry not buying it  you wouldn't double cut a part when you don't  have to ( waste of money)

If that part was made originaly to fit on a RJ 59 it would only be cut on the top side not on the bottom as the ponds were not making 400 surburbans yet

what that part tells me by looking at it. The cuts on the top side for The RJ was done after the fact ( as the part was originally made for the 400 surburban first then modified to

fit a RJ ) or a retro kit for owner dealer modifcation to the RJ lift

 

Brian

It also appears from the pictures that the spacing of the cut outs on the top are not spaced the same and not completely uniform which would indicate it was not done by the factory. But that could just be an optical illusion from the pictures or it was done on a Fri afternoon.

 

It could be possible that the 400 model was ready to be built as they neared the end of the 59 production and they just modified that 400 part to work on the RJ. Who Knows? Maybe the dealer didn't have the lift handle parts for the modification and came up with this solution?

I have one with a solid seat pan and the sector is welded to the hood stand and the frame but the holes are there for the bolts. Homeowner? Dealer? Factory?  

 

This is the kind of stuff that makes it very interesting!

Edited July 7, 2013 by wallfish

[Wheelhorsestory 210]

You are right fellas, this is the kind of stuff that makes it very interesting! 

 

Here is what we have as of now:

 

Fact:    Some later 1959 tractors had the muti-position lift sector

 

Unknown:  Was this particular individual tractor made this way at the factory or modified later?

 

Fact:  We will never really know.  All we have is our opinion.  My opinion is to enjoy it and believe what you want.

 

You guys get me so excited for even more research on the subject,

 

Michael 

[clemedc 29]

Haha I enjoy the discussion anyway. Thanks to all who chimed in, it's a passion we all enjoy.

[clemedc 29]

As for the pics it is an illusion that I hadn't noticed, and all the cuts are uniform and not mismatch or unaligned. Maybe why some have thought its a home made cut

[varosd 1,185]

As for the pics it is an illusion that I hadn't noticed, and all the cuts are uniform and not mismatch or unaligned. Maybe why some have thought its a home made cut

and Clay had it stored at my place after the show!!

"my" first RJ    (for 3 days, ha ha!)

 

What a cool buy!

[rmaynard 14,893]

You guys get me so excited for even more research on the subject,

 

Hmm...do I smell an addendum in the works?

[AMC RULES 36,945]

 LOL! So much for the final addition. 

[buckrancher 2,675]

As for the pics it is an illusion that I hadn't noticed, and all the cuts are uniform and not mismatch or unaligned. Maybe why some have thought its a home made cut

the side shot looks as some slots line up and others do not is from the differance from inside to outsde radis being if all slots have the same center line dim. on the

inside as the outside

[Wheelhorsestory 210]

I stand by my facts.  I believe this tractor is from the factory.  I simply tried to make a statement as not to cause an argument on Red Square since you can't convince some people. Read my post again.  My book is called Straight From the Horse's Mouth for reason.  It is FACT directly from Cecil Pond. There is no speculation.   This is the Final Edition and there is no need for an addendum when the information in the book is 100% accurate. Why do some people have to read into things or twist things.  My name is Michael Martino and I am the author!