Jump to content
JERSEYHAWG /  Glenn

C 175 , pig in a poke

Recommended Posts

JERSEYHAWG /  Glenn
46 minutes ago, WHX8 said:

Glenn...you'very got yourself  a cab...much less frustrating :lol:

I have been very busy lately, but just for you, I got something PLUS a cab. Have a look see.  It came off an 80 hour machine.

Hope you like it, I do. Finally, will be snow blowing in style on the 522xi.     :)

 

Glenn

 

 

00b0b_8vI4TN5csla_600x450.jpg

00Z0Z_7C4hB0oqjg_600x450.jpg

IMG_6281.jpg

IMG_6285.jpg

00r0r_f5xP0kqXVzf_600x450.jpg

00K0K_3VuPiHdX71j_600x450.jpg

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
shallowwatersailor
3 hours ago, JERSEYHAWG / Glenn said:

Mike, you hit the nail on the head. while hitting the key I decided to push down on the brake, it was already locked in the down position, it moved down just about a sixteenth of an inch, varooooom,,,,the ol pig starts up. I guess I have to check that now, opened the garage doors and windows and tweeked with all the carb screws, shes purring like a cat now. But that switch or whatever in the brake needs tweeking now. Your words Mike had me hit that pedal....thanks.  one more step done.

 

Hey guys, ammeter seems crapped, check flea bay I guess?

 

oh well, wheel horse fun.........:wh:

 

Glenn

 

I asked you about the brake earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
JERSEYHAWG /  Glenn
2 minutes ago, shallowwatersailor said:

 

I asked you about the brake earlier.

Yes you did, and it was down and locked as it has been while starting it all week. I guess that last lock down she finally went that millimeter where the safety wouldn't work. Will check that tomorrow.

On a better note, cleaned the connections on the ammeter, now she's working. Got to like an easy solve. Lol,  all kinds of one after the next surprises on the pig.

 

Glenn

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
squonk

With that blower and cab you've gone and done it. You won't have any snow this winter. Hey, it worked for me last year! :)

On 10/18/2016 at 8:37 PM, shallowwatersailor said:

I seem to recall that Wheel Horse used a different profile belt than what was standard. I've had good luck with replacement Toro belts. Back to my commercial HVAC days, belts could dryout hanging on the rack. I'm talking belts that were 12 feet in diameter in groups of four - plus 40 years ago technology.

NAPA 5L830W belt

 

As far as WH/Toro using a different profile belt, I keep seeing this on the forum but never any documented proof. Out side of a few oddball applications, I can't believe as frugal minded as the boys at WH were, I can't believe that they spec'd special pullies and special belts for their tractors. I've used Napa and TSC belts for  years without 1 issue. I even had a TSC belt work better than a brand new Toro belt on one tractor. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Sarge

If you look at the older belt specs , all the WH belts were HA profile which is indeed different than the common A profile belt . Over time , using A belts on the older equipment will wear out the pulleys towards the center - my 1277's engine pulley finally got too far worn and would eat a new belt pretty quickly from slippage . I got the belt angles off the net somewhere , welded up the pulley with the tig and ER80SD2 rod and re-turned the profile in the lathe ...

Sarge

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Wishin4a416

Thats gonna be a snow eatin XI!!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
squonk
On 10/18/2016 at 7:54 PM, jdleach said:

Well.... regarding the Champion/Autolite topic, I recall in the 1980s doing a stint at a Chrysler dealership. Found that the 2.2L, 318, 2.5L, all the way up to the 440 would run awful on the Autolites. 

I did a stint at Chrysler in the 80's as well. Those toilets ran like crap no matter what plug you had in them! :) 228109581avatar.gif

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
squonk

Right from Q Power belts:

 

HA, HB, and HC belts are dimensionally similar to A, B, and C industrial belts described in Rubber Manufacturers Association standard IP-20.  However, the constructions differ in tensile members, cord placement, compounds, and fabric in the case of wrapped belts.  In addition to our Q–Power® V–Belts we also manufacture the classical A, B, and C industrial belts that are built to Rubber Manufacturers Association specifications.

 

So according to them, HA belts were different in materials NOT in size dimensions.

 

Also over tome, pulleys wear out no matter what belt is used.

Edited by squonk
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
jdleach

I am not sure on the wiring of any of the other model of Wheel Horse tractors, but on the C175, and I am pretty sure this is true of the smaller C-series of the same vintage, ALL of the voltage from the battery runs through a single wire through the ammeter to the switch. The only circuit outside of the battery-ammeter-switch is the starter circuit (actually it is in circuit, but in another leg). In point of fact, pretty much all vehicle electrical circuits that employ an ammeter use similar wiring.

 

The reason has to do with what an ammeter does, versus a voltmeter. A voltmeter only measures electrical "pressure", while an ammeter measures electrical "volume". 

 

To better understand electricity and current flow, think of electricity as water. In water you have the pressure that moves it (pounds per square inch), and the volume, or how much water is going past a given point in time (gallons per minute). In electricity, voltage is the driving force that propels the individual electrons along, and is much like PSI, but is measured in volts. The number, or quantity of electrons moving past a given point in time, commonly called current, is measured in amperes (amps). One amp is equal to 6.2X10 to the 18th power of electrons flowing per second. That is a lot of the little buggers.

 

To recap then, voltmeters measure pressure, or volts, and ammeters measure current in amps, or the quantity of electron flow. Simple.

 

To accurately measure the flow of current in a circuit with an ammeter, you need to have all of that current flow through the ammeter first. You don't have this restriction with a voltmeter, as you can place the voltmeter anywhere in the circuit that allows it to measure the voltage of the battery.

 

Of the two meters, the ammeter is the most useful. Not only can you tell immediately if your charging system is working or not, you can also get a good idea of what circuit is at fault if you have a short. Example: Tractor starts fine, and the current draw looks normal. If when the the starter is released the meter goes into, or stays in the negative (to the left of zero), you immediately know you are not charging. If it charges OK, but drops to the negative when the headlights are turned on, then you know you have a dead short somewhere in the light circuit. With a voltmeter, if you are not charging, it will take some time before the meter registers the drop in voltage as the battery is becoming depleted. Dead shorts will look the same way, and there isn't any way to determine where the short is, other than tracing the circuit with a multimeter.

 

As we are all aware, voltmeters are used on all the newer tractors, while ammeters were employed with the older models. The reason is that voltmeters are the cheaper of the two to make.

 

What this has to do with Glenn's sudden dead tractor problem, is that on tractors with an ammeter like his, the first thing to check is if there is voltage coming out of the ammeter to the switch. If there is, then you should probably look at the ignition switch, then all those miserable little safety interlock switches. I had the same issue with my C175 last week. Suddenly went dead. Found that the posts on the ammeter were corroded and not making good contact. A side problem was the corrosion had built up sufficiently that current was occasionally arcing from the posts to the meter mounting strap, thus blowing the 25 amp inline fuse.

 

I posted this long missive so that others who have issues with their electrical system will have a little better understanding of how they are wired, and work. Once you have the basics, troubleshooting these tractors is really pretty easy, and do not take very long at all.

 

Glad you found your problem Glenn, and you are making excellent progress. That machine is really looking fine now.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
jdleach
1 hour ago, squonk said:

I did a stint at Chrysler in the 80's as well. Those toilets ran like crap no matter what plug you had in them! :) 228109581avatar.gif

 

Hmm... The 2.2 was the most powerful engine in its class at the time, and I rarely ever had to rebuild one. Unlike most 4-cylinders of the period, the cam design was such that, if the timing belt broke, you didn't scrag your valves. Catastrophic valve damage was the norm for most all the other engines made then.

 

The 2.2 was indeed, a rough running engine. That is why Chrysler later came out with the 2.5 that had balance shafts. The drawback was that they lost horsepower due to the change, and were stroked to try to lessen the loss. As far as durability, I never seen any problems. In the Ford dealership I worked (after I left the Chrysler dealership), the Escort engines were another matter. Ford eventually changed the head design (the bent valve syndrome), but other weaknesses were still present. One such issue was the poor crankcase ventilation. Every Escort I ever worked on, had in short order a seriously sludged up engine, with thick deposits under the valve cover and on the head. Then again, there was the issue of the 302 with the poorly designed piston skirts. I saw a large number of them things come in with "piston slap". Slap produced a ticking noise very much like a weak hydraulic lifter. Over time, the piston would eventually wear into the cylinder bore where the skirt was slapping, and then break off a chunk of the skirt. 

 

At that time, and of the Big Three, Chrysler had the best engine control system. They were the first ones to use OBD, as it was simpler, more reliable, and MUCH easier to diagnose. Did not work on too much GM stuff, but Ford had a disaster in their EEC IV system. I recall poring through the "H" manual trying to figure out some problem on a Mustang, Thunderchicken, or truck, and having to drag out breakout boxes, wiring harnesses, and all kinds of other crap to chase down driveabilty problems. Damn H manual was as thick as a Webster's dictionary, and came in a very large ring binder (to ease the technician in inserting the continuous stream of changes published by the company). The diagnostic manuals at Chrysler were specific to each vehicle, and were rarely more than 50 or 60 pages.

 

OBD proved to be such a good system, EVERYONE uses it now, even Ford.

 

During the 80s, Chrysler had the better engineering, quality, and support. One only needs to review the numerous articles in the press at the time. Not only were they able to turn the company around with solid products, but they also were the leader in innovation. In 1984 they introduced the minivan (whether you like them or not, they were, and still are a very popular platform). In 1987 they were the first American company to completely ditch the carburetor, and go with fuel injection across the board. Even the Japanese still made carbureted engines for several years.

 

Speaking of Chrysler in the years before, or after the 1980s is another matter, but during the 80s, they made very good products. Not perfect, but very good.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
BOB ELLISON
2 hours ago, squonk said:

I did a stint at Chrysler in the 80's as well. Those toilets ran like crap no matter what plug you had in them! :) 228109581avatar.gif

I agree with jdleach .I worked at Chrysler for 37 years and the 2.2 ,2.5

And 318 were the finest engines Chrysler made. I was a timing auditor for the 2.2 and 2.5 liter .these engines ran great. I put 275,000 miles on a 318 and after selling it the guy put more miles on it.on a personal note we sold all the machineing for the 2.2 and 2.5 to China .

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
squonk

If the 2.2's and 2.5's were some of the" finest" it's a wonder they stayed in business as long as they did! :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
SylvanLakeWH
8 hours ago, jdleach said:

 

 

...

 

During the 80s, Chrysler had the better engineering, quality, and support. One only needs to review the numerous articles in the press at the time. Not only were they able to turn the company around with solid products, but they also were the leader in innovation. In 1984 they introduced the minivan (whether you like them or not, they were, and still are a very popular platform). In 1987 they were the first American company to completely ditch the carburetor, and go with fuel injection across the board. Even the Japanese still made carbureted engines for several years.

 

 

Don't want to step on this thread but... I had two of those minivans and you bet - very functional...Problem wasn't the engine - ran great....problem was the transmissions - JUNK. And a company that would not back their product. Entire websites devoted to the Chrysler minivan transmission problems...Don't know how the new Italian car company will perform, but a Chrysler won't be in any garage of mine after how they mishandled the whole debacle TWICE...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
jdleach

And therein lies the rub Sylvan.

 

In the early days of the K platform, which was from 1981 till around 1988 or so, Chrysler trannys were top-notch. You had the large 727 auto for the heavier trucks and cars, and the 904 which was a scaled down version of the 727 for the smaller vehicles. For the front wheel drive autos, they just modified the 904. Same tranny, just had a differential.

 

Things started to go south when they went with the lock-up torque converter, and only got worse when they became computer controlled. Read about some real horror stories. That said, the worst part was that Chrysler ceased standing beside their vehicles.

 

What was in the 80s viewed as a defect by Chrysler, became a "feature" by the 90s and beyond. Microsoft has done the same in much of their software, and is a sort of inside joke amongst programmers.

 

Case in point: Bought a 10 month old Dakota in 2000. Was a 1999 model. Had the 3.9 V6 with roller tappets. Roller tappets were first installed across the board in Chrysler engines beginning in 1988. Remember a TSB (technical service bulletin) coming out shorty thereafter because more than a few tappets would click pretty badly in cold weather during initial start-up. I put in several "kits" till I left the dealership. By the time I bought the Dakota, had it for a couple years (only 10K when bought), and it had around 30K on the odo., it started clicking. Took it to the dealer. I KNEW about the TSB (got a copy somewhere), and said as much when I took the truck in. I KNEW about the issue. I was told at the time that it was "normal".

 

I have twisted wrenches for decades, and machined a lot of automotive parts and tooling, and that ain't normal. The tranny problem, along with brake pulsation, are a couple other issues that Chrysler has chosen to ignore. I own a Grand Cherokee, an '04 that I bought brand new (before the tappet thing reared its ugly head in the Dakota). Always ran synthetic oil, and never failed to service. Has 111K on it now. Always garage kept, and doesn't run or look nearly as old as it is. Except it has tappet clicking in cold weather.

 

Get bent every time I start it in the winter. The thing that torques my jaws, is that Chrysler believes it can piss in my face, and call it rain, and expect me to believe it.

 

SO no, I am not a die-hard Chrysler fan. I call them as they are. And has they were in the 80s, they were very good vehicles for the money. I am very reluctant to get another one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
JERSEYHAWG /  Glenn
1 hour ago, SylvanLakeWH said:

 

Don't want to step on this thread but... I had two of those minivans and you bet - very functional...Problem wasn't the engine - ran great....problem was the transmissions - JUNK. And a company that would not back their product. Entire websites devoted to the Chrysler minivan transmission problems...Don't know how the new Italian car company will perform, but a Chrysler won't be in any garage of mine after how they mishandled the whole debacle TWICE...

I own a 2009 chrysler town and country, just turned 80k. Just did new tires, brake rotors on the front again, seems they warp easy. Always have the oil done. No trans problems, the perfect mom mobile, kids, sports stuff, friends, dogs, moving stuff. The sunroof leaked 3 times, drain kept clogging, I kept fixing. No trans problems yet. The mrs wants a new one, that new designed chrysler van, I say heck no. Plenty more mileage to be got from this one. This van has been fairly reliable. No big chrysler fan, and have 2 grand cherokee's no problems there yet.

 

Hey, should I change the thread name? 175 pig poke, chrysler stuff, xi add ons.........  We got a lot of action on this thread. Lol

 

Spell ck is killing me. Keeps changing stuff.

 

Glenn

 

JD,SylvanLakeWH, Squonk, Bob, admire your knowledge on these things. Also, JD, appreciate the electric explanation, made it easier on me the novice. Not perfect, but easier. Thanks

Edited by JERSEYHAWG / Glenn
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
squonk

Chrysler with the "Never Burn " system and the "Ultra Slide" trannys! :ROTF:

And don't get me started when they got involved with Renault! :ROTF:

 

Of course now it's Fiat!     :rolleyes::rolleyes:    YOU'RE A GOOD  SPORT GLENN!!! :)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Retired Wrencher
On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 4:03 PM, JERSEYHAWG / Glenn said:

my wallet got murdered............:ROTF:

 

I just need to sort out its problems.... 

 

 

 

Glenn

Glenn time solves all problems . That has always been my credo. That is what I just went thru with the 73 W/Horse 8. Enjoy the project.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Ken B

A while back I worked at a small family owned auto repair shop. I'd usually do at least 3 tranny r & r's on Chrysler mini vans a week. It was to the point that I could do one blind folded with one hand tied behind my back while hopping up and down on one foot...... Maybe they have improved since then?:confusion-shrug: I've owned a few wicked 440's in 69 Charger's in my day, can't say a bad thing about them... I could think of a few choice words for the electrical systems in those 69 Chargers though.... 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
squonk

Used to do 2 2.2 turbos a day along with countless head gaskets, cams, wristpins. We had 2 big binders chuck full with all the service bulletins just with the ones trying to get the Horizon's to run smoothly cold! :)

 

The absolute best were the 2.6 Mitsujunki's. You had to install a heat shield under the carb to keep it from vapor locking in the summer month's and then remove it when it got cold to keep the carb from icing!:rolleyes:

 

You haven't lived until you worked on Renaults though. People say "Why don't you work on cars anymore"  and I answer "RENAULT!" :)

Edited by squonk
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Sarge

I can say I'm an "old" Mopar fan , handed down from Dad...

My old '75 Royal Monaco (first real car) was the most indestructible vehicle I've ever owned or been around - took me 12yrs and 325,000 miles to officially wear it out , but it still ran - rod banging 360 and all...

My current '14 Ram quad cab 4wd pickup (Hemi) is an animal - love that truck . Awesome engine , awesome brakes , but getting used to that 8spd is definitely a learning curve - wish they would have offered a 6spd manual or something . This one was built in the transition era and I must admit I was a bit nervous , but build quality, materials and such are top notch . Easily one of the best/toughest pickups I've ever been around .

 

Ok , back to belts ....

I spent a day on the phone with a Q-Power engineer and he did argue about the materials being the driving force for the HA type belts . However , by engineering drawings there is a slight difference in profile and they even admit to such on their own profile drawings charts . I have had excellent luck with their industrial belts on my hydros and decks so far . Worn pulleys is an important factor and I firmly believe a root cause of wear issues is from using aftermarket cloth-covered drive belts , the WH pulleys were great quality but not designed for cloth coverings , period . Those coverings pick up dirt and use it to sand down the pulleys - I finally lost the battle with my 1277's small hydro drive pulley on the Kohler and had to weld and re-machine it's profile . A new Q-Power belt and it works as it should with the hydro being able to develop full power now - enough to break the frame, anyway .

All in all , best option for belts is original equipment ones from Toro , or new old stock WH belts if you can find them .

 

Sarge

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
JERSEYHAWG /  Glenn

sarge. I put on a genuine toro drive belt. 90 percent of the time I have bought the genuine belt. although I DO have snoblower spares from other manufacturers. I did not want to chance it on the main belt for a few dollar savings.  BTW fellas, its running great....

 

I need a little help here. cant find it in the manual. but I noticed taking the deck off that the lift piston was connected to nothing, when I reached up and found out the attachment point. there is no attachment pin..bolt..clevis and pin.....I put a picture of the 2 attachment points.

 

What exactly attaches them, I am guessing a pin and clevis?????

 

Do any of you fellas know the correct part number?   BIG THANKS 

 

also, dropping the trans fluid right now  I have no idea what this guy has in there,,,,,some home made concoction.

 

this blackhood is really growing on me.

 

Glenn

20161101_130538.jpg

20161101_130552.jpg

20161101_181625.jpg

20161101_161646.jpg

20161029_170957.jpg

20161029_164137.jpg

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
gwest_ca

Here is an original parts list for this tractor

Go to Part 2 of the download

Cylinder and pin on page 44 of the manual which is

Page 14 of the file.

Clevis pin 932997 1/2" x 1-1/4"

Cotter pin 932017 1/8" x 1"

 

Garry

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
JERSEYHAWG /  Glenn
1 hour ago, gwest_ca said:

Here is an original parts list for this tractor

Go to Part 2 of the download

Cylinder and pin on page 44 of the manual which is

Page 14 of the file.

Clevis pin 932997 1/2" x 1-1/4"

Cotter pin 932017 1/8" x 1"

 

Garry

Thanks Garry, you have saved me  many times over the years.

 

Glenn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Mike'sHorseBarn

It sound like this horse is much better than a pig in a poke now!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...