"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Jump to content
Sarge

D series 3pt hose interference issue?

45 posts in this topic

I've ran into a clearance issue on the D180's rear hydraulic hose at the rear of the lift cylinder for the 3pt. The link that joins the cylinder piston to the main arm on the 3pt rock shaft uses 3 holes and a welded plate between the two side sections. That plate allows the cylinder to push against the rock shaft's arm and move it rearward, but - the lower end of that plate hits the cylinder hose's 90* fitting when the lift is lowered all the way . The link only goes one way with the plate joining the two sides facing more downward than up - it's offset from being centered a bit. The 3 holes in the link allow the rear 3pt to float, if you pin the center hole it locks it solid and allows for down pressure to the 3pt lift. Simple enough design, but not sure why it wants to hit the cylinder hose's end fitting - it's wrecked the swivel on the hose and caused a bad leak. I got a new hose from Lowell, but the modern replacement hose ends are taller than the original ones from WH, so it interferes with the 90* fitting even worse - see the photo and the mark where it needs to be cut out for clearance ..couldn't get a pic of it on the tractor - that seat frame is seriously in the way of these parts. Another not so fun part to work on a D due to it's frame design...ugh.

 

5a6e065d670ee_20180128_1108571.jpg.91ee9d5779229da820850fc8b0dd653e.jpg

 

The marked area is where it it hits that 90* fitting, badly. Aftermarket ends, as I said are even worse as they are a little taller - generally around 1/4" difference. I suspect WH specified aircraft rated low clearance fittings on many of their hydraulic hoses - it's not the first time I've ran into clearance issues , especially on the older models when replacing them with new hoses. Not sure if there is a new hose from Toro available - but it has an interference anyway with the linkage...

 

Has anyone else with a D ran into this issue with clearance to the link - or was this welded incorrectly from the factory somehow ?

 

Second thing - it seems many of the older models that used any hard steel lines used SAE 45* flare ends. Newer equipment uses the more common aircraft JIC 37* high pressure flare instead - it seats easier and can better handle the pressure. Are the steel lines on mine correct, or has someone changed them ? Ends appear to be common 5/16" SAE flares on these steel lines, it's tough to adapt modern hydraulic lines to them versus using JIC flare ends. I think even the S bend twin steel lines that go into the implement ports on the pump are the same size fittings and same SAE type versus JIS. I do remember that being odd when I had the pump out for it's repairs and all those parts looked original. A lot has been screwed with on this tractor over it's lifetime, common to see but I'm not sure just how far they went with some areas, I want to keep it correct. The old line sealed fine to the SAE hard line end below the seat - it's a 700psi system so it's fine, really. Other than the leak - the 3pt lift is super strong and had no issues other than not wanting to stay up for long due to the 90* fitting puking oil...

 

Sarge

 

 

20180127_191932[1].jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Much of the problem stems from WHs use of ORB#5 fittings.  They are no longer popular and indeed getting hose end  90 degree swivels is impossible.

 

Could you use a setup like this ORB#5 swivel elbow to a 1,4" JIC 4 flare male  the a female flare hose end??? 

 

I will walk down toe the barn and look at my D200 but with the easy ride seat i probably won't be able to get a good picture...  Edit:  Well at least I could see it... From looks the swivel elbow to JIC #4 might work???

IMG_0164.JPG

IMG_0167.JPG

Edited by pfrederi
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The JIC swivel 90* block style elbows in the #5 size are actually taller than the current market 90* direct hose ends, or at least from what I've found in any brand's drawings. I have found some obscure close-quarter fittings for aircraft applications,  but not with the #5 ORB sizing. One way or another I can make the hose work/fit - just find it odd they put the distance to the linkage so close that it can contact the 90 degree fitting. It could be this thing has been altered in some manner - that's what I was asking. Your photo is a pretty good shot , there's only about 3/4" clearance between the fender and seat brackets - it's a tight space for sure and not too fun to swap that hose out. It's also odd the steel lines just terminate in the way they do right now - just a slight bend on the end with only a lightweight clamp holding them to the frame, from there it's just an 8" long rubber hose for a flexible connection to the cylinder since the whole thing moves some during operation.

 

Gonna hit the hydraulic shop tomorrow and see if they have an adapter for the hose I have on hand - it's #5 ORB on both ends and I need the straight end to be the SAE 45* flare to mate to the steel line. I'll either cut a notch to clear the fitting or cut the welds and re-position the cross plate for better clearance.

 

I haven't tried pulling the easy-ride seat frame out of a D yet - just how bad is it ? All I see is the front cross rod - once that's out it may be fun trying to wiggle it out of there but would surely make working on the hose much easier - not to mention cleaning up the oily mess all over the transmission.

 

Sarge

  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The SAE ORB#5 to JIC #4  swivel elbow in my picture above will only stick out 1 inch from the cylinder. That looks to be about the same as the amount sticking out from the cylinder in my other picture.

Is the hose in your picture the original WH hose?  if so it looks also to stick out about and inch....  also consider using 100R3 hose it is fiber wrap not steel and much more flexible.  The hose end in my picture is the normal these days designed for many higher pressure hose types.  You can always cut off some of the sleeve for clearance before crimping.  Note the original crimped sleeves are barely an inch long.  We are after all talking less than 1000psi here.

 

As to the seat it is awkward and heavy....but you are right there really is no better way to access the area yo want to get to. I think you have to remove the lower dash panel.

  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I may just leave the seat alone for now - that lower dash panel for whatever reason is a real fight to align the bolt holes. I think it's due to the S bend steel lines to the pump from the dual valves since they bolt to the back of that panel - it's like the whole thing is always out of alignment one way or another.

There is a height difference in the OEM hose versus any new one - I'll have to measure the difference later today. Also, as I mentioned - these OEM fittings had to be an aero-motive specified part . They used a smaller wrench size (5/8") versus the common 11/16" on the new line's hex head. Not an uncommon thing - but tough to duplicate today as those fittings seem to be NLA. The 102287 rear hose is NLA from Toro - too bad as it would be nice to stay more stock, but then again on this tractor it pretty much doesn't matter. My whole thing is trying to figure out that clearance issue - if you drop your hitch all the way to the bottom I'd be curious to see if yours does the same - very close or actually contacting the cylinder link on top of the 90 on that rear fitting....?

 

Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I do not think the originals were any special type of aircraft fitting.  Just stock SAE ORB #5.  I have bought several ORB 5 fittings and they all use 5/8" wrench.  if you think about the Hydro pump head, the relief valve caps are 5/8" and use SAE #5 O rings as do the caps over the hydro lift ports....

 

I found a NOS WH hose that looks similar to the type used on the D 3pt.  Note the combination of fittings I showed yesterday stick out the same amount as the WH hose....

 

 

There was no sign of any marking/contact on my 3pt assembly. A couple moths ago we worked on my neighbors driveway using a very heavy York rake I would imagine that would stress the system but no apparent contact.  To lower it right now I have to remove the counter weight block for the FEL...may be a while...

IMG_0168.JPG

  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

It's no big deal . One of the aftermarket hoses I have has the larger and more common 11/16" wrench size, probably an imported fitting versus US. The original line had brass ends - so maybe those are the difference. I'll get a measurement later and try to get a pic...

Thanks for the insight, appreciate it. I see no reason it will cause an issue if I just cut a round notch out to clear the fitting - there is plenty of steel there to support the weight load against the parts.

 

Sarge

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Actually all the fittings I have bought are steel (at least magnetic) and most were made in China.  5/8 is the standard from What I researched.  Dash 6 which is a much more common size uses 11/16 wrench

 

 

 

InkedCapture_LI.jpg

Edited by pfrederi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Hmm, not sure what's up. The new hose I have uses larger 11/16" wrench size on the #5 ORB, odd I guess.

I did measure the installed height of the original hose on that 90* fitting -

 

5a6f5037a5ec6_20180129_1038261.jpg.cafda635a790a37ec7f1954042e1e0c6.jpg

 

Height from the flat once it's installed and compresses the o-ring is 1-1/8" or slightly over - maybe 1.150" total. Parts of this one are brass and maybe why despite it's looking in good shape it's leaking badly at the swivel. There is a mark on top of the 90* that shows where the link it's next to is hitting it . I'd almost bet it's either due to wear in the 3pt parts or that link's cross plate on top wasn't welded in the correct position. Either way, I'll make it work. Just something I found that was odd - as many things can be with these older machines and an unknown history, it's had a hard life as usual. I wouldn't know what to do with a new to me tractor that wasn't half trashed in one way or another - but I only gave $75 for the D with the blade and have about $750 in it now total, not too bad considering how well it works/runs. Could have done a lot worse...lol.

 

Sarge

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

No real luck at the hydraulic shop - they did not have any direct crimp-on 90* fittings in the #5 ORB, so I have to run the 90* adapter like your pic and a straight end. It's not going to leave much rubber between the two ends of the flex line but I'll see if it will work, pics to come tomorrow probably when it's suppose to warm up a little and I can get out in the shed.

 

Sarge

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
7 minutes ago, Sarge said:

No real luck at the hydraulic shop - they did not have any direct crimp-on 90* fittings in the #5 ORB, so I have to run the 90* adapter like your pic and a straight end. It's not going to leave much rubber between the two ends of the flex line but I'll see if it will work, pics to come tomorrow probably when it's suppose to warm up a little and I can get out in the shed.

 

Sarge

 

I have searched for a long time and had my hose guy try..No luck on 90 degree SAE #5 ORB hose ends.  As i said cut down the crimp collar before putting the hose end on gives you more free play.  Those long collars are designed for much higher PSI than we are dealing with. Look at the crimp lengths on the originals

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

You know - I had considered that before he crimped the hose . That shorter distance in the rubber section could turn into a problem with the steel line over time and crack it - wish I had him cut those a bit shorter, but his dies on that machine are really deep - they work mostly on really high pressure ag and construction equipment . Lowest rated hose they carry is 5,000psi 2-wire type but it is still pretty flexible. Another issue - that SAE or JIC flare. None of my angle checking tools nor his would make a definite identification of what angle the steel end is from the factory - almost looks like the dumb thing is somewhere between 37* and 45*, neither angle seems to fit as it should. His angle checker inserts into the inside of the fitting - on the original hose it wouldn't sit properly due to the flare end being so small , the tool is designed for larger hose and steel line sizes. Besides, all he had in stock was the 37* JIC flare, either way I think it will work fine as the pressure on that lift cylinder is fairly low - I'll find out tomorrow. Since the most used fittings on these are SAE it may leak - but if I have to I can cut the line and use a new JIC ferrule end to fix that and swap it over at the steel end.

 

I'm tempted to swap the whole thing over to JIC fittings and ends, but dealing with the pump and valve end would be a pain and the only real way to do it is to use the adapters anyway since no hose ends are available for these things. It's another standard that is going away with time and making older equipment a pain to deal with - all my machines are '74 and older and use Sundstrands with hydraulic lifts so at least they are all either #4 or #5 sizes, so that helps. I remember one of the lift lines on the 1277 drove me nuts trying to find something that would fit and I've used a lot of re-usable hose ends to fix them myself, getting those right isn't easy but they do work.

 

Sarge

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Sarge, don't know your problem, but have identical hose (NOS) on my desk and the steel lines in the garage. All are available if needed, or any part.

 

Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I'll keep that in mind - going out later today to work on it as we have snow predicted for this weekend. Probably only a dusting as predicted, but that has backfired on us and resulted in over a foot more than once when I wasn't prepared...lol.

Thanks

 

Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Ok...pm sent for the hose - thanks for that .

 

Problem I ran into with the aftermarket - local shop didn't have the #5 in a 90* fitting, they could only do a straight and have to use an adapter. Wrong, the adapter will not clear the cylinder piston to install the fitting and I should have remembered that from dealing with the same type of parts on the 1277. It must be a direct 90* on the hose - no choice here due to how tight everything fits. Kind of glad the swivel end starting leaking so badly - I had not noticed the huge bulge in the original line - it was about to fail and this one supports the "up" side of the 3pt hitch. Lucky it didn't explode when I used this thing to lift the shed up off the ground this last spring after the storm blew it off the temporary blocks - seems luck does come around here once in awhile - instead of the infamous Mr. Murphy and his shennanigans....lol.

 

Here's just how tight things really are on the D series - especially back near or above the transaxle when they are equipped with the easy ride seat option -

 

Hard line is just visible above the cylinder, below the fender , right next to the seat mount - this end is 5/16" hard line, SAE 45* flare as far as I can tell (#5 to hydraulic shops)

5a7230592f107_20180131_1447241.jpg.a9a3161a1e641e19a9184f0957626d47.jpg

 

Just for reference - that hard line is located a few inches above the front of the cylinder in this pic - between the seat's long frame and below the fender lip , mounted to the outer panel on the frame.

 

5a72309314c23_20180131_1447161.jpg.cdfc3fa2c5191b1e529c0fb34343224f.jpg

 

 

 

Here's the problem child - the piston end of the cylinder . It's port is about 1/4" away from the piston and comes out at an angle - #5 ORB (o-ring boss SAE) fitting needed here, must be a 90* direct fitting on the hose itself  like the original. No room to install any sort of an adapter due to the piston shaft and the linkage to the 3pt to the rear of the cylinder - just no room in there at all when the cylinder is retracted. The black bar extending down to the piston end is holding the cylinder up to keep it from puking more oil all over, this thing is a dripping mess from working on it in the one area it doesn't need - gonna need a pressure wash next spring.

 

5a723033e4600_20180131_1447021.jpg.133b53f860ed224716b62de2b8a124d7.jpg

 

The front hose is easy and has obviously been changed before in it's lifetime already - it's an aftermarket hose. There was a reason WH specified this rear hose the way they did - only way the dumb thing will work down in there due to the frame design and other factors. I just wish the lines had the more common JIC ends versus using the old standard low pressure SAE fittings. I could make new steel lines and eliminate the SAE parts with port adapters at the pump and valve ends - but the cylinders themselves become an issue with that - these older units and the design of the cylinders won't allow it .

 

If @R. L. Addison does in fact have an NOS hose - we're golden . I will still clearance the link to the 3pt and keep it from contacting the hose's 90* head for the future - prefer not to deal with this part again, lol...

 

Murphy needs to leave here asap - and take the cold weather with him. Another cold snap and possible snow coming yet again this weekend - I'm ready to become a Snow Bird if I could just find that Lotto ticket..

 

Sarge

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

@R. L. Addison - do you have that rear hose available ? We're slated to get some of the white stuff in the next few days , this thing is the snow mover around here due to the 56" blade.

 

Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 

Uh, what the horse....I wasn't looking for a free hose, more than willing to pay for it . Heck, I was prepared to make the trip if needed, it's a bit over an hour from here, give or take a few...and traffic at your end.

 

I do appreciate it , just let me know what it's worth...please. This Horse earns it's keep in rent credit here as well as doing "pay forward" help for others - an investment in keeping it alive and working as far as I'm concerned. Only issue I've had is trying to hide it's looks and the tracks it leaves behind - pretty obvious around here what visited their property when they are not home....lol. Thought I was being inconspicuous, but the secret is out who is moving snow/dirt/rock at night around here I guess - but I did get a plate of really tasty cookies on my tool box by the back door from the last large snowfall we had, lol...

We have a lot of old folks around here that can't hardly get out much - the locals that do clear some drives all take care of their buddies - and ignore the elderly. Not going to happen as long as I'm around, not the way I was brought up either.

 

Sarge

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Kevin, Your package has been delayed for some reason.  According to the recording, they said it is on the way to Ohio, IL around noon today.  I am hoping you have received it; however, we are are not sure on this end.  I am sending the tracking number for you to use if need be.  9505 5117 8719 8032 2061 04 is the tracking number and you can check this on www.usps.com if you want.  You can also check by calling 800-222-1811.  We'll keep an eye on it from here as well.  It was suppose to be to you by Saturday.  Let us know when you receive this package.  Thanks, Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I wondered when it wasn't there yesterday or Saturday - since they've rearranged the main hubs and sorting offices around the whole system is screwed up, thanks to Congress and UPS involvement .Some things show up quicker than expected, others seem to take multiple laps for no reason. It all depends on how it was shipped, Parcel Post can get downright weird as well as Media class and even First Class - which makes no sense at all. I still use them the most - they just don't damage things like UPS and FedEx although I have had one claim with USPS years ago - it was handled immediately and I had a check within 3 days for replacement parts and labor.

 

I do wish you'd let me know what you want for the hose - they are rare and pretty impossible to get in decent shape used without leaking constantly due to the 90 degree fitting at the rear - the weight of the 3pt when in the up position is holding cylinder pressure on that hose and if the swivel leaks it makes one heck of a mess in an area that is tough to clean. Having leaks on the trans area makes it tough for the trans motor and pump to cool themselves due to the fins on the axle getting blocked with dirt/debris sticking to the oil film - not to mention it leaves a nice mark wherever it's parked. The wooden shed floor is not something I look forward to replacing and oil mats just work only so well - remembering a drip pan when it's stored is a pain too. @wheelhorseman I believe has plans to get the correct steel line fittings so he can stock new hoses in the future - I will own a new set for backup parts as well.

 

Very curious to see that OEM steel line fitting and get an angle measurement on it - still not sure if it's the older version of the SAE 45* or JIC 37* seating angle. Just finding the odd #5 ORB ends is bad enough, let alone a SAE45* steel line end if that's the case but I'm sure if anyone can do it - Lowell will figure it out. Part of the problem is the length of the hose - it's only about 8" long overall.

 

I'll let you know when it gets here, hope it warms up a bit more this week as we got around 4" last night and more on the way. High of only 14* today and I think that's somewhat hopeful, we never got close to the forecast high yesterday - they missed it by 5*F again, lol. I think you folks got a lot more than we did , or at least the radar showed the heavier bands had slid further south than expected - predicting snow patterns is a real gamble anyway in the Midwest. I'm going to have to go start a battle with the Village Idiot again from what he did this morning - they have an old heavy large Cub that they plow the sidewalks with on the business district in town - he used it on our main sidewalk which has sunken 3" in most spots with a blade that is 5' wide. Tore the heck out of the lawn yet again, what an idiot. Almost none of the school kids use that sidewalk anyway and I always plow it with one of my 42" blades - fits perfect when angled on a 36" wide walk and doesn't tear up the lawn. He rolled well over a foot of sod and just left it like that - far as I'm concerned they can fix the damage come spring , too. It was bad enough last year when the Village truck drove into the second driveway and dumped a huge pile from the alley across the street, right in the drive entrance. I use that drive to load the tractor/fuel when I take it to other places to help plow for Mom and others nearby in another town - that wasn't too cool. Not to mention, he usually gets well off the edge of the streets since there are few curbs here and rolls the sod in people's lawns and dumps all the debris for them to clean up. Why they need to use a heavy 2 axle dump truck and 10' blade is beyond me, a simple 1-ton dump would more than enough for the few streets we have here and a lot easier to operate.

 

Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I called USPS today and spoke to a lady about why this is still delayed.  She told me from what she can see it has not left Pekin yet, so they are investigating to see what has happened with this package.  Here we were trying to get it to you quickly as we thought you needed it and what a mess now.  We have never had any problems with USPS before so we will see how they will help us now.  They said it could take 2-3 days to get back to us.  We'll keep you informed.  We all need to be patient on this one.  Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

If Ron's hose is lost in USPS I may have one for you.  It isn't new but seems to be in good shape.  The flare end seems to be 45degree (The other fitting in the picture is a for sure JIC 37 for comparison)  The cylinder end is an ORB#5. Yours if you want it..

 

IMG_0169.JPG

IMG_0170.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I've gotten the same results when I had our local office run a trace on the tracking number - they say it's basically in limbo somewhere between Pekin and Peoria's District hub, but no idea where, lol. I've never had a package lost and have sent some truly horrible-expensive things overseas ($750 carburetors, modified) with no issues, ever. UPS and FedEx could lose an elephant and it's documented they have lost people, or at least their urns with the ashes...geeze. Totally not your fault - you did everything right and I'd still rather trust USPS over the others any day of the week despite our limited window times here due to such a small town office. They are great here, they leave us keys to various boxes that will fit smaller packages so we can pick them up after hours - larger stuff I have to get someone to go after it , but it works out when I'm working long days on road jobs . I am passing on the tracking number to a buddy's wife - she has access to information not available to most of the normal Postal Clerks - she's in distribution or something and will get it figured out.

Hopefully, it will show up some day and I want a true gauge of that angle to insure we have the right type of fitting for the future - especially for Lowell as he does plan to stock these hoses in his inventory. I'm pretty convinced that since JIC wasn't widely used in the early 70's that the fittings are indeed SAE and they do look it from what I've been able to judge, just want to make absolutely certain - if nothing else for Lowell's sake since he's such a great resource for us. I am passing on the tracking number to a buddy's wife - she has access to information not available to most of the normal Postal Clerks - she's in distribution or something and will get it figured out.

 

The problem with these fittings is their size - 5/16" hard line is uncommon in the world of hydraulics and rarely used these days - it's either 1/4" or 3/8" and all of those are normally the higher pressure rated JIC versus the old SAE standard. Almost all older equipment has been converted away from ORB (o-ring boss seat) and SAE 45* tapered steel fittings, sometimes requiring different cylinders or machine work. Talked earlier to another very large hydraulic shop - he converts all the old stuff to the new standard and won't deal with it - maybe not a bad idea in the long run. He said many of the cylinders can be re-tapped for pipe thread depending upon wall thickness of the outer tube - I know for a fact this one is far too thin for those threads to hold the pressure.

 

Another thing - any hose that has been installed and torqued will show wear - that's the problem trying to measure the angle of the tip and most gauges are not designed to fit inside such a small inside diameter. The two ends we had tried to check show the wear mark and it alters the angle a bit off - the best gauges go inside the inner bore to more accurately measure the outer end angle - makes sense if you look at it since they will wear once installed, even JIC 37*. I believe Lowell has found the correct ends, just need to know exactly which one it is to make them available - wish there were more Lowells in this world, lol.

 

I sure appreciate the help from you guys - I truly hate leaks and this thing looked like the Exxon Valdez when I got it . I've dumped way more money in the thing than it really deserved but the engine is in such good condition it's tough to let it die a parting-out death to me. Besides, when it right it's really right and a pleasure to work with. I'd love to find a later model rear axle and experiment with beefing it up some to remove any further problems or at least the potential of failure. It has a super heavy frame design that I honestly wish WH would have adopted to the rest of them from day ONE...but we love them anyway and honestly most people abuse these things far beyond what they should , myself included.

 

In the meantime, the 16Auto lit up after some persuasion and cranking time - let it warm up for quite awhile and got the main parts plowed. I hate the lift valve on that one - seems to have zero finesse to it and the thing loves to either ride up off the surface or gouge the heck out of things - seems no in between. I forgot how much longer it takes to move snow with the 42" compared to the 56" blade, wow that took awhile. I am glad to report the GSD is totally worn out from "working" the tractor in the snow and the new Rocky boots really worked very well - feet were still in one piece when I got done. At least it was some seat time - I miss that in the winter between snows..

 

Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Sarge - Sorry you are having to wait so long on the hose. I thought you could get in & have the unit up & going Saturday night,(hoping at least), but didn't work out that-a-way. Hoping for the best.

 

I'll stick with my 42" blade, as it goes up the sidewalks without a problem, but I do want to find some spring leaves to make some skids for both of them. Takes a little longer for driveways, but my time isn't worth much anymore so I can just keep[ plugging away. I can still do pretty well on the horses.

I would like to pick up a 48" so I could change if I needed to.

 

I have the final drive out of the "D" series that has the redesigned bearings, I was putting it in my "C" series, would have to reinstall the long axles and I have pinions & sun gear so it could be rebuilt into original configuration.

 

Ron                dunngawn@hotmail.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I just got a message from the buddy's wife at USPS - the box was dropped into the wrong basket and went to Palatine versus Peoria directly. She said it was scanned last night in Hazelwood so it should be here tomorrow - she will also see to a refund on the postage costs due to their mistake, lol....nice to have someone inside. At least it should show up and not totally lost - that's the important part and I can get Lowell the correct information. Again - you did the right thing and I'm glad you saved the tracking number - you've gone well above and beyond on something you couldn't control - that is appreciated very much on my end. I try to treat folks the same way - at until they give me reason to be otherwise and on this forum I'd highly doubt that will ever happen, we are truly like a family here.

 

I'm hunting a '77 or later complete unit if I can find it - especially a non-running, complete D that I can use for spare parts. Especially the entire hydraulic system and the improved rear axle differential case/bearings. I have some ideas to increase it's strength to better match the thing's frame strength - just have to get into one to see if it would work. At the rate D's are being left for dead or parted it won't be long and spare parts are going to climb a lot in price - I'd like to cure it and save these things - they are a brutal monster with a lot of potential.

 

Sarge

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members
     
     

    No registered users viewing this page.

     
  • Similar Content
     
     
    • By mkueb
      Does anybody have a good source for replacement front wheel bearings for a mid to late 1970's D160 wheel horse tractor?  There are two push in bearing units (inner and outer) per wheel.   I first attempted to replace with standard bearings but quickly found out these are not standard sizes.   It's been a while since I check and I don't completely remember,  but I think the wheelhorse bearings where something like 1/16" of an inch larger OD than a standard catalog bearing.   At the time,  I remember finding bearings but they wanted somthing like $100 for each bearing.   I was able to located two bearings and did purchase them for a reasonible price,  but am still looking for two for completing the set.   The part numbe ron the two that I was able to locate is 104396.   If anybody has any ideas,  I would appreciate.
       
      Thanks
      Marc
    • By Sarge
      Fast question ...
       
      Per the IPL for the 6-1141 and 6-1131 54" & 56" blades - how is everyone pinning the rear blade lock arms so they can't unlock the blade ? I've ran into problems with this thing before wanting to unlock itself and drop the blade half off the tractor. It seems when back dragging rough pavement, especially if I back into a snow bank the thing is moving those locks out of position and allowing the frame to drop off. The only reason it stays at least somewhat under the D is the lift arm , but getting it back into position is no fun due to the weight of this thing and especially out in the snow/cold weather. Last time I had to drag the thing back to a clear area so I could wrestle it back into position, lift the frame and lock it again. I did wire them shut for now, but don't trust it and I use it to back drag quite a bit on rough areas I don't want to ram the cutting edge against and risk damaging the rear axle differential or anything else. Mine has been rebuilt with a new cutting edge of 1055HC and the frame is highly beefed up - most of it is now boxed in and the thing has gained nearly 50lbs of steel. It cuts great, almost too good but that random dropping it off is starting to irritate me - need some ideas here...
       
      The smaller 42" and other frames lock from the other direction - so to speak. The brackets are also drilled to accept large hair pin cotters to keep those locks in place - I see no way the bigger blade frame is designed for that, unless I'm missing something ?
       
      Sarge
    • By Sarge
      Since I've finally got some time with this D and not puking oil all over itself it's time to address a few small issues . Biggest one right now is how that blade engages the ground - it always wants to sit a few inches lower on the right side and always puts more force on that side as well . When I rebuilt the frame I made certain it was squared and flat to the head part and the blade - it still measures out perfectly with the rear mount and the blade's cutting edge staying on the same plane . But , trying to do light grading work and leveling material it always wants to cut more on that right side - I suspect part of this is the weight of that handle , the solid steel cross shafts and sub frame for the whole assembly . With those parts previously cut loose I was quite surprised at just how heavy that stuff was - probably close to 35lbs of steel . With that weight hanging off one side of the frame I suspect that's the root cause of the issue - anyone got an opinion on this or ran across the same issue ?
       
      I've considered either adding weight to the left side of the blade or maybe add a spring to the frame to help correct it - what have others done or am I by myself on this , lol ??
       
      Sarge
    • By Sarge
      Ok - the UL-1 batteries won't cut it for turning over the big cast iron Kohler twins - got one that is only 6mo old and it's basically shot already . One start cycle and if it doesn't fire it's done - needs to be jumped . Since it's mounted above the Sundstrand pump and so close to that thumper engine I'd assume the vibration is just killing the plates . At a rate of 2 batteries per year - that doesn't work out very well and the rotating mass of that engine just draws far too much from the battery - even with a new starter .
       
      From the BCI group number chart and some dimensions of what can fit in the tractor physically I come up with a Group 26 battery - what is everyone using in their twin cylinder D's ??
       
      I see an equivalent Deka runs about $80 - anyone tried that size on one of these D's ...?
       
      Sarge
    • By Sarge
      What started out as a simple task of moving my 6-1/2' x 12' utility trailer to unload it's contents back into the Shed Repair Project after building a new floor turned out to be a really bad day . I figured the weight of the trailer and it's load was probably around 2,500lbs or more and the big D-180 should be able to handle it . Used the 3pt hitch and an adapter to lift the trailer tongue and off I went...until I got to the end of the north drive and the pump coupling on the hydro failed - badly . In hindsight - the trailer probably weighed closer to 4,000lbs the way it felt behind the truck ...
       

       

       
      Now , the trailer had to be taken off the tractor and put on it's jack ....which didn't work out too well loaded that heavily . Since the trailer was built with 2x3 angle iron on the tongue it decided to fold itself into a pretzel - despite the wheels being blocked tight so it couldn't move . It fell over and I had to use the HI-Lift to get it off the ground . The sight of the trailer falling over in the rear view camera on the Dodge is still well embedded in my memory - I knew that was going to be another large project .
       
      The coupling had an earlier repair from last winter's failure - so a pto pin was driven through the hole to get it out back to my work area to be fixed later . It made the short trip , but just barely and the tow valve was frozen tightly . As it turned out , the damage to the D was a much bigger issue..and cost 3 times as much in total .
       
      The pic doesn't do the damage any justice - that entire tongue was bent badly -
       

       
      Sand blasted , new tongue built and waiting for paint -
       

       
      Painted , as it sits now awaiting the lights , wiring and re-install the floor decking .
       

       
       
       
      All the while - got more work done on the D's pump problem . Found a great used pump , as well as a spare coupling in good shape . After a lot of machine work ($$$) we came up with a solution and everything was back together...
       

       
      After all this I found that both the original mufflers were completely shot and falling apart - so another project ...
       
      Bought a pair of 180* mandrel bends , two cone transitions and a pair of @jimkemp 8" mufflers (very nice, btw) . Fabricated the flanges for the engine's exhaust ports , as well as the pipes for the stacks -
       

       

       

       
      Spent a lot of time rolling the engine over on the starter to slowly prime the pump back up and finally , after several months - fired Big Ugly to test the exhaust before painting the stacks . No leaks from the hydro thanks to some new o-rings and backer rings from @pfrederi on the hydro manifold , that was a big relief .
       
      A bit shocked at the sound of the big opposed twin - somewhat like a Harley running on the choke or something - but overall not obnoxious or too loud ....
       
      D180 startup.mp4
       
      If you don't want to wait for the MP4 to load - here's the YouTube link -
       
       
       
      I don't think the camera's microphone will show the sound too well , but so far I like it . Took a ride around the block , nice having this beast back up and running , finally . Now to finish that dumb trailer....pretty much wasted nearly the whole summer getting all of this done plus the hours at work . I'm about ready for a break but need to get ready for winter .
       
      Sarge
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
     
Premium Theme Designed By IBTheme.com

×