rj59 that turned out to be a rj58

[ricksrj58 273]

the rj59 turned out to be a rj58 once i cleaned off the tag.the tank,fenders/box and seat were missing and the front rims are scrap but he gave me a pair that look like they are off a rj35,the k91 was locked up and when i got it home i took off the oil pan and the inside was dry and nothing but rust.did have a nice hood and the oil bath air cleaner and a frame with the tag on it.the tranny feels tight like it should but the ring gear could still be bad.told him to be fair it was not worth what he was asking.i did give him 150 for it and 100 each for 2 nos kohler k91 rebuild kits with piston,rod,rings,valves,gaskets ect.

[MikesRJ 558]

the rj59 turned out to be a rj58 once i cleaned off the tag. .... and a frame with the tag on it.

Once cleaned, were the serial numbers readable on the tag? I'd be interested in what serial number it turned out to be and what numbers/letters are cast into the transmission center section near where the shifter enters.

[ricksrj58 273]

what is the best way to remove the paint from the tag without damage?

[buckrancher 2,694]

Hey Rick how was the other tractors he wanted to sell anything desent?

Brian

[VinsRJ 723]

Looks like a good starting point for a resto. Early production RJ58s could have come with RJ35 front rims.

Use a little Brake Clean on a paper towel to remove the paint from the tag.

[MikesRJ 558]

You can also put some brake fluid on the painted over tag to help soften the paint, and not effect the tags printing.

[ricksrj58 273]

Brian, i did not see any other tractors but they could have been outback under the snow.

i will try some brake fluid/cleaner today and see if i can get the serial number to post for ya.

[MikesRJ 558]

It might be just me, but this looks like a '58 tag which has been banged up a bit. The "9" just isn't tall enough. Certainly not the same height as the rest of the characters.

Now I'm really interested in what you find when you get it cleaned up.

Also, post the letters/number of the transmission casting around the shifter too.

[ricksrj58 273]

well after a little rubbing the tag serial # looks like 16606,the 0 could be a 8 it is really hard to tell. the tranny has 814-9. the 9 on the tranny and the tag look the same,maybe it is a 1959.

[VinsRJ 723]

From the looks and sounds of it, its most likely a RJ58 biult in 1959. Common with the higher serial number RJs.

Bottom line, 58.... 59, who cares...... Either way you have a nice restorable unit on your hands. :thumbs:

[buckrancher 2,694]

well after a little rubbing the tag serial # looks like 16606,the 0 could be a 8 it is really hard to tell. the tranny has 814-9. the 9 on the tranny and the tag look the same,maybe it is a 1959.

814-9?

probably B 14-9 or feb. 14th 1959 casting date I think is still to early for a rj59 if it was a G or H odds would be in your favor

I have a E 20-9 or may 20th 1959 and it has a RJ58 sticker

Brian

[ricksrj58 273]

the casting #s on my other 3 rjs are

F1-9

D26-D A D or a 0?

G23-9

what can you tell me about these.

yes the tractor is very restorable, i have yet to find out if the ring gear is good or badly chewed up.now i have 6 rjs in my small but growing herd :thumbs:

[MikesRJ 558]

the casting #s on my other 3 rjs are F1-9, D26-D (a D or a 0?), G23-9

what can you tell me about these.

Identifying the transmission manufacturing from the cast date codes is always a "best guess", but ...

F1-9 : June 1, 1959

D26-0 : April 26, 1960 (probably a "service replacement" transmission)

G23-9 : July, 23, 1959

[ricksrj58 273]

thanks mike,i was just curious. so the D26-0 is a service replacement,ok

[64s 83]

I was under the impression that the RJ58 ID tag was silver and black. The RJ59 ID tag was black and white. So, is the tag you have silver or white? That should tell the story.

If I'm wrong, someone please correct me. :thumbs:

[MikesRJ 558]

I was under the impression that the RJ58 ID tag was silver and black. The RJ59 ID tag was black and white. So, is the tag you have silver or white? That should tell the story.

If I'm wrong, someone please correct me.

No one has ever displayed a picture of an RJ-59 tag on this site or anywhere else I've ever seen. I've asked this question several times and each time have received silence. Personally I don't think anyone knows what an RJ-59 tag looks like.

Does anyone have a picture of an RJ-59 tag?

[VinsRJ 723]

If there are no documented tags, does anyone have an original sales receipt confirming the sale of a RJ59?

[MikesRJ 558]

... does anyone have an original sales receipt confirming the sale of a RJ59?

Vin, Several receipts have been posted. But I don't follow you as to what that would prove? In 1958 the sales guy could have written anything he wanted.

[sscotsman 186]

... does anyone have an original sales receipt confirming the sale of a RJ59?

Vin, Several receipts have been posted. But I don't follow you as to what that would prove? In 1958 the sales guy could have written anything he wanted.

But why would a sales guy write anything other than the truth in 1958?

I see no reason why he would lie, or make a mistake..

I think Vin meant that if a sales reciept says RJ58 and its dated 1958, its a RJ58..but if someone had a sales reciept that actually said RJ59 and was dated 1959, that would be excellent evidence the machine is a RJ59..

although im sure original sales reciepts, still with the machine, are so rare as to be virtually non-existant! but still..it could happen with a one-owner machine I suppose..

Scot

[VinsRJ 723]

... does anyone have an original sales receipt confirming the sale of a RJ59?

Vin, Several receipts have been posted. But I don't follow you as to what that would prove? In 1958 the sales guy could have written anything he wanted.

I have the receipt for my RJ...... the item listed as sold is "RJ"..... I was wondering of someone had a receipt that indicated the item sold as "RJ59" seeing that would have been the model designation. :thumbs:

[64s 83]

I have what I think/thought was a 59 simply based on the seat pan (the seat pan is the same as my 400) and transaxle date code. The date code on the RJ is E20-9 and F30-9 on the 400. Is it an early 400, or did someone swap out the trani in the 60's? Some things will never be known, but according the Mike Marino (who got it from Cecil Pond) the '59 RJ's were being built on March 30, 1959. Were they built before 3-30-1959, I don't know, but I also would love to see a '58 and '59 ID tag side by side.

If anyone has a clear (ie. non painted, damaged) ID tag from either 58 or 59, please post a picture. Thanks.

[Redbirdman 7]

In 1958 the sales guy could have written anything he wanted

Well, that could have been me! (Damn!).......But I was only 16 working in my dads garden center, but thinking about somethings far more important than a stupid tractor!

....(^)(^).......

dang, I wish I paid more attention then! (to tractors....and all the crap we hauled to the dumps and the scrap yard..like oil bath aircleaners and Clinton engines)...Pop was a Reo Hahn Toro and everything else dealer but we swapped with other make dealers no matter what the make was. But pop always insisted NEVER write the so-called YEAR on the sales reciept because it could come back to haunt you. The people were buying a mower or a tractor, not a damn car he would say! And stuff left over from year to year did not matter to them, just don't tell em! he would say..

But anyhow.......to muddy the waters even more for me:

Mr. RJ guys, my RJ with F 19 9 with a rounded end idler pully rod and a solid seat (not square)

MAY BE A RJ59? not an RJ 58?

But what about my D 10 9 over 3501 N, also rounded end idler pully rod but with a pan seat (not square) with holes???

Oh, who would have ever thought 50 years ago I would worry about this stuff....

ED :thumbs:

[TT-(Moderator) 1,162]

If there are no documented tags, does anyone have an original sales receipt confirming the sale of a RJ59?

No receipt, but here's proof that they do exist:

(notice the revision date)

[MikesRJ 558]

But why would a sales guy write anything other than the truth in 1958? I see no reason why he would lie, or make a mistake..

I did not mean to imply anyone would lie. I meant to imply that in 1958/59 the receipt would have been hand-written and could in effect contain whatever the salesman wanted to call it, or whatever he happened to write down. Like Vinny said, his only says "RJ".

[ricksrj58 273]

ok i am going ask,i could be wrong which is normal.i know they did not make as many rj59s but could they have been still building them into 1960? D26-0 april 1960 on my tranny .