fritz 1 #1 Posted December 1, 2008 would you guys say that 1076 are fairly common wheel horses? becouse i have two of them but i have not seen many other models located in a close area? another qustion.?? what do you think about the most common wheel horse? (anything older than 74 is what i consider a true wheel horse) but also other wheel horse. what is the most common?? sorry to bother you all with qustions again fritz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Bullington 5 #2 Posted December 1, 2008 Hi Fritz, yes I would say the 1076 is no more different than any other 60's models.. Also on this statement: (anything older than 74 is what i consider a true wheel horse) The defination of True has to be determined ...If your meaning to when pond was the owner then the statement can stand,,,If you mean wheel horse period, then I would have to argue,, There are models produced in the 2000 years that have the same axle frame and tranny as your old pond models and just as good! Honestly I still consider anything with name a wheel horse. :horseplay: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fritz 1 #3 Posted December 1, 2008 ic?? so could i take the rear end of a 312-8 and put it on a raider 8?? is that what you mean?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rustyoldjunk 127 #4 Posted December 1, 2008 the 66-67 10-12hp are some of my most favorites.they are the first of the long frames ( under 10 hp were still short frames).they have the narrow fender pan i like very much and the hood is specific to the 66-67 (it has one more slat in it then the 68-69 hood).the hood and top of the dash is also about an inch taller on the long frame than it is on the short frame. i think these are the best looking of the long frames.as for them being rare i dont know about that but i do know the short frame 8hp and under are easy to find around here but finding a 66-67 complete running 10-12hp long frame is about like finding an rj around here,i have looked hard for one for the last couple of months online and localy and the nearest complete one i found was in st louis....that dont necessarily mean they are rare but none have surfaced around here lately. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimD 3,345 #5 Posted December 1, 2008 seems to me that "most popular" means something different to just about everyone. it's an individual thing. kinda like "favorite". maybe there should be a poll on this subject. just a thought. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Teddy da Bear 11 #6 Posted December 1, 2008 There was a posting like this not long ago. If the Raider was an 8 speed (or called 6 speed) and the 312 (I am not familiar with) is an 8 speed....then yes....likely interchangeable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Bullington 5 #7 Posted December 2, 2008 I have not had a 312 but the rears look identical...someone here may know on this subject that has one of these tractors. Michael Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rustyoldjunk 127 #8 Posted December 2, 2008 i put a 312-8 transaxle in a C160 earlier this year,it was a direct bolt in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hodge 6 #9 Posted December 2, 2008 I put an 8 speed out of a Raider 9 onto a B-80, direct bolt in and identical to the old rear end. That is the beauty of WH- a large portion of the parts are interchangable. I mean this kindly, but to say that anything newer than 74 is less of a WH is an insult. You can certainly prefer certain years, but it isn't correct to call something inferior when in fact it shares the same parts... I will put my 77 B-80, or my 84 1600, or my 88 520 up against any other year, and expect them to perform similiar, because they are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hodge 6 #10 Posted December 2, 2008 DUH, I can't remember my years- the B-80 is a 75. And, I forgot to extend a welcome to you, fritz! Welcome to Redsquare! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
