523-H high roller

[kpinnc 16,676]

13 hours ago, cleat said:

Yes, the lift bellcrank is slightly shorter on the reduction steering models.

I found that out the hard way also.

 

Forgive the dumb question- what did you do to resolve it?

 

Obviously my thinking is to trim it down and use the next hole on the tab. But I am curious if anyone has ever measured the difference between the standard vs. shorter versions. 

[cleat 8,429]

57 minutes ago, kpinnc said:

 

Forgive the dumb question- what did you do to resolve it?

 

Obviously my thinking is to trim it down and use the next hole on the tab. But I am curious if anyone has ever measured the difference between the standard vs. shorter versions. 

 

Here are the two.

 

Shorter with reduction steering.

 

Regular steering.

 

[kpinnc 16,676]

18 minutes ago, cleat said:

Here are the two.

 

That is amazing as always sir!

 

Looks like the second hole in the original is less than 1/4 inch different from the first of the special model. 

 

I'm not going to try and open this center console back up. It looks to me that trimming the original down and using the second hole is pretty close and should be all the lift I will need. 

 

Thank you @cleat!!! 

[Handy Don 15,669]

2 hours ago, kpinnc said:

Looks like the second hole in the original is less than 1/4 inch different from the first of the special model. 

I noticed on our 520 (and on my 854) that the full arc of the lift arm is pretty close to 60º.

In effect, the center-to-center distance between a hole in the arm and the rock shaft equals the maximum range of the lift (= 2 x sin(30º) x C2C)

Using the second arm hole provides one inch less movement (vs. the outermost hole on the 8-speed arm) to a link that is perpendicular to the arm at the midpoint of its arc. 

The full range of the outer hole is ~4.25” so you will have 3.25” or ~23.5% less range. 

Edited Monday at 09:04 PM by Handy Don

[ebinmaine 76,613]

17 minutes ago, Handy Don said:

I noticed on our 520 (and on my 854) that the full arc of the lift arm is pretty close to 60º.

In effect, the center-to-center distance between a hole in the arm and the rock shaft equals the maximum range of the lift (= 2 x sin(30º) x C2C)

Using the second hole arm provides one inch less movement (vs. the outermost hole) to a link that is perpendicular to the arm at the midpoint of its arc. 

The full range of the outer hole is ~4.25” so you will have ~23.5% less range. 

 

I'd be concerned  (perhaps unfounded)  that if I used the second hole for something heavy like a snowblower it would be much more taxing on the lift mechanism as a whole.  

 

Thoughts? 

[Handy Don 15,669]

1 minute ago, ebinmaine said:

 

I'd be concerned  (perhaps unfounded)  that if I used the second hole for something heavy like a snowblower it would be much more taxing on the lift mechanism as a whole.  

 

Thoughts? 

Given that the lifted weight is the same (the blower), the closer hole is an easier to lift but yields less travel/movement/height and less torque on the rockshaft. But the forces on the rockshaft bushings will be the same. 

[Handy Don 15,669]

If having the max lift range matters (and to me it would), I’d seriously consider:

- trimming the end of the arm

- welding up the remains of the outermost hole

- sistering the arm with some ⅛" sheet metal welded on both sides and rounding the end of the arm

- drilling a new hole centered ½” from the end if the shortened arm

 

Yes, a bit awkward with the rock shaft in the tractor. 

 

Edited Monday at 09:16 PM by Handy Don

[ebinmaine 76,613]

28 minutes ago, Handy Don said:

If having the max lift range matters (and to me it would), I’d seriously consider:

- trimming the end of the arm

- welding up the remains of the outermost hole

- sistering the arm with some ⅛" sheet metal welded on both sides and rounding the end of the arm

- drilling a new hole centered ½” from the end if the shortened arm

 

Yes, a bit awkward with the rock shaft in the tractor. 

 

 

 

I may move the steering gear itself forward a couple hairs. Redrill with 4 new holes instead of just the 2 forward ones. 

[kpinnc 16,676]

5 hours ago, ebinmaine said:

may move the steering gear itself forward a couple hairs. Redrill with 4 new holes instead of just the 2 forward ones. 

 

This was actually something I had thought about. I only need about 1/4 inch for the lift to clear. Maybe less... 

 

The upper steering shaft is the only thing that would be of concern. The hole that it passes through is partially slotted already. 

 

Definitely got some work to do. 

[19richie66 17,772]

On 1/11/2026 at 10:11 PM, Lee1977 said:

We talked about this bearing and bracket, though I would send the picture any way.

Where might one find said bracket. I must have missed seeing it before

[kpinnc 16,676]

31 minutes ago, 19richie66 said:

Where might one find said bracket. I must have missed seeing it before

 

The bracket is on all the 500 series "Classic" machines. The standard version just has a bushing but the one in the pic was modified to use a 3/4 flange wheel bearing. 

Edited Wednesday at 06:49 PM by kpinnc

[Lee1977 7,519]

34 minutes ago, 19richie66 said:

Where might one find said bracket. I must have missed seeing it before

Early 520's and 500's, my 89 520 has one. Later 520's they just modified the battery tray.

Edited Wednesday at 06:52 PM by Lee1977

[kpinnc 16,676]

3 hours ago, Lee1977 said:

Early 520's and 500's, my 89 520 has one. Later 520's they just modified the battery tray.

 

All of my machines (518H, two 520H, and one 520-8) were 1987-1990 models, so I was unaware of the changes to the later model 520s. 

 

Thanks Don! I learn something new every day! 

[cleat 8,429]

8 hours ago, Lee1977 said:

Early 520's and 500's, my 89 520 has one. Later 520's they just modified the battery tray.

 

Actually the later 520's moved the steering shaft bushing to up under the dash.

 

The dash can be drilled to accept a wheel bearing as well.

 

A couple of mine have been done this way.

 

 

[kpinnc 16,676]

Well, I have a plan for the upper steering shaft on the 523-H, but it will be the weekend before I try it. I want to add a couple inches to the length to raise the steering wheel, so I'll definitely need some additional support. Hopefully it'll work out. 

[19richie66 17,772]

5 hours ago, kpinnc said:

Well, I have a plan for the upper steering shaft on the 523-H, but it will be the weekend before I try it. I want to add a couple inches to the length to raise the steering wheel, so I'll definitely need some additional support. Hopefully it'll work out. 

After seeing what you can do, piece of cake. 

[kpinnc 16,676]

Got the lift cut down just a little. Split the top hole, welded it up and drilled another. Only lost about 3/8 length on the bellcrank. Gives 1/4 inch clearance now. 

 

Also installed the lower steering and aligned the wheels. Used 2 of the 3 shims underneath to get the best gear mesh. So far so good...

 

 

[cleat 8,429]

13 minutes ago, kpinnc said:

Got the lift cut down just a little. Split the top hole, welded it up and drilled another. Only lost about 3/8 length on the bellcrank. Gives 1/4 inch clearance now. 

 

Also installed the lower steering and aligned the wheels. Used 2 of the 3 shims underneath to get the best gear mesh. So far so good...

 

 

 

Looks just like the late model bellcrank now.

Great job !

 

[kpinnc 16,676]

I think I got the hydro pedal issue fixed. Long story short- building a tractor from several models can create small issues that have a bigger effect than you (meaning me) think. 

 

The DCL carrier parts (the whole center console) are from a 518H, the frame and tranny were from a 312H. Somehow, the linkages were more different between the two than I thought. The hydro was strong, but not very fast. 

 

For one, the link that connects the rear cam to the center DCL carrier was about 1/2 inch too long. I trimmed it down and that gave me full forward travel at the rear cam plate. 

 

Second, the vertical "return to center" and park brake cam stopped the follower way to early, so reverse cam travel with the shortened link was very little. I ground the bottom of the opening out about 1/4 inch. It doesn't touch anything normally, but this one did. The vertical cam was a new part when I assembled everything so maybe I had the wrong part? Regardless it no longer binds but still returns the DCL carrier to center and the park brake still works as it should. I didn't get pics of the bottom of the cam but it no longer stops the follower. 

 

So all of this now gives full travel at the rear hydro cam plate in forward and reverse. It stopped about 1/4 inch from the stops before so hopefully it's good now. 

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by kpinnc