Archive through June 17, 2012

[kmcconaughey]

Brian W., umm, that's not my Cub Cadet or green thing... I just re-posted some old photos from a forum member.

 

[hydroharry]

Dennis F - hey thanks for posting that reply to Bill J on replacing the axle. I just had a 2nd cup of coffee and am still a little confused, but agree with what you said.

Bill J and Brian W - no need for a micrometer or any real special tools for squeezing the axle channel back to correct width. In fact, I don't know if there is a "correct" measurment width identified anyplace. It's correct to me when the axle "just" fits into the channel, and by just fits I mean you may have to push it in a little, or puts some grease on the center part that rides against the channel. The "snugger" the better since the channel will open up again over time/use.

Little Donny T - I don't agree on having a little play in the axle channel if you use the pin, but since it sounds as tho you are using the nut/bolt method then you have to leave it slightly loose so the axle can rotate - basically you want it snug, which I wouldn't consider play.

Charlie - hey things are looking good there. The GearHeads are gonna love ya once you got the collars attached.

 

[aschumacher]

Hummmm, Charlie looks like the orig mfgr rolled the edge of the collar to hold it on. You gonna epoxy it or come up with some neat way to crimp the edges? You might have to chuck it in a lathe if you want to roll the edge.

 

[rkelm]

Hello Rodney here, didn't have a chance to look at forum this weekend and looked at archieved and saw the find Wayne had. Would really like to talk you out of it. That is a great looking machine given the age. My first one was a 126 and still miss it. Great find.

 

[lhinds]

I finally found the picture of the 44A deck on a narrowframe. The belt pulleys have been bent (turned) to alighn the belt with the center pulley. The humpback subframe was used. This setup worked very good. Sorry about the poor quality of the picture.

 

[mhomrighausen]

Paul F. They are absolutely positive they set everything according to the manual? Man... These are darn hard trying to visualize any problem without seeing it. Wayne S. has a possibility. What I am thinking is they have not properly installed that linkage that goes alongside the hydro pump/motor. If you don't mark that when taking it off then when you put it back together you can be too high or too low and if not in the right position then they can have the too fast reverse and too slow forward.

Looking at the Service Manual for a 125 hydro transmission... Check the foldout section called Illustration 28 Schematic of a hydrostatic Transmission. If I recall (and it's been sometime since I've viewed one of these critters in person) the bracket that the pivot pin is attached to will slide up and down just a lttle in the bolts while re-attaching. If you don't get that one in proper perspective then you can adjust all the rest of the linkage to hearts content and it will still be off.That is what I'd be looking into... (<font size="-1">Of course that is what I would do and maybe not what someone else would do.</font> )

 

[wshytle]

Rodney-

I haven't had a 126 until now and from what I've heard I can't wait till I get it up and going. It's missing the flywheel screen and I won't run one like that. I also realized the darn thing has spring assist. If it only had hydraulics...

Marlin-

Maybe that's the problem I'm having with a couple of my hydros. I can't for the life of me get the neutral just right. I've figured all along it had to be in the linkage. From what Paul said Sam and his uncle were experiencing I thought of the swashplate right off.

 

[dfrisk]

LUTHER - Thanks for posting the pic of the 127 & 44A deck. Guess I'll have to start searching some of the CC graveyards for a decent deck & mule drive. The problem John Lang had with the deck not lifting very high that Wyatt mentioned is common with most if not all the 44 & 50 inch decks I bet. The 50C on my 982 only raises maybe an inch from my 3 to 3-1/2 inch mowing height.

I'll have to save my 38" deck because it's the one my home-made lawn vac chute adapter bolts to.

If I get another 44A deck, I'll have to find my piece I cut off my old 44A deck so I know how much to cut off this one too. Think I made the whole deck 47 inches wide, just narrow enough to fit between the wheel well tubs in a pickup. IH got a little carried away with protecting people's toes by extending the overhang on the discharge chute. That 4-5 inches makes all the difference whether I fit between some obstacles in my yard or not.

 

[bwittman]

Dennis,

Sorry to have originally left you out of the conversation. It seems as both you and Harry have experience on the front axle squeeze, so I'll give it a try.

As for the toolage. Most of my tools are 30 plus years old. I try to buy a tool once and never again. I have mostly S-K and Proto, with a few Craftsman, Snap-On and misc. tool brands thrown in. This stuff was made when S-K was really in business and Proto wasn't part of the Stanley Works. It seems to me that I have bought too much for this thing now and a few extra tools would cause a pretty good war. I'll get through this, but in retrospect, I should have bought a new one from Tractor Supply or Home Depot. It would have made things easier at home.

Of all the things I have lost, I think I miss my mind the most.

 

[fcurrier]

Brian: "in retrospect, I should have bought a new one from Tractor Supply or Home Depot."
That's a theory that's been bugging me since a guy posted about a $990 149. If a guy just has 1 it's worth putting money into. I'm talking about making it mechanically proper and letting the "look like new" aspect wait 'til later. Tonight I mowed some more with our $500 149. Since starting to use it last year I've got 52.5 hours on the hour meter that I installed right after deciding it was a keeper. I've replaced the steering column, front tires, seat, oil (of course), just did the hydro fluid and filter with a new rear cover gasket. That's off the top of my head and I still have less money into it then I'd have with a new one. Plus, a new one would never last around here. My "lawns" are basically reclaimed woodland.

 

[ddulac]

Nice Original Troy! Those are just cool tractors.

I found another great use for the 100 last night (aside from constantly re-grading the back yard that "shifts" with the spring winds).

Sitting in the back of the trailer in this picture are 60 8" cmu blocks, 2/3 of a cube. I have been using the tractor and trailer to "stock" the block for my masons around the perimeter of the new cubshop. It saves me money because I pay them by the hour.

The tractor does bark a little when the swamp tires dig in and pull all that weight up onto the slab.

 

[nbextermueller]

Brian,

Don't even start thinking about those mowers at the big box stores. They are a bunch of over priced, bent up, china sheet metal. Not single one of them last 5 years. I mow with a 31yr old 782. My neighbors all have "new" mowers. I stopped counting how many times their junk is broken and I either help them fix it, or mow their grass while it's in the shop. Heck, I have one neighbors big broken Toro in my cub shop right now. It has power steering and all... He went out and bought a brand new craftsman last summer and it's been down 3 times already for mechanical failures.

He stopped questioning me when I drag home another cub and was really eyeing up my "old" 2072 Super I just scored.

So get your mind right and that cub cutting grass. It will last the rest of your life with a bit of proper maintanence like every motorized thing needs.

 

[kshultz]

Kraig,
"hump back"?

I'm not famliar with this term. Could you please explain in more detail?

 

[wshytle]

Shultzie-

The section of the undercarriage the attaches to the mule drive has a "dome" shape to it. I'm pretty sure this is the "hump". I posted a pic of one that broke a couple of days ago. I think this design also has something to do with what Dennis was talking about with certain decks not rising/lifting very much but I'm not that familiar with them all that much myself.

 

[kmcconaughey]

Shultzie, note the arch (aka hump back) in the newer 44" and 50" deck sub-frame:

Compare that to the older (mostly) straight style sub-frame for the 38", 42" and 48" decks:

 

[pbell]

Brian, Nic,
The models sold by Home Depot, Tractor Supply, etc., are low end models, driven by the company "bean counters", because they sell. The average, modern american, surburan home owner, with their "throw away" mentality (buy cheap and when it breaks throw it away and buy another one) will buy the low end models, but will not, for what ever reason, spend the money for a new high end model that would last much longer (if properly maintained). Not everyone can, or wants to, repair and maintain a 40 year old "lawn mower", even though it would be better than the new low end models. In the money of the day, that 40 year old Cub Cadet was not cheap when new, and in todays money would be in the same price range as a new high end model. I can't find my copies of a 149 price list, but in 1966 a 122 sold for $905 plus $139 - $182.75 for a deck. Cub Cadets were never inexpensive.

Price sells anything, and the cheaper the price, the more that will sell, but, if the price is lower, the quality and reliability is normally also lower.

 

[kshultz]

Huh, well I knew there was different subframes I thought maybe you were talking about the deck. Thanks! This clears it up for me anyhow.

 

[jchamberlin]

Paul, Nic, Brian, and Frank,

I don't think the Garden Tractors in this forum compare to the Lawn Mowers typically sold at the big-box stores. I also don't think that the argument that an older Cub Cadet makes better economic sense is an especially strong one. A person can spend a lot of money and time fixing up one of these machines.

I think a better argument can be made for the tractor's utility and quality. A Garden Tractor can do things that can't even be imagined by a lawn mower. Also, one never rides around the yard ENJOYING the seat time in a cheap, tinny no-name (same-name) lawn mower. The machines simply don't compare.

But if ONLY money is counted, a case can be made for buying an $800 tractor and discarding it when it starts to act up or needs repairs. In a similar fashion, if one can determine the condition of an older Cub Cadet, a similar price is justified, in my opinion. However, if $200 buys a 40 year-old tractor that needs all its tires replaced, its entire suspension and steering re-worked, its driveline replaced and its motor re-worked --and all you want to do is mow your yard, the wife may have a point: it doesn't make economic sense. A refurbished 149 that is mechanically correct is worth $990 and its purchase can be defended.

On the other hand, if you enjoy working on things mechanical, and you find that working on automobiles, trucks, and boats is too expensive and takes up too much space (not to mention getting too complicated, in the case of automobiles & trucks), then a tractor hobby makes sense, and sooner or later you learn to pick and choose those projects worthy of your time.

For What Its Worth, My Two Cents, etc.

By-the-way, at my local Cub Cadet dealer, the Cub Cadet is now the low-end of the lines offered; the high end is Kubota, and the mid-line is Bad Boy.

 

[bjamison]

Jeremiah - I totally agree.

I found myself with a small fleet of other color tractors and this Spring with a 1650. I'm on the hunt for another IH Cub Cadet - but the yard has to be mowed. Two years ago, I bought a MTD Cub Cadet LTX 1042 from a dealer (same as is sold at the box stores). This tractor starts every time, mows great (much to my surprise), has foot controls, tight turning radius and is comfortable to ride. Sometimes when the grass needs mowed, I don't have time to pump-up a flat tire or break out the starter fluid. For my Wife and family - it is exactly the right machine for them. Sit on it, turn the key and go. It also has an abundance of safety switches on it too - I'm comfortable no one is going to get hurt. My lesson learned is - find a machine that will go every time and have the rest of the fleet in whatever state of repair is convenient at the time. This way, grass gets mowed, but you don't feel pressured to work or spend money on an old piece of iron - and ruin the enjoyment of owning/fixing/restoring it. My 1650 is a premium garden tractor and I got a good deal on it - but, as I continue to work on it and spend $$$'s, it is fast becoming a premium priced tractor too. The other benefit of having a MTD low priced Cub Cadet is I don't have to worry about someone driving one of my fine garden tractors into a fence post...

Having said that - I may look at a 149 this weekend. Anything I should watch out for? Did the 149 have hydraulic lift?

 

[dfrisk]

JEREMIAH - I respectfully disagree that buying an older but servicable garden tractor like a Cub Cadet DOES make financial sense.

I paid $362 for my #72 in Jan, 1981. It got a new battery, a rattle-can paint job, but a good rattle can paint job. I rebuilt & installed a K241 in place of the 3-4 yr old K181 that was in the tractor when I bought it in 1985. I did a "cheapie rebuild", think parts & labor was around $300 total. I had the S/G rebuilt around '82 or '83 for $30. And while I've put many new parts on it, it's been my main mower for 31 years also.

I didn't have to put the new rear tires & wheels on it, or the AM/FM/Cassette radio, the lights I maybe did, since I used to do more yard work late in the day, and finished after dark.

I bought a QA-36 snow blower in about 1982 or '83 and used it every winter until about 15 yrs ago when I finally got my Super H up here to play in the snow.

I spent WAY too much money to build up a K321 Killer Kohler for it about 6-7 yrs ago, also installed a new $300 steering gearbox, built a custom 3-gal gas tank, and it still needs a new better paint job that I now have the equipment to do, but I see no reason why it won't still be mowing well and looking great for another 20+ yrs.

I bought a very well used 129 back in about 1990 for $400. It also needed paint & decals, the K301 rebuilt, new seat, and I put a used pair of tires on the back. I sold it at my Dad's last auction for $680, No I didn't get my money back out of it, but I mowed a LOT of grass with it for the 15 yrs I owned it.

I guess the financial end of the equation depends on how much of the repair work you do yourself for just the cost of the parts, how much you want to fix them up, to "Restoration" Standards, or just refurbish, or just keep them running reliably. And what you start with for a tractor makes a HUGE difference too. Something that was rode hard and parked ten years ago out in the weeds makes for an expensive refurbish.

The one thing you can count on with an old Cub Cadet is that you won't have to do many repairs to the transmission & rearend. You should be able to keep them running as long as you can afford the Kohler parts.