[Farmall] drawbar bolts

[Mike]

If you are at all familiar with the later "numbered Lo-Boy's", they are
essentially what the Cub would have been if IH had fixed many of the
things we find fault with: full length frame, separate radiator,
standard throwout bearing, clutch that can be changed without splitting
the tractor, electric (constant running) PTO clutch, somewhat standard
hydraulic system, key/solenoid start, optional Cat I three-point hitch,
separate tank and hood, optional creeper auxiliary transmission, and
even a pressurized cooling system. On the downside, they used an idiot
light instead of an oil pressure gauge and kept the proprietary PTO
speed/direction arrangement. The final iteration, the 184, had an
alternator. But everything else about the Cub that we know and love
remained the same - the same old F head engine (hot-rodded up to 20 hp),
three speed transmission, etc. On the downside, the steering was more
like a garden tractor's, and the Cultivision offset was gone. For
whatever reason, IH put the (Cub Cadet) belt driven generator/starter
and an outboard clutch on the early 154/185 but went back to a regular
starter and flywheel clutch on the 184 (the later number went backwards
because IH wanted to the "new" '84 series tractors to all be numbered
and look alike). I suspect that the reasons for keeping the oddball PTO
arrangement were 1. to sell more implements and 2. the engineering cost
to add a regular 540 PTO would have been prohibitive. The numbered
Lo-boys were targeted at the commercial landscaping market, where most
of the implements were rotary mowers and snowblowers, and maybe pulling
a trailer or drag.

<http://public.fotki.com/mikesloane/international_184/184_painted1.html>

Mike

On 4/14/2013 11:49 AM, Tom Bonjour wrote:
>
> Mike, Sounds like you have had some experience with this. I'll bet
> you are right a little ramming. Ramming with the one arm loader
> ought to do it. Cub features I would add to the list of things I
> would change are the radiator/bolster arrangement and the throw out
> bearing. I would much rather see a normal radiator and a throw out
> bearing that doesn't pull the engine down. But as others have said
> here, cost was probably a big factor in the original decisions.  It
> is amazing how many of these little tractors are still running and
> often working. I have a one row planter rigged up for the one point
> hitch and plan to plant sweet corn with mine soon.
>
> Tom