MT160D

[Capricious]

"...That's a really good looking load!..."


Appreciate the kind comments.

However, there are a couple areas open for criticism, and I am changing my plans a bit in response to those.

The tow vehicle, a long-bed, 2WD Ford Ranger, has a max. tow capacity of 4000 lbs, a CGWR of 7500 lbs, and a GVWR of 4700lbs.

The trailer, as pictured above, weighed 2780 lbs, within the limits, while the combined weight of truck and trailer weighed 6640 lbs, to which I would need to add my weight and a few other items, probably bringing the total to 7000 lbs, which is under the 7500 lb CGWR, but not by much.

However, the specs also mention that trailer brakes are required any time the total load (trailer and vehicle) exceed the GVWR of 4700 lbs, and i have no trailer brakes. Another issue, that totally escaped me until recently, is that the truck is licensed for 6000 lbs.

So, I have decided not to trailer the tractor and rotary cutter together. I will make a trip down to the site hauling the cutter, the angle blade, and also my walk-behind brush cutter. Will unload and hide in the weeds the cutter and the blade, and maybe do some weed mowing around the places too steep for the tractor, and then head home that evening. This was my orignal plan when I thought i would end up with a 48 inch cutter instead of a 42"

Additional trips will be with just the tractor as load, which might still put me a bit over the 6000 lb license plate limit but not by much. Will still be in the load range where the trailer really should have brakes. I should add that the 4700 lb GVWR is a heavy payload package (standard GVWR is 4350 lbs, I think) and that package does include larger rear drum brakes that standard ( 10" by 2.5" vs 9" by 1.75"), however it does not appear that the heavy payload package affects the trailer towing ratings in any way.

There is no way I could safely leave the tractor on site, but I am hoping the cutter and blade can be concealed well-enough that they can be left there and won't be stolen.

The long range plans are for a bigger truck, but that is probably (2) years down the road.

Test-fitted the new PTO shaft last night- fits perfectly, no cutting needed. A lot lighter weight than the old shaft. Battery on the tractor was dead. Not sure what happened there but it may be related the the ignition switch problem. Charged if for a couple hours and the tractor started right up. Not a big issue.

 

[284 International]

Thank you for being a careful and responsible driver. I respect you for being diligent and cautious; I wish more people were like that.

For what it's worth, the fuel cost for the additional 400 mile round trip will just about pay for one side of brakes for your trailer. It's about $100 per side. It's always easy to spend other people's money, but if it's a given that you need to get out there with all that equipment, your choice is to either make one trip or two. If you're convinced that you should have trailer brakes to haul your tractor with the cutter, blade, and the walk behind mower, then the choice is whether it's worth roughly $170 to have brakes on your trailer and a brake controller in your pickup, and never have to make two trips again, while being safer on each trip in the process.

I don't know what the situation about the truck being licensed for only 6000 lbs means. Is it possible to update the weight limit through the DMV? I imagine that would cause other things, perhaps insurance, to require alteration as well, but it may be preferable to operating outside the stated conditions for your insurance policy and registration in case something does happen. I am continually surprised that California does not require vehicle safety inspections, has virtually no enforcement of vehicle weight limits apart from commercial trucks, and doesn't pay any attention at all to people hauling loads commercially with pickups that I can tell.

That obviously colors my frame of reference when I say this: I'd probably just drive the entire combination, trailer brakes or not. I'm not saying one should, but on flat ground, good weather, and all that I don't think it's unsafe with a careful, attentive driver.

 

[Capricious]

Thank you for being a careful and responsible driver. I respect you for being diligent and cautious; I wish more people were like that.

For what it's worth, the fuel cost for the additional 400 mile round trip will just about pay for one side of brakes for your trailer. It's about $100 per side. It's always easy to spend other people's money, but if it's a given that you need to get out there with all that equipment, your choice is to either make one trip or two. If you're convinced that you should have trailer brakes to haul your tractor with the cutter, blade, and the walk behind mower, then the choice is whether it's worth roughly $170 to have brakes on your trailer and a brake controller in your pickup, and never have to make two trips again, while being safer on each trip in the process.

I don't know what the situation about the truck being licensed for only 6000 lbs means. Is it possible to update the weight limit through the DMV? I imagine that would cause other things, perhaps insurance, to require alteration as well, but it may be preferable to operating outside the stated conditions for your insurance policy and registration in case something does happen. I am continually surprised that California does not require vehicle safety inspections, has virtually no enforcement of vehicle weight limits apart from commercial trucks, and doesn't pay any attention at all to people hauling loads commercially with pickups that I can tell.

That obviously colors my frame of reference when I say this: I'd probably just drive the entire combination, trailer brakes or not. I'm not saying one should, but on flat ground, good weather, and all that I don't think it's unsafe with a careful, attentive driver.

Thanks for your comment. It really does not mean an extra round trip (which costs every bit of $100.00). There are areas that I would not attempt to cut with the tractor, such as a steep hill that must be accessed from the top of the hill, as the bottom of the hill is federal property, and for that the walk-behind cutter is my only option. If i can "knock-out" that hill on the same trip with taking down the cutter & the blade, then I have still accomplished something. I don't think i would have the time to run the tractor over most ofthe ground, and run the walk-behind on the hill and a few other places, in just one trip. Too much work for this old man. The big concern is leaving the implements out in the weather, and at risk of theft.

Yes, the license could be upgraded, except that i jsut renewed the thing a couple weeks ago. If i had thought about it before hand, it would have been only a few dollars more. Not sure what the cost would be at this point, to change it. Anyway, that is not really a safety issue.

Adding brakes is an option; the axle has the mounting flanges for backing plates, but then there is also the need for a controller. But, then I am still pushing the towing/hauling limits on the truck, and a bigger truck (future plans) might not have the same brake issue with that size trailer, so i might be ahead to save the money for the next truck.

I keep of lot of tools in the truck; (3) chainsaws (up until now, clearing this land has involved a lot of chainsaw work), ax, shovel, pick, a couple of jacks, tire chains, tools, (2) two hand air pumps (one high pressure/low volume, the other low pressure/high volume) and other stuff. I will be going through all of that to see how much can be left in the garage. Hope to save a couple hundred pounds or so there.

 

[Capricious]

To summarize my PTO shaft situation: I have a 16 hp trctor & a 42" rotary cutter. The input shaft on the cutter gearbox is splined just like the output shaft on the tractor PTO. The shaft that came with the used cutter was a big ole thing suitable for an 85 hp tractor, and it had no shearbolt/pin, nor a slip clutch. I bought a slip clutch with male & female splines, mounted it on the cutter gearbox, and then went to cut the shaft to shorten it, wherein i discovered that would require welding on this old-style shaft. I found a pretty good deal on a new shaft with splined connectors on both ends, and which also incorporated a slip clutch, and the new shaft fits perfectly, but that left me with a stand-alone slip clutch i did not need, and will probably sell.

I noticed that while the new shaft had a spring-loaded push pin connector on the tractor end, it used a removable threaded pin with a nut on the slip clutch end, where as the stand-alone slip clutch had a push-pin quick connector on that end.



Since my plans are now to leave the cutter on-site, and i will want to remove the shaft and take it home with me, having to use a wrench to remove the shaft seemed like extra work. Both the shaft and the stand-alone slip clutch came from Agri Supply. I can't seem to find a manufacturer's name on either , nor on the sparse paperwork that came with each. Obviously Chinese stuff. But both slip clutches appeared to be about the same, so i thought I would try switching-out the coupling ends between the two, so that the shaft would have a push-pin coupler on both ends:



Internal parts appear to be pretty-much the same, with one exception:




These flanges, which are the surfaces the friction discs act upon, received differing amounts of machining. One is obviously smoother than the other. Whether this would affect the amount of torque needed to "slip" I don't know. After the thing slips a few times out in the field, the "rough" flange might look as smooth as the other one anyway. But it appears that manufacturing consistency is not what it could be. Maybe it doesn't matter on these things. Anyway, these two pieces were the parts that were interchanged between the two slip clutches.


I went ahead and reassembled the parts as I intended to, and now have my shaft with a slip clutch AND with push pin quick connectors on both ends:

 

[284 International]

...a bigger truck (future plans) might not have the same brake issue with that size trailer, so i might be ahead to save the money for the next truck.

I know exactly what you mean, and am exceedingly frugal myself. However, I like having brakes on my trailers, even when the tow vehicle can reasonably stop the load without them. A controller is under $50, and the wiring kit may already be included in your vehicle's factory kit. The controller is removable from vehicle to vehicle, so isn't a waste even if you upgrade in tow vehicle size.

At any rate, you have a good, safe, arrangement, and in the end that is all that matters. Good luck with your project; I hope everything goes smoothly and well for you.

 

[techwrtr2]

I give thanks for having a 2500 series truck at my disposal.

But I do want a higher capacity trailer.

 

[Capricious]

Too hot to try cutting brush with the tractor this weekend, so i am thinking I might try adjusting valve clearances, as the engine seems to "tap" fairly loud.

There are supposed to be timing marks on the crank pulley for TDC on #1, but for #3 & #2 one is supposed to rotate the crank 240 degrees.

Anyone have a good way to determine 240 degrees of rotation without buying a degree wheel?


Thanks.

 

[284 International]

I think the reason they give that advisement is to make it possible to adjust cylinder 2 and 3 at the same time. If you merely spin the crankshaft so that each cylinder is at TDC and adjust the valves then, it will be fine.

I have marked a socket with long and short lines on the points and flats of the socket, which gives 30 degrees of rotation per mark. Or, it's a half turn plus one point of the socket.

 

[Capricious]

I had thought about marking degrees on a metal disc and attaching it to the crank pulley (making my own degree wheel, in other words), but hadn't thought about just marking the socket.

Thanks.

 

[Capricious]

Did not get a whole lot done on the tractor over the weekend. Temps both days in the upper 90's F. Took my father to breakfast Saturday morning. He had boats of one kind or another since I was born (which was a long time ago) so had breakfast at a marina so we could look at the boats:

Deli and Ship Store | Alton Marina

After breakfast meet the wife @ the non-profit where we both volunteer and worked a few hours there, so didn't get home until 14:00 in the afternoon. Had some other things to do but found time to clean-up the engine on the tractor a bit in preparation for setting valve lash. Don't want crap falling down into the valve train while the valve cover is off. Also, loaded the old sears garden tractor onto the trailer for mowing on Sunday morning:







Sunday morning mowed about 1.5 acres @ the non-profit, came home, unloaded Sears tractor, removed deck, washed deck & greased spindles, greased whole tractor and remounted the deck. Fired up the weed eater and trimmed and edged the yard. Then time for Mitsubishi.

I knew that there was a flexible coupling of some sort on the crankshaft pulley. Appeared to be a rubber "doughnut" held on with 3 bolts, with a 3-legged steel "spider" with female splines fastened to the doughnut with 3 bolts (one of which was missing).





Since the tractor has these mounts on the frame, I assume that at one time it had a mid-mount mower deck which was driven off the front of the engine:





I removed the coupling and discovered that the rubber doughnut was bad, cracked through at one of the mounting bolts:





I am guessing that this is not the standard crankshaft pulley, but rather a pulley intended to work with the flexible coupling:





Guessed correctly first time at the size of socket needed for the bolt on the crankshaft pulley (27 MM) and rolled the engine over looking for the timing marks. The mark on the timing cover was easy enough to find but the marks on the pulley are bit tougher, i saw something that looked like it might be the TDC mark but am not sure.

As the sun was bright, the temps hot, and sweat running in my eyes, I decided to call it a day. Valve lash will have to wait.