GC parking brake popped out! Damage pics.

[rjmack]

btw, i can hardly wait for the 'first scratch rant':laughing:

 

[ray66v]

As to being dissatisfied. Actually, to the contrary, I am very satisfied with the GC.

I believe you are dissatisfied with the parking brake, and that is what I was referring to.

I am not having problems with my brake, and don't know if other 2300 series owners that are having problems.

So, I am wondering if it has to do only with the 2600/2400's? And what, if anything, was done differently on the 2600/2400's?

If they can't use the older version, hopefully there will be a way to redesign the toothed part, or install a stronger spring??

The filter shield seems simple, looking at the finished product, but it took some effort to get it right. Even something as simple as the drilling template was not without a hassle, because the printer, they sent it to, kept resizing it.

TO all who read this post, everything above is my opinion and my opinion alone. I do not purport any of this as FACT. Nothing more than speculation based on a very limited set of observations. It's just my :2cents:

LOL, think that will work?

 

[irvingj]

Wacky, glad to hear you went with a new one; notwithstanding the extra expense, I too think you'll be better off in the long run.

I went out and took a look at the parking brake setup on the 2300 series... quite similar, with a piece of angle iron engaging as a pawl onto the toothed plate attached to the parking brake lever.

I noticed that the pawl is simply surface-welded onto the brake activating rod, moving rearward when the brake is applied.... makes me wonder how the angle it's attached at is set up at the factory. It appears to me that if that angle weren't just right, it might make it easier for it to slip out on its own....

I haven't had any issues with my 2310's parking brake.... yet... but I won't ever rely on it on a slope!

 

[ray66v]

Thanks for those photo's irvingj. :thumbsup:

Apparently the angle of engagement is the difference. Because, they do look similar.

 

[tsteahr]

I believe you are dissatisfied with the parking brake, and that is what I was referring to.

I dawned on me that because I posted those pictures, folks here may have taken that as my being dissatisfied or unhappy with the brake, and the pictures were supposed to be proof of the problem. That was not my intent for posting the pictures. I was trying to show that if a operator does not fully engage the latch, it can result in the brake releasing. In other words, when used correctly the brake is fine. It was certainly not my intent for the pictures to be used as "evidence" or proof against massey.

So I honestly don't have any issues with the brake. I once failed to fully engage the latch in my first few hours of ownership. I chalked it up to learing the machine, not to a problem.

I am not having problems with my brake, and don't know if other 2300 series owners that are having problems.

So, I am wondering if it has to do only with the 2600/2400's? And what, if anything, was done differently on the 2600/2400's?

If they can't use the older version, hopefully there will be a way to redesign the toothed part, or install a stronger spring??

The GC2300 photos posted by irvingj look very similar to GC2400 series. I don't think there was much (if any) change in the design. The spring on the thumb lever actually pulls the toothed plate away from the brake arm, so unfortunately I don't see a stronger spring on either the thumb lever or the brake pedal helping. On the toothed part, when the latch is fully engaged the design of the teeth are such that a slight amount of additional pedal travel is necessary to release the latch (at least on mine). I actually think a considerable amount of thought was put into the design of the teeth and pawl. I think any tooth based latch design will be susceptible to a partial engagement however.

The filter shield seems simple, looking at the finished product, but it took some effort to get it right. Even something as simple as the drilling template was not without a hassle, because the printer, they sent it to, kept resizing it.

I can appreciate that.:thumbsup: I have never found it simple to design anything that actually works as intended and without problems...

LOL, think that will work?

It was worth a try...:laughing:

 

[ray66v]

tsteahr, How do you know if the brake is not fully engaged?

I got the impression there was no way to know.

 

[bp fick]

Wacky, Congrats on the new machine!!! We want photos!!!

This is absolutely a good outcome. Better if it had happened three weeks ago and spared you the ulcer, but hey. Rejoice brother. Your tribulations are now over. Move on, never look back.

 

[tsteahr]

tsteahr, How do you know if the brake is not fully engaged?

I got the impression there was no way to know.

Check out the pics I posted (post #115 of this thread on pg 11). You can look through the cutout in the floor and see the latch engagement.

 

[Wacky]

Check out the pics I posted (post #115 of this thread on pg 11). You can look through the cutout in the floor and see the latch engagement.

Which I am doing now every time I use it!!:thumbsup:
I also noticed it to "feel" like it engages better. Don't know why, maybe because I have been off of it for a while, or maybe they tightned it more than the previous one. Either way, I am a little gun-shy at using it at all.

 

[Wacky]

Wacky, Congrats on the new machine!!! We want photos!!!

This is absolutely a good outcome. Better if it had happened three weeks ago and spared you the ulcer, but hey. Rejoice brother. Your tribulations are now over. Move on, never look back.

Thanks. I will try and get some up tomarrow evening. Have to get back to mowing now, I am behind as you probably know.