Demise of the Robin...lots of smoke

cqaigy2 · Sep 10, 2008

That does seem a bargain.

My 422 w/Robin engine has the pumps all on one end toward the center.

J_J · Sep 10, 2008

Does anyone have the same group PT's? It seems like every time one of us talks about their PT, it is different. They must flip a coin as to what they will build today, and let's tell the customers that the printer is down so we don't have to print a manual or hydraulic schematic. Let's also mix up parts between American and Italian. Let's also let them fix their own crap, and all we have to do after the sale is sell our parts at inflated prices. If we mix things up good enough, they will not even be able to compare one PT against another. Damit, this is fun.

Marks481 · Sep 10, 2008

SnowRidge said:
$40 is amazing. Engine removal on the Robin equipped PTs must be vastly simpler than with the Kohlers

4 bolts hold the engine to the bed, 6 bolts hold the pump on. Disconnect 4 electrical wires and your done. Doesn't seem too difficult.

Of course, the putting back together is probably the part where your realize that the $40 is a good deal.

SnowRidge · Sep 10, 2008

Tim_in_CT said:
4 bolts hold the engine to the bed, 6 bolts hold the pump on. Disconnect 4 electrical wires and your done. Doesn't seem too difficult.

Of course, the putting back together is probably the part where your realize that the $40 is a good deal.

Here's the procedure I wrote up for getting a Kohler with PT built muffler out. Machines with the Kohler muffler require less heavy lifting.

You Robin guys with pumps on only one end have it soooo easy.

BobRip · Sep 10, 2008

My 2000 model year PT422 has a Robin engine and pumps on both ends of the engine. I think it's the model year that determines the pump location, not the engine.

MossRoad · Sep 11, 2008

My 2001 PT425 with the Kohler has pumps on both ends, too. I agree that model year determines pump location on the 400 series.

SnowRidge · Sep 11, 2008

I wasn't aware that the Robins could drive pumps off of the front of the engine. Most small engines don't seem to have that capability. I still don't think it's as simple as a model year thing. In fact, as far as I know, PT doesn't have model years, just build years. I would be really surprised if the pump location change coincided with a year change, except as a coincidence.

It's as if PT changes how they put the machines together almost on a whim. Something triggered the change from pumps on both ends to all pumps on one end. Maybe it was the difficulty of engine removal with them on both ends. Maybe the tram pumps suddenly became available with a stacking capability. Maybe they found it was cheaper to stack them all on one end.

We will probably never know the real reason, but if I had to guess, cost to build would be the big driver.

ponytug · Sep 11, 2008

SnowRidge said:
I wasn't aware that the Robins could drive pumps off of the front of the engine. Most small engines don't seem to have that capability. I still don't think it's as simple as a model year thing. In fact, as far as I know, PT doesn't have model years, just build years. I would be really surprised if the pump location change coincided with a year change, except as a coincidence.

It's as if PT changes how they put the machines together almost on a whim. Something triggered the change from pumps on both ends to all pumps on one end. Maybe it was the difficulty of engine removal with them on both ends. Maybe the tram pumps suddenly became available with a stacking capability. Maybe they found it was cheaper to stack them all on one end.

We will probably never know the real reason, but if I had to guess, cost to build would be the big driver.

As someone who has been actively involved in short production manufacturing, I would just offer up the possibility that as the availability, and costs, of some parts shift, it is often easier to redesign and incorporate a different part/design, rather than staying with an older design. Sometimes, we've had no choice, a previously available part goes off the market because the demand was too low. Often, it isn't worth the price of a custom run of an exact replacement, so you redesign a new part in, and then some other part goes out of production.

Sometimes, you get creative; I recently discovered that a competitor sells something that looks like a custom stainless steel handle. I scratched it and discovered it was a chromed 1/2" copper plumbing tee. (Think low cost...)

PT makes the steel parts, but the pumps, motors, etcetera are items that they are dependent upon others to produce (at low cost, since these aren't Duesenbergs) for them. When new features come out, like an engine with dual side PTOs, it can make it easier to clean up the design. (Or/and unintentionally cause new problems. I remember a Renault enginen that had to be removed from the car to service the starter motor. IMHO not a great design...)

All the best,

Peter

SnowRidge · Sep 11, 2008

ponytug said:
As someone who has been actively involved in short production manufacturing, I would just offer up the possibility that as the availability, and costs, of some parts shift, it is often easier to redesign and incorporate a different part/design, rather than staying with an older design. Sometimes, we've had no choice, a previously available part goes off the market because the demand was too low. Often, it isn't worth the price of a custom run of an exact replacement, so you redesign a new part in, and then some other part goes out of production.

Sometimes, you get creative; I recently discovered that a competitor sells something that looks like a custom stainless steel handle. I scratched it and discovered it was a chromed 1/2" copper plumbing tee. (Think low cost...)

PT makes the steel parts, but the pumps, motors, etcetera are items that they are dependent upon others to produce (at low cost, since these aren't Duesenbergs) for them. When new features come out, like an engine with dual side PTOs, it can make it easier to clean up the design. (Or/and unintentionally cause new problems. I remember a Renault enginen that had to be removed from the car to service the starter motor. IMHO not a great design...)

All the best,

Peter

The Kohler CH25 that they abandoned in the PT-425s is a very common version (CH730-0032), which is still in production as a general purpose OEM/replacement engine. It is stocked by several supply houses. I don't know why they abandoned it, but I doubt it was availability.

Power Trac seems to delight in using obscure sources for pumps and motors, probably for cost cutting reasons. I'll bet nobody on the forum knew that the hydraulic motor for the PT-425's 48" brush cutter comes from Bulgaria, and is almost impossible to obtain, except directly from Power Trac.

The trouble with this approach from a customer viewpoint is single sourcing parts from Power Trac, who mark stuff way up. For a company that makes a machine for which there are no dealers and which must be maintained by its owners, it is a very strange way to do business.

BTW, I have no idea if they are still using the Bulgarian motors on the brush cutters. I know they used one on mine. For all I know, the current production models may have motors sourced from Botswana or Lapland.