Jump to content

Nominations for Tractor of the Month
Garden Tractors and Parts on eBay



Photo
- - - - -

582 With Siezed Engine... What Are The Options


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 ad356 OFFLINE  

ad356

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3766
  • 9 Thanks
  • 160 posts

Posted May 25, 2012 - 07:11 PM

my freind down the street just got a 582, its acutally in very nice shape very low hour tractor. problem is it has a siezed briggs twin l head engine. what are the possible repairs on this. he owns several good i/c twin flathead engines but they are all vertical. if i have acess to bolth engines and all parts required (i do) what is the possibility of moding one of the vertical engines into a horizontal engine. is it just a matter of taking off the side cover and replacing it with an oil sump? or is there more to it?? i think i have all of the parts i could possibly need. i guess the story with the engine is that it was run out of oil. rebuild would probably require crankshaft machine shop work, new rods and god knows what else. i know this guy doesnt want to spend the big bucks fixing this machine. it is very, very nice shape, i looked at the hour meter and it appears to only have 120 hours on it, someone destroyed that engine when it was still a baby. the tractor is a CCC, first time i ever seen a CCC logo, i thought it was interesting. it was before mtd really took control of cub cadet and ruined it. i would like some more information on the transaxle in the machine. it doesnt appear to be a IH transaxle but still seems pretty beefy. who made these transaxles? they look similar to the older design but not the same. did CCC produce a 782 and a 982 or just the 582's? seems like mtd maintained the qaulity of this machine right up until the end of the '82 series. oh, yeah one more thing, its the first 82' series i have ever seen in the yellow and white most of them are red.

#2 IHCubGuy ONLINE  

IHCubGuy

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3438
  • 1,356 Thanks
  • 1,474 posts
  • Location: Northumberland Pa

Posted May 25, 2012 - 07:30 PM

The 582 was built by both IH and CCC as were all the other models in the 82 series. IH built the 82 series in red only. When MTD took over and it became CCC they painted the models for IH red and they were sold thru IH dealers. The models sold thru O.P.E. dealers were painted yellow and white. If it's yellow and white and says 582 it would be the cub style transmission but depending on when it was built it could be a variant of several possibilities. The 582S was painted red and would have a Peerles transmission in it as would the yellow and white 580. These tractors were 4 speed units unlike the 3 speed IH tranny. Take a look at teh serial number plate and post a pic of it or at least get the numbers and post them. I can tell you when it was made then, by who and when.

#3 ad356 OFFLINE  

ad356

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3766
  • 9 Thanks
  • 160 posts

Posted May 25, 2012 - 08:27 PM

i know cub cadets fairly well and i know this machine is not the 582 special. it has a 3 speed shaft driven trasmission with a traditional cub cadet clutch. i guess i thought these transmissions werent built by IH becuase they are painted black all of the IH built cub cadet transmissions were painted the color of the tractor. i assumed they were something different becuase they were black. i noticed working on my 147 that where the yellow paint was flakeing off that underneath the yellow it is painted red. i think originally the transmissions for the farmall cub and the cub cadets were built on the same assembly line and that the cub cadets just recieved an additional coat of yellow. i also thought that IH did not provide MTD with any of the IH transmissions which is another reason why i thought the transmission wasnt the same. sorry just trying to get my history straight. i love older cub cadets and there history. newer cub cadets, i dont care for them very much. working down the street i have worked on the newer stuff and the older stuff. the older cub cadets have such an impressive build quality and the newer stuff is quite the opposite. i worked on an LT1042 and i thought it was the worlds biggest peice of dung, in fact i think its soo sad to see that great name ruined by having it put on such poorly made junk. my old MTD 800 series is a much, much better built machine then that lt1042 i worked and my 800 series is 20+ years old, and its just a plain old mtd. it makes an awesome lawnmower and has done its fair share of brush-hog duty but isnt heavy like my old 147 (which i still have)

Edited by ad356, May 25, 2012 - 08:32 PM.


#4 ad356 OFFLINE  

ad356

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3766
  • 9 Thanks
  • 160 posts

Posted May 26, 2012 - 08:36 PM

so can i combine parts from a good vertical twin with parts from a bad horizontal twin and make a good running horizontal twin or is that not possible. what is involved with that job? is it just taking the side cover off of the vertical and replacing with the oil sump from the horizontal engine?

#5 IHCubGuy ONLINE  

IHCubGuy

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3438
  • 1,356 Thanks
  • 1,474 posts
  • Location: Northumberland Pa

Posted May 26, 2012 - 08:54 PM

i noticed working on my 147 that where the yellow paint was flakeing off that underneath the yellow it is painted red. i think originally the transmissions for the farmall cub and the cub cadets were built on the same assembly line and that the cub cadets just recieved an additional coat of yellow.


What is underneath is most likely the primer coat. My 107 has the same thign happening to it. It's not really a red color I bet but more of a salmon like color. The inside of the transmissions were coated with it as well. Your 147's transmission is not even close to the same as a Farmall Cub. They have a basic same shape to the final drive housing on the outside and the ring gear is the same but that is it. The rest of it is different as the Farmall Cub was never made as a hydro and the hydro tranny is a completely different case then a gear drive.

Another point is that yes the gear drive transmissions DID indeed go down the same assembly line. However a transmission bound for a cub cadet was only given a very short input shaft whereas the Farmall Cub transmission was given an input shft a couple feet long to run through the torque tube of the tractor to the clutch. It can go even a step farther in the Farmall Cub trannies on the assembly line as ones bound for a Cub had a straight gearshift lever and ones bound for a Cub Lowboy had a lever that was bent over more like a Cub Cadet lever.

Edited by IHCubGuy, May 26, 2012 - 09:09 PM.


#6 IHCubGuy ONLINE  

IHCubGuy

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3438
  • 1,356 Thanks
  • 1,474 posts
  • Location: Northumberland Pa

Posted May 26, 2012 - 09:03 PM

i know cub cadets fairly well and i know this machine is not the 582 special. it has a 3 speed shaft driven trasmission with a traditional cub cadet clutch. i guess i thought these transmissions werent built by IH becuase they are painted black all of the IH built cub cadet transmissions were painted the color of the tractor. i assumed they were something different becuase they were black. i


You are correct here. when CCC took over the line they started building the transmissions in the tractors from scratch (after existing supply was used up from what IH had built in parts). The transmisson tooling was one thing that MTD did not buy from IH, for 2 good reasons. One the tooling was VERY OLD and wore out (it had been making those transmissions since 1947 when the Cub was launched). Secondly the EPA was tightening regulations on steel manufacturing at the time and it was better from that standpoint to make transmission housings from Aluminum to avoid this. The basic shell is "close" on the outside, but not exact. The innards are the same and the bearings ride on steel collars within the aluminum case. As for the color CCC decided that they were not changing the transmission color for IH built tractors so everything after CCC took over is a black transmission be it a IH badged unit painted red or a Cub Cadet badged unit painted yellow and white.

Edited by IHCubGuy, May 26, 2012 - 09:06 PM.

  • Toolpartzman said thank you

#7 ad356 OFFLINE  

ad356

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3766
  • 9 Thanks
  • 160 posts

Posted May 26, 2012 - 09:55 PM

since the mtd built black transmissions that look similar to the IH units are made of aluminum does that make them inferior to the IH built transmissions or is the MTD design just as strong?? does that aluminum housing make it a weaker transmission. personally strength aside when it comes to a garden tractor that im going to work hard i would rather have the cast iron unit. not only do i feel that it is stronger the extra weight is exactly what you need when your are pushing heavy snow, running a plow or doing chores that require heavy duty, unlike lawn-mowing that does not require a heavy machine.

#8 IHCubGuy ONLINE  

IHCubGuy

    Tractorholic

  • Senior Member
  • Member No: 3438
  • 1,356 Thanks
  • 1,474 posts
  • Location: Northumberland Pa

Posted May 27, 2012 - 12:25 PM

For work like snowplowing or snow blowing I would say no they are not. There is one aspect though where they do have a disadvantage and that is when a rear hitch is added for things like moldboard plowing. Since the housing is aluminum the threads in the bolt holes for hitch mounting points can and did pull out. This can be overcome by modifying the hitch brackets to go around the side of the tractor and use holes in the rear axle housing instead of just the rear cover plate. From a standpoint of weight I don't think it made that much of a difference. I personally would rather have the cast but I would not be afraid of either one of them. The later aluminum housed units actually used a fine spline carrier for the ring and pinion which was WAY better than what IH used. In fact many pullers swap out the carrier from the later ones into the earlier cast units for a fairly stout rearend.
  • Toolpartzman said thank you




Top