Gearclash

I was gonna say . . . loose as that looks I was thinking the liners were AWOL.

Lucky you. I’ve rebuilt the front hubs on both my MX170 and MX150. The MX170 had wrecked a hub. GRRRR. My fault though. I don’t use the MFD all that much on the MX170, it is the loader weight that kills them, especially if they get neglected.

Thanks! Somehow I got the notion that 4 pinions were always the heavier hub. For some reason it is usually easier to see the number pinions than the number of front wheel bolts in tractor pictures.

@SDman (and others) Is it my imagination or are there far more smaller Gen II MX Magnums with the heavy front axle? Seems most of the MX200s have a 3 pinion hub, look through MX210s and most appear to have 4 pinion hubs.

My MX170 wears the most hats of the tractors I own. Loader tractor, rake tractor, snow plow, and has filled in as a baler tractor and been on the mixer wagon.

Things are still happening out there. Twilight on a field of bales that we baled on March 31, 2020.

Thanks for the clarification and advise. I am not real excited about using front duals, I would rather have a wide single tire, however it is possible I would run a loader and/or a front 3 point on an MX Magnum. I have both on an MX170 now and I know the loader can pretty easily overload that Carraro axle.

As Randy would say “head shakin’ mode here.” Very sad news to hear of his death, especially given the circumstances.

Did I read correctly that the only the two big models of the MX Magnum line have a front axle rated for duals?

One more question about the MX Magnums. Foot throttle. Do they have it? If yes, how usable? For me a good foot throttle is a must have for a raking tractor and a definite plus for a baler tractor.

Looks like there is such a thing as a 175/70R-14 car tire. That will be the same width as a 6.95.

Just some mud porch musings. So the B and C series Cummins engines were the product of a joint venture between Case and Cummins. I believe Cummins came into the deal without engines of that size. Case did have at least one engine of that size, the 504. It would be interesting to see how similar, if at all, the B and C series engines are to the 504.

Yes, the Maxxum PTO is a sore point with me. I did learn if the pins give trouble, replace the whole works, drive tube and all. Much of the trouble comes from the stub shaft retaining ring groove wearing and allowing the reversible stub shaft more axial slop, which in turn allows the slide tub to beat on the pins more. The Euro design does away with the connection between the reversible stub shaft/slide tube and the shift collar. They should have made them all that way. While the MX150/170 use the same basic PTO components as the small frame MX Maxxums, the PTO housing is very similar to the Magnums which make them near enough infinitely easier to work on. The idiot that designed the small frame Maxxum PTO housing needs his knee caps broken. I see SDman points out in an earlier post that the 540/1000 version of the MX Magnum are susceptible to the same sort of ills as the Maxxums.

Ya I know the whole song and dance. I own a Euro.

Euro tractors generally sell for less in the US. People don’t trust them and there is some grounds for that. Seems a disproportional number of them show lower hours than they should.