442 Case hydraulic drive issue?

breimer

Member
this unit is somewhat new to me. I know I need to rebuild the engine. Before jumping into an expensive repair I wanted to know how well the drive pump etc works. It drives forward quite normal. However backing up it hesitates. It kinda wants to back up slowly while I move the lever further and further back. When the lever is 3/4 of its travel into the reverse direction the tractor begins to back up more aggressively. It has minor play in the linkage but nowhere near that much. Oil level is full although it looks kinda milky. Do you think the oil is the problem?
 
I will get chastised for posting this, but those tractors used a "hydraulic drive", simply a fixed displacement gear pump and a gerotor-type motor, with a flow divider between them.

TOTALLY different and different acting, under the best of circumstances, than a REAL hydrostatic drive, as is/was common practice to use in garden tractors. Having owned two of them, I would never consider owning one again as a working tractor, but only as a museum piece to show the ill effects of making a product that deviates (unsuccessfully) from generally-accepted engineering practice.

Yeah, I know I'm being the bad guy here, but there HAS to be a reason no one else went down that path in with a production garden tractor.

(BTW, if you have never had the experience of driving one on a slope with a LAKE at the bottom, you have missed one of life's low-cost THRILLS!)
 
More often than not, the problem you describe is caused by wear
and tear in the control linkage. This "slop" in the various parts
means that you do not have good control over the spool that
diverts the oil to the drive motor.

While I agree that you should eventually drain out the milky oil
and install new 20W50 motor oil, that won't solve the problem.

Everything in the travel control must be inspected and repaired.

- new top bushing in the dash

- new ball joint at the spool

- repair the hole in the plate at the bottom of the travel lever. It
is probably egg shaped.

- replace the metal rod that goes in that hole, It is work and
perhaps cut.

The spool moves about and inch in total but your hand moves
more than 6 inches when operating the travel lever. In that inch
of movement is forward, reverse and neutral. It does not take a
lot of free play in the linkage to cause problems like the one you
describe.

All of the above is part of the restoration process you intend to
perform. The best time to do it is when you have dismantled the
entire tractor.
 
Past ownership of a couple Case tractors doesn't qualify you as an expert, Bob.

Hydrostatic drive is an excellent method to provide power to the rear wheels but it has its short-comings. Hydraulic Drive is also an excellent method but it too is not perfect. Colt was the company that pioneered and patented the hydraulic drive for garden tractors. That MIGHT be one of the reasons why no other company went that route.

Hydraulic Drive's big plus is that you have 8 to 10 gallons of oil in constant circulation at pressures as high as 2800 PSI on some models. This fact gives Colt, Case and Ingersoll tractors the ability to provide hydraulic power to their rototiller, Bush Hog Mower, double-acting log splitter, 3 pt hitch mounted 48 inch finishing mower, chipper/shredder as well as mower decks and snowcaster for certain models. No hydrostatically driven garden tractor has the capability to do this.

When someone such as yourself does not truly know the product that they are commenting on, it means they are ignorant of all the facts.

Colt patented the hydraulic drive system in 1962. Case bought Colt in 1964. Jack Ingersoll bought the company in 1983. Eastman Industries bought the company in 2005. Here we are today, 50 years later and you can still buy a brand new hydraulic drive Ingersoll garden tractor. If the product was as bad as you suggest, there must be a lot of stupid people in the world because they kept coming back to the dealers to purchase another hydraulic drive tractor instead of choosing what you consider to be the superior drive system.

It is true that the early models did have a run-away problem on steep grades when operated by people who never took the time to read the Operator's Manual. That problem was resolved with an add-on holding valve that was later on incorporated into the tractors as standard.

The fact that you had the thrill ride you speak of simply demonstrates your ignorance of how these tractors function in the right hands. If you are happy with your hydrostatic tractors, then who am I to argue? I just take exception to negative comments about CCI tractors being made by someone who hasn't a clue about them.

I hope this reply lives up to your expectation of chastisement. After all, you did invite it so you have nothing to complain about.
 
Yeah, I "know the product" reasonably well, and AM aware of the remote hydraulic capabilities, since my 446 had a hydraulic tiller. (That sort of worked, not as well, though notas well as my 318 DEERE with hydraulic tiller driven by a dedicated hydraulic pump.)

I still propose that those tractors do NOT have the smooth, reliable speed control, with engine braking as a true hydro system does.

They are NEAT in their own way and I have no problem with them being collectible (as a lot of oddball things are). I just don't see them being as useful and precise in operation as their competition of the era!
 
Bob, you are the type that won't listen to anyone that has forgotten more about Case/Ingersoll than you ever knew. I also owned four different ones plus a 322 John Deere and after taking the mower off and putting the snowblower on it it went down the road to a guy who stopped to look at it and it was on his trailer before the ink was dry on his check. My dealer put the holding valve on the unit that didn't have it on from the factory and never had an issue going down the hills or up. Would still be using them if our dealer didn't go broke selling farm equipment.
 
Hey, John!

I stated my OPINION in a reasonable and non-condescending manner and am in no way trying to impose it on you OR the IP!

It is an OPINION (and an OBSERVATION of how the darned things work) and no more than that, as is YOUR opinion.

If we all liked the same thing, it would be a dull world!

And if the REST of the world fully enjoyed the Case/Colt/Ingersol hydraulic-drive system as much as a couple of you guys, it would be mainstream today, instead of being relegated to the dustbin of history!
 
Bob,
Once again, your ignorance of the breed is showing in your latest post above.

If you knew anything about the world of garden tractors, you would know that their days are numbered. Almost every manufacturer has opted out of the garden tractor segment of the market. The sub-CUT and CUT tractors have taken over. Deere only makes one garden tractor series and that is the 700. Cub Cadet does not make a GT any longer. Dixon's tractor isn't a true GT and neither is Sears. Wheelhorse is gone and the only other one that comes to mind is Simplicity.

As for the CCI branded GT's, it was total mismanagement by Ingersoll's owners that put the company into the position it is in today but the advent of the sub-CUT and CUT models also played a big part.

You are entitled to post your opinion about the Case GT's but your opinion is flawed because you never took the time to learn how to operate it correctly or you would not have formed the opinions you did.

That aside, please tell us all how any of your opinions actually helped breimer with his question?
 
Dang it Tom even though you are right about the garden tractors it does make a person feel a little sad when you think about what has disappeared. During my younger days I always enjoyed going to the State fair and the local fair to look at the new models. Ariens, Bolens,Case/Ingersoll, Ford, Allis Chalmers, Toro, Wheel Horse, Cub Cadet, Power King, Simplicity, John Deere, just to name a few. Sure I missed many. Sad to see so many disappearing. Wish Eastmann would hook up with a zero turn so they could hang around. Sorry for all the "looking back".
 
Tom, Am I IGNORANT for being straightforward and honest telling the IP his (basket) Case will NEVER perform in the fashion of nearly every other true "hydro" garden tractor that has ever been sold???

Those things are what they are, but they do NOT function in the same manner as the other hydro GT's made in the same era.

(Notice I did NOT say they ere "bad", just stated they were "different".)

Can you HONESTLY dispute that?

I am in NO way condemning them or any lucky folks that may own one of them, just stating that if a WORKING machine is needed there MAY (perhaps) better choices.
 
Bob,
You are entitled to give your opinion, just like everyone else is. This is a discussion that has no resolution because it is very similar to the Ford vs GM vs Mopar conversations that have taken place since the advent of the automobile.

I agree that there is a slight difference in "feel" between hydraulic and hydrostatic drive tractors. As I pointed out in my initial reply, both systems have their good and bad points. However, unlike you I do not disparage hydrostatic drives other than to point out that they have very limited capabilities when it comes to powering additional hydraulic functions.

Why do you find the need to characterize briemer's 442 as a "(basket) Case" or continue to imply that hydraulic drive is somehow inferior to hydrostatic drive? Perhaps I have it wrong but in my eyes, you have been condemning hydraulic drive from your very first post. I find that odd because I know of a great many people who abandoned their interest in Cub Cadet, Simplicity, Wheel Horse and even...........dare I say it...... John Deere, after discovering Case.

A properly set-up Case GT can hold its own against any competing brand on all aspects of property maintenance. They have been a high-end, quality machine since their advent and remain so today.

You knew at the outset that your words were going to draw fire from Case enthusiasts but so far, you have not explained why a hydrostatic drive tractor will outperform a hydraulic drive tractor. So how about putting away the bluster and get down to some facts. When it comes to ploughing a field, mowing grass, blowing snow or any other task normally performed by a garden tractor, tell us where the hydraulic drive falls short.
 
Case garden tractors are like Studebakers used to be a very few die hard fans.Like you said to most people they are very user UNfriendly.Actually with better quality parts and better engineering they could have been a pretty good machine.
 
Well now that's quite a bit of conversation! To add my 2 cents worth, I realize most of the differences, I work at a Deere dealership and have operated various hydrostatic units from older to newer garden tractors to the new combines. There's pros and cons to them all. I do like my 2 old case tractors and find that the hydraulic drive system is simple and in my 1973 Case 224 works very well. It doesn't whine and scream like the hydro in my 1855 Massey. Back to my original question, I have checked the linkage and find only a very small amount of play. Absolutely less than is represented in the movement of the lever required to make the machine back up properly. However the engine runs so poorly that I may not be able to continue diagnostics of the hydraulic drive properly. I just wondered if the the valve itself could be faulty. Like Tom said I'll check it all out closely when I take the engine out to rebuild it. Just hoping the pump and drive motor etc are still ok. If it needs all these parts too I'm second guessing if this should become a parts tractor.
 
Problems with control valves are few and far between but
certainly within the realm of possibility.

I do not suspect the pump because you do not complain of a lack
of ground speed going forward. Your complaint seems to be
when reversing the tractor only. The pump has no idea which
way the tractor is heading. It just pumps oil or it does not pump
oil. It's a black or white situation.

The drive motor does know about direction but the usual
complaint is that the tractor will back up quite well but lacks
power going forward. This is due to the tractor travelling
forward 90 percent of the time or more, thus putting more wear
and tear on certain parts that are rotating while travelling
forward. For these reasons, I do not suspect the drive motor.

The spool in the control valve may be damaged. The only way to
know for certain is to remove that valve, dismantle it and have it
inspected by a knowledgeable person. These valves can be
commonly found on e-Bay for very reasonable prices. You could
also contact antiquesetc on MTF's CCI forum because Ken parts
out tractors and often has these valves.

You already realize the genius of the Case tractor's
uncomplicated design, so there is no reason to relegate your 442
to that of a parts tractor when the problem can be solved rather
easily and inexpensively. The Kohler is probably the easiest and
least costly engine to rebuild and that needs to be done whether
there is a minor issue with the hydraulics or not.

Take a peek at the 442 recently restored by Doug Wartil over at
the Case, Colt, Ingersoll forum. Your 442 could end up looking
just like his and I'm sure that Doug would be pleased to give you
any assistance you may need.

I realize that you may be slightly frustrated at the moment but
don't allow yourself to be influenced by the negativity of a
couple of people on this forum. Every forum has members like
this. If you truly believe that the linkage is tight, then why not
buy a used valve, install it and refill the system with clean oil?
That might be the quickest way to put your mind at ease so you
can get on with the restoration process.
 
Thanks Tom, again that is helpful information. Although there are different opinions, I don't mind people posting and me being able to read all this stuff. Thanks to all who have replied.
 
Many times, different opinions can be beneficial. However, the
opinions expressed by Bob and Traditional Farmer are totally
without merit because they do not address the problem you are
having. Of course, when you don't know much about CCI tractors,
it's pretty difficult to post something worthwhile.
 
have to once again agree with Tom on this one even having two of these fine tractors for a while does not "make you a expert" on them if you know how to operate them correctly down hill is no real issue at all, I have ran them since 1966 from a 155 to 446 units love them all they are night and day above a hydro unit yes they do operate different but then again you do need to be a operator to use them to their full potential and you sound like many others I know who THINK they are a operator but really are just along for the ride, if you do not like some thing fine that is your opinion but do not put down the thousands of people who do, we sold 10-15 Case compacts a year many of them still are hard at work how many of the box store cheap hydro are still running after 40 years? just my two cents
cnt
 
I have 3 Case tractors. What you describe is pretty much normal operation. Case is a hydraulic drive, not a hydrostatic drive like pretty much everybody else did. When the engine on a Case is running, it"s circulating the full volume capable of the pump. A hydrostatic system uses a variable displacement pump. Hydrostatic is more efficient since only the amount of fluid to move at any given speed is pumped vs the full flow of the Case system.
 
I like my 446, 220, and 155, but the hydraulic drive falls short when you have to climb a steep hill. After you've run them long enough shifting from high to low gets to be second nature, but the hydro tractors you just pull back on the speed lever a bit.
 
Hi Range is to be used only for rapid travel across normal terrain to get from one place to another. It is not intended to be used while performing work of one kind or another. Case never intended Hi Range to be used while ascending steep grades or descending them either. Knowing HOW to use your tractor properly is the key to greater satisfaction with it.

If your tractors had difficulty climbing grades in Lo Range, then that would suggest certain parts are badly worn. A diagnostic would need to done on the hydraulic system to determine whether the pump was capable of putting out its rated flow and pressure. The oil should be changed out and fresh 20W50 installed to make sure that wasn't part of the problem.
 
To the contrary Brian.

What breimer described is not even close to normal. A properly operating Case GT will travel smoothly in both forward and reverse and achieve the same ground speed. The speed changes are linear in either direction. The last of the tractors with the CASE logo displayed went down the assembly line in 1986. As such, all of the Case tractors are at least 27 years old and your 155 is at least 45 years old.

breimer's 442 is at least 41 years old. A lot of wear and tear can take place over those years, especially when they are owned by people who do not service them when they should.
 
Well Tom, I guess you"re entitled to your opinion. My 446 is new enough it has the holding valve built into the travel valve. Been that way since I found it in the mid 90"s. None of my tractors go in reverse the same speed as forward.
 
Brian,
This isn't about my opinion. It's about FACT. Every Colt, Case and Ingersoll Operator's Manual written, show identical forward and reverse speeds.
 
Again Tom, you fail to grasp what was said. If you were reading closely you would see that I have shifting ranges down to a proverbial science. Unless you're mowing 4 or 5 inches off in one pass, how productive is it to mow at 3mph? This is where the hydrostat is more efficient. No need to change ranges when you come to a hill. You can easily mow at the limits of engine power or cut quality.
I'm not knocking the Case in any way. They have the same hydraulic capacity as many farm tractors did in the 60's and 70's. It just depends on what you want to do and how fast you want to get it done. I like the big wheels and high clearance. It cuts better than my 1450 Cub does too.
 
I'm not going to argue with you anymore. This now falls under the "Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience"...
 
When someone has no legitimate reply, they resort to personal attacks out of frustration.

If you really knew what you were talking about, then you would know that the tractors were designed to run in forward and reverse at the same speed.
 
I grasped perfectly what you said.

The engineers wrote Operator's Manuals that clearly state Lo Range is to be used when performing "work". Mowing grass is "work". However, there are some owners who insist on performing "work" in Hi Range and then blame the design of the tractor when it fails to ascend grades while cutting grass.

When you push any machine beyond its design limits, then who is at fault? Sure, if a tractor is driven by a hydrostatic pump instead of a hydraulic pump, you can ease off on the control lever. Trust me. I get it. However, I wouldn't trade my Case for any of the hydro powered units that are out there today. Most of them will be in the scrap yard within ten years time but my Case will still be motoring along just fine 40 years from now, thanks to its design and rugged components.
 
You need to spend more time reading on these forums. Calling Tom an idiot is uncalled for, inappropriate, and just downright hostile.

FYI. I have been reading these forums for years, and find that Tom is one of the most knowledgeable people around. Sometimes a bit opinionated and cranky, but still a fountain of information.

You are lucky that I am not the moderator on this forum. You would have had your post deleted and been warned not to repeat the offense.
 
agree with you Tom all of my Case compacts go the same speed either direction I have seen the drive motor wear cause them to go slow in FWD like you said below
 
(quoted from post at 19:57:39 07/17/13) You need to spend more time reading on these forums. Calling Tom an idiot is uncalled for, inappropriate, and just downright hostile.

FYI. I have been reading these forums for years, and find that Tom is one of the most knowledgeable people around. Sometimes a bit opinionated and cranky, but still a fountain of information.

You are lucky that I am not the moderator on this forum. You would have had your post deleted and been warned not to repeat the offense.
Anybody that has a Case tractor can learn from Tom you just have to want to You just cant fix stupid..
 
I suppose you and Tom are lucky I"m not the moderator. Cranky, crotchety, and just plain mean people are no fun to be around.
It was explained to me once that one in 3 people are mean, ugly, etc. Look to your left, look to your right. If you don"t see one guess what?!
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top