Teach Me How To Drive A SOS?

What are the yes and no things to do for driving a SOS Transmission? I've got a Ford 4400 that we've been doing a lot of work to, and I think I'll have it up and running tomorrow.

According to the manual I have for it, essentially put it in P, start it, push the "inching pedal", select the gear and go. Then simply click between gears as needed or wanted.

On the other hand, my neighbor tells me that there are 3 different ranges, 1-4, 5-8, and 9-10. Which are indicated by colors I see. He says that you need to use the pedal to get into a gear, and then I can shift back and forth in the gears IN THAT RANGE only, and then say I want to go from 4 to 5, I need to press the pedal, click into 5, and release pedal?

Also, what type of hydraulic or gear oil do I need to run in the rear end for the SOS? Is it the same system that will run a remote hydraulic valve? I want to buy a correct remote valve that mounts on top of the case, also under the seat. And finally where do I add the oil and how do I tell how full it is?

My tractor has an oil cooler in the radiator, I have no idea how much oil is in the rear end as I removed the cooler lines from the case forward and replaced them with hydraulic hoses, and then also replaced the radiator.

Thanks guys! Eager to get it done and post some pictures. I found a correct hood for my diesel to gas swap, not I just need to find the right grill.... Bryce

I believe that you can shift between the ranges without the pedal. My understanding is that using the pedal makes it a smoother transition. I believe that the hydraulics take a different fluid than the transmission.

Hello Bryce-
I hope you had a Merry Christmas. You do not need to use the inching pedal to shift between ranges. You will find the 4-5 shift the most abrupt, followed by the 8-9 shift. When you cross from one range to another, you are engaging and disengaging multiple clutches and the pump can only supply so much oil so when you fill two clutches in the 4-5 shift, there's a bit of a lag and a jump. That said, I shift between 4-5 when plowing and it works as it should, just a bit unpleasant. The SOS transmission is great for hay work.
I'm not sure about your specific transmission, but on my 4000 and 5000 the SOS is a separate sump and filter from the rear end. The fill/level plug is on the RH side of the transmission about under the ball of your right foot. It takes about 3 gallons of premium UTF and the filter is a WIX 51569.

Hope this helps. Tim

Level plug for the rear axle/hydraulic system is on the left side of the rear axle back by the PTO shaft. Fill cap is under the seat a bit right of center. Again, I'm not certain its the same on your industrial model, but that's it for ag tractors. I can scan a page from my manual and email it if you need.

Once you have it up and running, try to back it up to an implement to hook it up.
Then load it on your trailer and take it to the first spring time auction.
Expect to lose money.
As far as the shifting, it should shift without the inching pedal.
I just don't understand why they called them "inching" pedals.
It's a valve. All in or all out. No "inching" to it.
No feathering like a clutch.

Excellent, thank you!

That wix filter is a canister filter, not a spin on right?

After looking my manual over more, you're correct. There are two different fluid systems. And about 3 ish gal for the trans.

I am very excited. I know they have a bad reputation, but for raking and possibly baling hay it is going to be a fantastic tractor. Currently I'm baling and swathing with a SuperM Farmall. No live pto is a killer....

Thanks

I have a 1962 4000 SOS. All the gears on the shifter are in black and not marked in ranges.

I put it in gear and let out on the inching pedal and then shift between forward gears without using the inching pedal. When shifting higher I shift two gears at a time. You have to get up to fifth gear to get any real ground speed. Slowing down, I throttle down first then shift down one gear at a time.

I don't think it's good to shift under heavy loads like plowing or discing. I don't think rake or Baler will be a problem.

My 4000 has two reverse gears. To backup to an implement. I idle it down completely and use R1. It will backup slower than my 9n.

I use my 4000 to move snow. It is a snow pushing machine. Will run circles around my 706.

It's not as bad as you claim. If you pivot your foot on your heel against the floorboard, the control is much better than
merely trying to lift your leg up and down. I would agree, it's not as smooth as it could be, but it's certainly not all or
nothing.

Well, we know which camp you're in, Royse.

I'm in the other camp but I'm not a hard core defender.

By modern standards, the S-O-S is a late model dinosaur but it was revolutionary in the day.

Too bad Ford shot themselves in the foot upon introduction.

Dean

"Too bad Ford shot themselves in the foot upon introduction."

It is that reputation that prompted me to say expect to lose money.
A lot of people see SOS and run. They may not even know there were different versions.
I've owned three of them now, all the later versions.
The last one was a 3000. I was going to dedicate it to running a rototiller.
With the low ground speed and independent PTO, it seemed like it would shine at that job.
But it didn't work out for me so I sold it and moved on to the next project.

Not everyone loses money with a SOS. Tim (dopp creek) uses them in his haying operations. As often as he needs to speed up and slow
down, he's saved money in multiple ways, from not wearing out a dry clutch on a crashbox, to not grinding gears on a crashbox, to not
plugging up and breaking his baler trying to power through a big wad of hay because he got tired of stopping to make a pile of fine
metal shavings in the bottom of a crashbox. We all know how you personally feel about the SOS, but don't make a blanket statement
about them that covers all owners.

Yes, Ford did drop the ball when they were introduced in 1959. They were rushed into production without the necessary field testing
needed to work out the bugs. They made the same mistake on the 6000 in 1961, which ended production some 5 years later. However, Ford
did work out most of the bugs on the SOS (save for a couple of rough shifts and less than butter-smooth inching pedal) and had a
successful 15 year production run with them.

I'm not a farmer myself, however if I was and a 4000-5000-6000 sized tractor suited my needs, give me a SOS over the crashbox any day
for an operation that requires frequent speed changes. Same thing goes for the later Fords. If you've ever driven a TW tractor with
that dinosaur transmission, and then went into an 8x30 series with a powershift, wild horses could not drag you back out of it.

I have 3 SOS on this farm. I bought the first 6000 commander in 1983. At that time it was my big horse. The only issue I have had is input shaft wear. Whole different can of worms for some other time. A SOS can be shifted while pulling hard, done it millions of times. Just like a Mother in law, some love theirs, some do not. I like the SOS trans, enough to own 3. Mine go to the field each spring, not just play toys. I have hundreds and hundreds of hours in the seat of a SOS. You do not have to use the inching pedal to go from P to any gear. It does make a BIG jerk if you try hitting a high gear though. I always use mine. You can shift up or down without doing anything but moving the shifter. I use the inching pedal when shifting down to make a very smooth shift. Never use the inching pedal while pulling hard, just be ready for a jerk. NEVER shift from 4th to 5th, or 5th to 4th without the inching pedal. Heavy load, or light. Its just to hard on the tractor, very hard shift. I always try to shift up to road speed with the engine at half throttle using the pedal 9-10 to soften out the shift then throttle up. Slowing down I push the pedal in, coast a little slower drop out of 10-9 then release the pedal easy. If you play a little you can make that tractor shift like a dream. If you have High engine RPMs and shift it hard you can bring the front tires up off the ground. This where most guys hate them. If you don't need power, you don't need high RPMs. Throttle it back and let it shift easy. Some inching pedals are smooth and easy, some just suck. My 6000 is very jumpy. I just plan for that. Never try to hook up to something if not at an idle. Never allow someone to stand behind you to put the pin in unless you have some seat time and can "feel" the pedal and have some experience. This just takes a little time. I have a 4000 with SOS that the inching pedal is as smooth as silk when the rpms are low. Why it is nice and the 6000 sucks I don't know, each tractor has its own personality, learn yours. For an inexpensive durable long lasting Chore tractor The SOS shines. The PTO does spin when shut off until a light load is applied. You have to shut the engine off to hook the PTO. When cold they sometimes creep forward when in park, after driving it. If you start it and give it a bit to warm up this problem goes away. Some will get stuck in two gears if shifting from park into gear when REALLY cold out. This goes away if you let it warm up also. Al

Bern, my statement wasn't clear apparently. I apologize for that.
I didn't mean expect to lose money operating one.
It was in reference to losing money selling it at an auction.

I have to agree that things got better as improvements were made.
Many different versions of Ford transmissions out there.
Some had way too fast gears, some had other issues. A lot of it is
just personal preference as to what fits the needs at the time.

Let me know when I can stop biting my tongue will ya?

"A lot of it is just personal preference as to what fits the needs at the time."

Yep!

Bryce, be sure to use the specified fluid, 134- current suffix. CNH will sell ya Ambra, there are less costly equivalents, but by all means make absolutely sure it meets the Ford spec. If you put the wrong fluid in, this transmission will fail in short order.

Owned a '64 4000 with S-O-S, former NYS Thruway tractor, it did highway mowing. We cut, raked, baled, small tillage, snow plowing, rotary cutter etc. Enjoyable tractor to operate, sure you'll figure out the pedal, and the shifting on the fly. The '64 was good in that department, none seemed to be completely gentle but nothing like some describe as far as hard and heavy transitions through gears or starting off, reverse etc. I did hundreds of hours mowing with the rotary cutter, nimble and very capable little tractor. Power steering, Independent PTO are nice features.

a m2c134 fluid did not come along until 1986. Why not a m2c41 fluid as the owners manual calls for? I am not aware of any problems due to using the correct fluids and filters.

The SOS transmission got a ragged reputation, and farmers did shy away from them. I remember the auctions in the 60s and 70s, they brought less.

Then, there are three clutches in there instead of one or two, so if it breaks there are probably more parts to fix. Farmers of the frugal 60s or bankrupt 80s didn’t like that idea either, and so they have the rep they have.

Actually a pretty cool thing to rebuild and have more as a show machine than a hard working machine these days. Not that they can’t work.

I still have my TW20, wife likes the 8970 a lot better so I get the TW most of the time........

Paul

Comparing the TW to the 8970 would be like comparing an 800 to a 5000.

(quoted from post at 23:26:53 12/27/20)
a m2c134 fluid did not come along until 1986. Why not a m2c41 fluid as the owners manual calls for? I am not aware of any problems due to using the correct fluids and filters.

Click to expand...

The only fluids I can find that say that they meet the M2C41 spec also say that they meet the M2C134(A, B, C or D) spec.

Any type "A" automatic transmission fluid will meet the m2c41 spec. Its actually in the owners manual. Type A is a 20wt oil wit a red dye.


Any type F automatic transmission fluid will EXCEED the original spec. Almost any universal tractor hydraulic fluid will meet and exceed the later m2c53 specs. I cant say 100% because I have not seen all the UTF out there, but its very very very simple to meet the m2c41 spec. Ford, JD, and Chrysler all three were used the type A, then the type F specs while GM used the fluids with more friction modifiers. So, yes, there are many fluids out there there are for the early ford tractors that will work well but dont met the m2c134 spec. And yes, there are many that do.

The statement to use the "specified" m2c134 is simply not correct. And the current New Holland "Ambra super g 134" at $83 bucks is not needed or required. The $16/5 gallon (on sale) oil exceeds the tractors specified oil. 134 oils did not come out until 1980 and were specified on the ford 1981 models

In 1981 ford switched to the 134 oil, to handle the increase heat loads cause by increasing the flow rates. The increased pressure and flow rates meant that the fluids would travel through the pump more often, and pick up much more heat. This excess heat even required the addition of hydraulic coolers on some models even on manual transmissions. Ironically, I dont believe ford even sold an sos when the 134 fluids came out in 1981, so technically you could argue that they were never approved for sos.

In 1986 ford change to the 134b/c spec... noting the c oil was a multiweight and could be run below +20f with out being dilluted.

Stating that an 1957-1963 18x1 sos tractor "SPECIFIED" a fluid that did not come till for 20 years later, when no SOS transmissions were built,,, is not in anyway correct. How many ford sos tractors ran with NO fluid changes... and no filter changes for 65 years plus? Changing the fluids every 600 hours with a filter change using the type A fluid would probably be the best/better solution for those tractors but they have proven their resolve despite the lack of newer fluids or more important, the lack of maintenance.

Nor is stating it specified that the later full synthetic motor oils for the engine is required or correct, Even today, most folks dont run a 5w40 motor oil, or a mobil one 20wt in their 1957-1963 tractors.



or the current New Holland "Ambra multi G 134" oil correct.

I put this toy together BECAUSE I wanted the SOS transmission. Has 4,669 miles doing tractor drives in 2020, hope to get even more next year since several drives like the Mackinac Bridge crossing was cancelled this year..

Another pic..

Hey Dieseltech, what is the top road speed on that rig? It looks fun to drive!

Not sure wide open, but 1500 RPM in tenth gear is about 40 MPH. Most drives I go on ninth gear is used for 15-20 MPH range. In ninth gear it's gotten 25 MPG several times, better than my diesel pickup..

If you are going to use it in a hay operation you will love it. One of the best tractors for hay operations ( small squares) IMHO are the Ford SOS. My Dad was always trading tractors looking for the best, least expensive HP he could get and had a 5000 for awhile. It was great on a disc mower or sq. baler.

Lots of folks call them a "jerk-o-matic" as it well describes the range changes... They are wonderful for running a tiller as they will slow down enough, fab for plowing or haying as you can shift up and down as needed... even if they are a "jerk-0-matic". At auction they sell very low, so I buy them low... I have made money on the 5 or so that have come along, but they also sell slower... Can take up to a year to sell one. But they get used the whole time. Oddly they are usually the first tractor I go to for odd chores. Easier to sell when you describe them as power shifts, hydro shifts, more in line with the modern tractors..

Too bad Ford shot themselves in the foot upon introduction.

My thoughts exactly Dean. Ford failed on the first roll out. For years I stayed away from the Ford SOS because of people saying 1) They have too many problems 2) They are too expensive to fix 3) You'll will lose money on any tractor you buy with the SOS.
Over the last 40+ years I have run only a couple Ford SOS and not for extended periods. I have run JD 4020, 4430, 4440 (and owned a PS 4440) all with the JD 8 speed power shift, which was the later version of the SOS. Both developed by Harold Brock. I now have an early 4000 SOS. Ran across the tractor by accident, it had a front weight bracket, original paint, and seems to be a low use/low hour tractor so I bought it. I don't plan on letting this tractor leave my farm. A well adjusted SOS is a great transmission to operate in my opinion. I hope to use mine on some hay ground. The SOS was revolutionary when it was introduced in 1959. They likely should have waited until 1960 or even 1961, whatever it took to work out the bugs and keep Mr Brock happy. The Ford-John Deere stories would be much different I believe.

I used a 3000D SOS very hard for several years for jobs that should have had a larger tractor. My main concern was using it for stationary pto ,as it could be accidentally bumped out of park, unlike the JD.

(quoted from post at 11:47:07 12/27/20)

Yes, Ford did drop the ball when they were introduced in 1959. They were rushed into production without the necessary field testing
needed to work out the bugs. They made the same mistake on the 6000 in 1961, which ended production some 5 years later.

Click to expand...

1959? That's about the time the Edsel came out. Explains a few things. Seems like it ought to be a good for mowing and blading, etc.

I found this thread very interesting, as I am looking for a second tractor and, around here for some reason half the pre65 ford tractors seem to be SOS.

So Ill toss a few questions in that are in my head...

The SOS trans has no typical clutch?

If not what is the inching pedal, technically speaking?

I need to putter around here moving hay, I rarley go over 3rd gear 99% of my driving is in 1st or 2nd, due to the way everything is laid out around here. Would a SOS be better than a standard 4/5 speed for this work?

Can you go from forward 1st to reverse without using the inching pedal? How similar is the SOS to a shuttle shift?

Can they be repaired/worked on without splitting the tractor when a repair is needed?

Generally speaking, do they require more or less maintenance/repair than a standard clutch drive?