Another belt driven Hydro pump question

I have seen it done both ways (old FEL style where the pump shaft comes through the axle pivot pin, and the bracket/ belt under the hood option)
I have a FEL that I want to mount and I am not too crazy about cutting on a good hood. Looking at the under hood option but I have a couple questions.
1. what are the chances that a single v-belt could drive it all and just adjust tension at the alternator?
2. is there any reason why all of this would not work in a similar fashion on a Ferguson TO30 as opposed to the N's?
Thanks,
-Josh
 
(quoted from post at 22:56:14 01/07/20) I have seen it done both ways (old FEL style where the pump shaft comes through the axle pivot pin, and the bracket/ belt under the hood option)
I have a FEL that I want to mount and I am not too crazy about cutting on a good hood. Looking at the under hood option but I have a couple questions.
1. what are the chances that a single v-belt could drive it all and just adjust tension at the alternator?
2. is there any reason why all of this would not work in a similar fashion on a Ferguson TO30 as opposed to the N's?
Thanks,
-Josh

I have a lot of experience here.

Unless that loader has a tiny pump on it I would suggest you forget about a v-belt drive. If using the fan belt on an N-series you wont get enough wrap on the pump pulley to transmit the kind of power you need for loader hydraulics.

The shaft drive works extremely well and you will have the full crankshaft horsepower of the tractor available. It's cheap and easy to install. If you dont want to chop up a good grille buy a junk grille to chop up or leave it off altogether.

When I do belt drive hydraulic pumps for the N-series I use an industrial synchronous drive (timing) belt that can transmit 20+ HP. And unlike v-belts synchronous drive belts do not require a lot of belt tension which is a pump killer. These drives are more costly and require custom brackets and timing pulleys.

The shaft drive is going to be much the same on a TO-30. I dont know the specifics off the top of my head but the parts are going to be readily available. A belt drive will be considerably different and require some custom work.

TOH
 
The pulley for the TO is different from the pulley on the N. If loader
came off an just sell that pulley and buy one for the TO.
 
Thanks guys. I had a really comprehensive response but it contains naughty words that adult eyes can't handle apparently. Is it not even safe to talk about tractors anymore?
I have figured out which parts i would need to go the front shaft route. it's a combination of ford and ferguson parts but it will work. I will look into how i can tastefully mod the hood. it seems odd that the install manual doesnt mention a necessary hood modification as far as I know.
It is a Dearborn 19-21
-Josh
 
(quoted from post at 10:35:34 01/08/20) I will look into how i can tastefully mod the hood. [color=red:df05c57912][b:df05c57912]it seems odd that the install manual doesnt mention a necessary hood modification as far as I know.
It is a Dearborn 19-21[/b:df05c57912][/color:df05c57912]
-Josh

Perhaps because the 19-21 ran off the tractor hydraulics. There was no front pump, shaft drive, or need to modify the sheet metal.

Are you sure of the loader model number and is this going on a Ford or Massey tractor?

TOH
 
(quoted from post at 09:03:47 01/08/20)
(quoted from post at 10:35:34 01/08/20) I will look into how i can tastefully mod the hood. [color=red:02bb7714cb][b:02bb7714cb]it seems odd that the install manual doesnt mention a necessary hood modification as far as I know.
It is a Dearborn 19-21[/b:02bb7714cb][/color:02bb7714cb]
-Josh

Perhaps because the 19-21 ran off the tractor hydraulics. There was no front pump, shaft drive, or need to modify the sheet metal.

Are you sure of the loader model number and is this going on a Ford or Massey tractor?

TOH

It's the 19-21 Dearborn loader for sure. the tag is still visible. it was made for the 9N but it fits the TO as well in terms of the attachment points etc...
I have been using the original installation manual for reference it does mention removing the grille in some versions and it mentions putting the vertical side panels back on but doesnt make mention of the grille part. I assume they meant to leave that section out which is what i have seen done with others' setups.

Reading between the lines it seems there were design changes to the loader mid-model. some used fittings that tied into the on board hydro, and some used the front pump that came with the assy, hood mods were contingent upon which method was intended to power it.

Mine has the front pump and im inclined to run with it. not sure the on board hydro is really enough, which is why i'd think they changed it...

Hope that helps.
-Josh
 
(quoted from post at 14:08:50 01/08/20)
(quoted from post at 09:03:47 01/08/20)
(quoted from post at 10:35:34 01/08/20) I will look into how i can tastefully mod the hood. [color=red:6a236fc6d7][b:6a236fc6d7]it seems odd that the install manual doesnt mention a necessary hood modification as far as I know.
It is a Dearborn 19-21[/b:6a236fc6d7][/color:6a236fc6d7]
-Josh

Perhaps because the 19-21 ran off the tractor hydraulics. There was no front pump, shaft drive, or need to modify the sheet metal.

Are you sure of the loader model number and is this going on a Ford or Massey tractor?

TOH

It's the 19-21 Dearborn loader for sure. the tag is still visible. it was made for the 9N but it fits the TO as well in terms of the attachment points etc...
I have been using the original installation manual for reference it does mention removing the grille in some versions and it mentions putting the vertical side panels back on but doesn't make mention of the grille part. I assume they meant to leave that section out which is what i have seen done with others' setups.

Reading between the lines it seems there were design changes to the loader mid-model. some used fittings that tied into the on board hydro, and some used the front pump that came with the assy, hood mods were contingent upon which method was intended to power it.

Mine has the front pump and im inclined to run with it. not sure the on board hydro is really enough, which is why i'd think they changed it...

Hope that helps.
-Josh


My two sources of information are the original 19-21/22/23 installation manual and the 1952 Dearborn Loader Master Parts Catalog. All three models shared the same basic frame and the installation manual covers all three models. The only hydraulic control option shown for the 19-21 Standard Loader is a connection to the test port on the tractor and operation via the 3pt lift lever. That is spelled out quite explicitly. The 3pt lift arms had to be chained down when using the loader. The manual also notes that the Model 19-21 can be converted to a Model 19-22 or 19-23 with the purchase of a suitable conversion kit.

The parts manual shows the Models 19-22 and 19-23 Heavy Duty Loaders came with an independent shaft driven pump and either a single spool (19-22) or double spool (19-23) control valve. Those loaders operated independently of the 3pt.

Sounds like you have a 19-21 mutt that someone has converted to use an external pump. Trip or hydraulic bucket?.

TOH
 
(quoted from post at 14:15:43 01/08/20) and yes, it is going on a TO30, sorry I forgot to answer that part.
-Josh

This works quite well on N-series tractors but probably not on a TO-30. Just some food for thought.

TOH

PumpDrive.jpg
 
TOH I think you've got it by the tail Sir. I'm looking at that parts catalog now, and mine has the cage and pump that bolts to the front like a -22 but the tag says -21. Who knows about what might have happened along the way. theres also a difference in the front mount where the parts book and instructions show the axle pivot/drop plate as a one piece wedge shaped weldment with the pin. mine is a formed plate that requires knocking out the hood nuts and it lays over the stock pivot pin. seems like I've seen mention of that in my research. dont think it's going to cause me too much heartburn though.

Mine is the trip bucket but the PO had welded a plate to the arm with a hole for a pin. looked like they had planned to add a cylinder since the bucket already had a mount for one but never got around to it. seems like i could go either direction with it since mines a trip bucket but If I could find the valve and cylinder parts to add the -23 bucket cylinder later on, i might regret not using the front pump setup.

-Josh
 
(quoted from post at 15:35:32 01/08/20) TOH I think you've got it by the tail Sir. I'm looking at that parts catalog now, and mine has the cage and pump that bolts to the front like a -22 but the tag says -21. Who knows about what might have happened along the way. theres also a difference in the front mount where the parts book and instructions show the axle pivot/drop plate as a one piece wedge shaped weldment with the pin. mine is a formed plate that requires knocking out the hood nuts and it lays over the stock pivot pin. seems like I've seen mention of that in my research. dont think it's going to cause me too much heartburn though.

Mine is the trip bucket but the PO had welded a plate to the arm with a hole for a pin. looked like they had planned to add a cylinder since the bucket already had a mount for one but never got around to it. seems like i could go either direction with it since mines a trip bucket but If I could find the valve and cylinder parts to add the -23 bucket cylinder later on, i might regret not using the front pump setup.

-Josh

No matter what you will regret using the tractor hydraulics. Small single and double spool control valves are readily available and cheap.

TOH
 
Yea, that's what i was considering as a possible "upgrade" but i'll have to take a look at the TO and see if there's any real estate available there. Not sure about the lugs on the block as well. I will check on that and see.
Thanks!
-Josh
 
(quoted from post at 15:41:06 01/08/20) Yea, that's what i was considering as a possible "upgrade" but i'll have to take a look at the TO and see if there's any real estate available there. Not sure about the lugs on the block as well. I will check on that and see.
Thanks!
-Josh

A
Let me take that comment about tractor hydraulics back. I was speaking with the N-series in mind - the TO-30 has live hydraulics and may be much better suited.

TOH
 
It's funny that you mention that, I have always operated it as if it did not but that's really just because grandad did it that way. I'm going to be mad at myself if i have been unhooking that driveshaft on the bush hog all this time for nothing. Think i will plan to go with the front pump in case I decide to add the bucket cylinder later.
-Josh
 
(quoted from post at 18:52:46 01/08/20) It's funny that you mention that, I have always operated it as if it did not but that's really just because grandad did it that way. I'm going to be mad at myself if i have been unhooking that driveshaft on the bush hog all this time for nothing. Think i will plan to go with the front pump in case I decide to add the bucket cylinder later.
-Josh

Shows how little I know about the TO-30. Apparently it uses the same PTO driven belly pump design as the N's. I just assumed Ferguson would have improved that by the time the TO-30 came out. Assumptions are risky business....

TOH
 
(quoted from post at 17:29:06 01/08/20)
(quoted from post at 18:52:46 01/08/20) It's funny that you mention that, I have always operated it as if it did not but that's really just because grandad did it that way. I'm going to be mad at myself if i have been unhooking that driveshaft on the bush hog all this time for nothig. Think i will plan to go with the front pump in case I decide to add the bucket cylinder later.
-Josh

Shows how little I know about the TO-30. Apparently it uses the same PTO driven belly pump design as the N's. I just assumed Ferguson would have improved that by the time the TO-30 came out. Assumptions are risky business....

TOH
I'll verify once I can get back out there but I believe that's probably the case unless it was force of habit from one of the other machines. I know his old MH pony is like that too.
Appreciate all the help
-Josh
 
I wasn't sure either.
Doing a bit of searching here -
It looks like the Ford beat Ferguson to
live hydraulics by a year but the 35 had
optional live pto a year earlier than
the 600.
Ns, TOs, NAAs, 35s, Hundreds
All similar small tractors running neck
and neck in a very competitive industry.
 
(quoted from post at 19:19:34 01/08/20) I wasn't sure either.
Doing a bit of searching here -
It looks like the Ford beat Ferguson to
live hydraulics by a year but the 35 had
optional live pto a year earlier than
the 600.
Ns, TOs, NAAs, 35s, Hundreds
All similar small tractors running neck
and neck in a very competitive industry.

Mines a 53, I'm sure it's not live PTO or hydro, but the 3 point is nice. The Pony didn't have that. It really is a testament to progress when you look back at how far this technology has come. I am going to take it easy with this old thing. I'm not in a hurry to move a lot of rock. Moved about 40 tons so far with a wheelbarrow and a round point shovel last summer. That is getting old. :)
 

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