My Tractor Forum banner

61 - 65 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #61
Thanks Rick again you're wrong just like the rest of them you guys can discuss this until the cows come home when they fly off I'll let you know otherwise thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,777 Posts
Not much to discuss really. There’s a right way and there’s a wrong way to rebuild these spindles. I only hope no one gets injured from the method that was chosen. Remember, you came on here asking for help from those of us that are more experienced in these tractors than you are. Whether you want to heed that advice is up to you. Good luck! :)

Rick
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,369 Posts
Not much to discuss really. There’s a right way and there’s a wrong way to rebuild these spindles. I only hope no one gets injured from the method that was chosen. Remember, you came on here asking for help from those of us that are more experienced in these tractors than you are. Whether you want to heed that advice is up to you. Good luck! :)

Rick
Rick,

In case you did not read this whole thread, there is something unusual about the deck the OP has. The spindle assemblies do not match the IPL, the only known IPL, for the 24G 72" deck.

According to his measurements it would take a 3/16" spacer to make it work as we think it should, and the shafts matched up to ones in a Promaster 400 deck?

Richard's Lawn and Garden apparently knew what he had and instructed him.

Without seeing it, or having it in my hands, I cannot offer any other thoughts, other than to say what I said above several times, it is known that early 24G tractors had some oddball stuff on them?

I wish PopcornPopper was still on this forum, he had about four 24G machines and knew all the ins and outs.

Sheldon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,777 Posts
Rick,

In case you did not read this whole thread, there is something unusual about the deck the OP has. The spindle assemblies do not match the IPL, the only known IPL, for the 24G 72" deck.

According to his measurements it would take a 3/16" spacer to make it work as we think it should, and the shafts matched up to ones in a Promaster 400 deck?

Richard's Lawn and Garden apparently knew what he had and instructed him.

Without seeing it, or having it in my hands, I cannot offer any other thoughts, other than to say what I said above several times, it is known that early 24G tractors had some oddball stuff on them?

I wish PopcornPopper was still on this forum, he had about four 24G machines and knew all the ins and outs.

Sheldon
Sheldon,

Thanks. Yes, I read through the whole thread including his mic measurements on the spindle and housing. If he used deck model 44444 from a Promaster 400 72" to find his spindle shafts than those shafts are current Gravely part number 58802900. The old part number for 58802900 is 34603. 34603 is the part number listed in the 24G 72" deck IPL for the shaft that is used on each spindle assembly. 34603 is also the same shaft used on the double pulley spindle on each 60" deck used on regular Gravely rider's. The initial 24G IPL shows 34603 to be splined at the top, however the replacement of that shaft is keyed. Of all the 60" decks I've worked on, both from the mid 80's and 00's, the double pulley shaft is also keyed. Either the replacement is simply keyed, or the IPL is wrong and they were all in fact keyed to begin with. I would likely vote the later as it's just a picture on a page.

Now if you compare spindle housings, the current Gravely part number for the housing on the 44444 model deck is 08957700. The original housing part number on the 24G deck IPL is 44898, which the current part number for that is also 08957700. For the 60” deck on regular riders Gravely used housing 21215, which is current part number 08722700. It’s also the same housing used with the 40” and 50” decks with splined spindles. The shaft that he is using on his 72” deck is used on the 60” deck for the double pulley application. In that application it is required to rebuild that spindle in the same way you rebuild a standard splined 40” and 50” deck spindle. The nuts on the top and bottom of the shaft must be locked down tight so the shaft and all of its components spin as one tight assembly. Otherwise the spindle will destroy itself, as you well know. I can’t see Gravely using the shaft in one application, requiring assembly in one way, and then using it in a different application, require assembly in another way. Furthermore, having to re-adjust bearing load at each blade changes is not practical nor does it seem feasible from an engineering standpoint.

Thanks,

Rick
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,369 Posts
Rick, I knew most of what you just explained, and figured the rest was likely.

But I have never owned a 60" or 72" deck, on a 24G or Promaster.

It does not make sense to me either, but I'm not there to see what he has, or why it does not go together the way we expect it to?

I too am concerned it will not stay together, but we have done all we can here.

I was also concerned that he was apparently doing this work with the housing still in the deck, that just seems more difficult to me, and harder to be sure of how things are going together.

But what do I know?

Sheldon
 
61 - 65 of 65 Posts
Top