The Fordson Tractor Pages Forum

Yes the tranferbox is defenetly a Roadless but I have two bolts on each side on the A-frame and on yours has a big nut. Then the design of the steering arm is different. It can be a change of design of course.
Both use the trade name Manuel after Segre-Amar´s son Emmanuel.

Hello Grani,

I have seen the conversion with the big nut before here in Holland is a SM with the same axel,

My tractor is a Power Major from 1960.

I do have some numbers from the axel

01592 G on the axel on the cast house the is #3 WH 1427

May be you now something from this numbers

On Roadless axles there is a brass plate with an axle serial number. Mine is 2325 and it is a 1963 so Yours should have an earlyer number to be a Roadless.

Grani,

I asked John Bowens and he dont know the number,

as you see the number on the 6/4 for sale with him may be I overlooked the 01592 G the G as 6 I dont know.

The Roadless serialnumber has only 4 digits.

Hi guys,

Thanks to Henk, I got myself a nice triangle. I am going to place it "forward" for my 6 cylinder conversion. Here 's a picture, of how it should looks like.
The triangle needs a little adjustment of course.





An acquitance of mine made the 4 plates, that fit into the 4 wholes in the tombstone. Each plate is 8 mm (= 0,31 inch) thick.
Should I use 2 or 4 plates for the wright strenght? What do you think?

Get a solid block made rather than the plates.

I had them cut out of 1.5" steel by a local machine shop. We used some of his off cuts for them. They drilled them for us too.

Hi Brian,

Thank you for your reaction!
Would it be an idea to use all the 4 plates en weld both the 2 plates to one another?
I don't mean to be obstinate/headstrong, though...

Guys
Been watching this thread for awhile now.
Have also been watching Tomo's thread on British Farming Forum, and he is upto the same stage as you Pascal.
http://farmingforum.co.uk/forums/showth ... 963&page=2
Same idea done in different ways.
I'm not saying that this is the way I would do it, but I like seeing different engineering approaches to problems/obstacles.
Keep up the good work, and the photo's.
Kiwi Kev

Like Kev says, people have different ways of approaching the same problem.

I do not claim to be an engineer but somethings just look right. If you tell me four plates welded together are as good as a solid lump, I will believe you.

I have been told on here that to reverse the axle support will weaken the tractor but the one I built was in full farm work on a spreader, plough and long road trips for a very long time with no problems. But I had strengthened the side channels with a loader frame as we have talked of in the past.

Mine is 95% depending on the strength of the loader frame. Without it the whole thing would fall apart. The frontaxle A frame is pivoted in the loaderframe crossmember.
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w315 ... um/005.jpg

Think you chaps should stop playing with 590E engines and really get into high HP!



I took this over the weekend.




She has a 2700 series engine connected to the gearbox and a Perkins V8 fitted to the front connected to the 2700 via a clutch to reduce any excessive strain on the crank (?).

Think she might manage a two furrow plough?

Hi Kev,

Thank you for your link to the other website. Very interesting!


Hi Brian,

Wow, that's quite a tractor!! But I have one problem, though...it won't fit in my barn..

Thank you for your advices! Do you happen to have a picture of the 6 cylinder Major, you have converted?

I don't have a loader frame, but my plan is to reinforce my Super on 3 ways:

1. Metal plates (made by Henk!) to be welded on the U-bars



2. Anglebars to be welded into the U-bars (see red rectangle):



3. Lengthened U-bars to the gearbox (see red circle)




What do you think, guys?
Any advice will be appreciated.

Hello Pascal,

IMHO the option in the second picture is the best. Support the front axle in its original location with a support between the U-bars.

Lengthening the U bars and fit them to the rear axle housing is of no use I think. The 4 bolts to the transmission will stop any movement between the bars and the transmisson. This lengthening is usefull to put weights on with a tractor pulling game.

A guy in our naberhood has a super major with a 6 cilinder block and only made the U bars longer and supports the axle on the front. The tractor is used for the cattle food mixer etc. without any problems. I would not worry to much about strengthening the tractor to much. It won't break up that easy.

Regards

Emiel

Emiel wrote:
Lengthening the U bars and fit them to the rear axle housing is of no use I think. The 4 bolts to the transmission will stop any movement between the bars and the transmisson. This lengthening is usefull to put weights on with a tractor pulling game.

I have exactly the opposite opinion. The best thing is to lengthen the frame all the way to the rear axle.

Grani, we have to be a bit careful as Emiel is far bigger than me!! But I agree with you. The loader frame we used went from the rear axle to the four mounting bolts and then forward onto the side channels. It was like a second chassis.

Sorry Pascal, the one I did was over 30 years ago. It was still working after 25 years with no problems, but I never got any pictures. No digital cameras in those days and, in our area it was nothing special. They were working tractors.

Brian wrote:Grani, we have to be a bit careful as Emiel is far bigger than me!!

He might be bigger but from the distans I am looking he seems quiet small.

Pascal
Without getting into a "who's right and who's wrong" debate, I would also be going down the line of Emiel's view, of having the A frame around the right way, and then making brackets off the side rails to support the A frame. This would also strengthen the side rails.
Having a greater distance between the A frame rear bush, and the axle bush, gives more support/strength. You also have the strength from the bolted joint between the engine, sump and gearbox, as well as the front engine brackets bolted to the side rails. All this support and bracing,-----------compared to having a shortened A frame around the wrong way, all being held in place by 4x bolts in each side of the side rails that go into the tombstone.
Those 4x bolts each side is all that holds your front axle to the tractor.
Depending on what the tractor will be used for after it's finished, I would also be thinking about moving the axle back further(like a Roadless 4WD) to get a better turning circle, as well as power steering.


Kiwi Kev

Hello,

In my opinion anybody should do with his tractor what he or she likes to do. I just write down what I think.

I feel the extra length of the tractor does not really improve stress on the frame, nor on the gearbox. The new engine lacks front axle support. If the front axle is pushed away in the standard situation, it will be stopped by the a frame in the sump and on the tomb stone and from the tomb stone on the side rails.

By moving the support forwarts, the support is extra stressed, and the arm of force is longer via the rails to the gearbox. By leaving the a frame support in its original positon, the tomb stone is less stressed and the length of the arm to the gearbox is shorter. The 4 bolts between the gearbox and the side rails will make a moment tight connection, when the bolts are tightened correctly and therefore additonal welded on bars to the rear will increase more weight than increase strength.

When you put a front end loader on a tractor, a comlete different stress is put on the tractor, and therefore a frame to the rear axle is quite usefull.

Brian: You don't have to be affraid of me going mad. Let's just try to find a good solution for Pascal's tractor.

Pascal: If you like I can PM you in dutch with some more explanation on my theory.

Best regards

Emiel

Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your explinations!!

Please don't make a fight about my front axle.
I know there are different solutions. I really appreciate your opinions and advices!
I have to think it over again and I'll let you know which solution will be the best for my tractor.

Emiel,
If you could send me a PM with the explination in Dutch, that would be great! Do you have any pictures of the tractor in your neighbourhood?

Hello all,

How did county solve this problem with the SUPER 6 ???

can someone put some pics on

They used their own sump.

The best way possible would be to make a sump out of two, cut it in the middle, fit the front and rear, put the pin where it should be and weld everything up. I have now seen that done.

6 cylinder engines were fitted by a French dealer as we have discussed before and they had a sump cast. There have been one or two at Meddo and they really are the way to go. But finding a sump is like finding Rocking Horse Manure.

These sumps are sometimes for sale...but they are really expensive...about 1000 - 1500 euros just for the sump!! So, no engine included...

The French (Belgian?) dealer will be EVA?

I have heard it too, that people welded two 4 cylinder sumps together. Quite a job since the welding of this material is quite a job.

Pascal,

Did not know your wife was in that sort of dealer business

The guy were I collect your triangle did the same thing as Brian says. He welded two together. But then he is a professional welder.

Hi Henk,

No, Eva (my wife) is unfortunately not into the tractor-business.


I think it's even for an professional welder quite a job.
I guess he doesn't sell them at a reasonable price?