Outdoor Power Equipment (Lawn Mowers, Snow Blowers, Chain Saws and more) Discussions

Guys,

I may get to go check out some SS's. One is a Yardman 21" 5hp 2-stroke. The other is a Toro CCR2000e 2-stroke.

I am leaning towards the Yardman, based on boratification possibilities. I'm guessing/hoping it has a 5hp Tecumseh, maybe the HSK850. The Toro would have a 4.5hp Suzuki engine, from what I understand. I don't care about electric start. Any reason to avoid the Yardman? I realize it's probably not as solid/durable a machine as the Toro. But if it could be ramped up more in the power department, I could live with that. Thanks for any feedback.

Thanks guys. aa335, I had a lockwasher I was going to toss in, but the stud was too short. I was so caught up in whether this was actually going to work that I did not just grab my blue Loctite. I will have to go back and add that, good point. "Fortunately", the stud was rather rusty, so the nut was snug already. It came with built-in, brown, threadlock

borat, I had corrected the pulley alignment prior, and I don't think this really shifted the engine noticeably. But I will have to double-check the pulleys, just to make sure I didn't accidentally cause an issue. The mount was sized so that it basically lined right up with the stud location, so I'm not expecting issues with alignment, but I'll check.

The tube is 1.25" diameter, and there was a 1.25" diameter endmill available, so I just used that. If the tube had been a size for which an endmill wasn't available, I would have had to program that feature on the machine, and made it with a smaller cutter. And I'm definitely just learning how to do this, so it was a lot easier being able to just use a tool that happened to be the right size, vs programming.

Edit: and, trouts2, unfortunately MTD did *not* choose a good place for a support. In looking at the parts lists for this machine, I did not notice a reference to any sort of engine mount where I added this. I'm not even sure whether the engine is "supposed" to have a stud in this location (in other words, as was mentioned previously, I can't be sure that this is the original engine; if it is, there was a stud present, and nothing appeared to actually use it). The impression I got was that the engine is really supposed to be supported only around the crankshaft, and the rest of the engine just hangs in space, free to move around. Which doesn't strike me as a good idea.

RedOctobyr wrote:
Yeah, existing rust works as thread locker too.  :)  Forgot about that.  They work so well, sometimes you snap off the bolt trying remove the nut. 

This is what the bottom engine mount looks like on my MTD Yard Machines:

Can't figure out why this pic is so big?  I resized it to 400x400.  I apologize if it causes people viewing problems. 

As you can see, the PTO end of the engine is bolted to a plate which is part of the chassis.  Much better than the Craftsman mount.  The bottom is supported by a triangular strut which is attached to the rod and a brace which is attached to the back of the intake housing.  All in all, a very stout arrangement. 

You did the right thing Red when you added that support.  Particularly if you're going to "crank it up"!   The added torque effect would very likely cause negative effects on the engine mounting system had you not beefed it up. 

Borat,

Looks like your MTD is nicely supported. 

Was the Craftsman machine only supported by a single bracket on the PTO side?  Seems very flimsy considering the weight of the engine and the twisting forces involved.

On my Honda 621 and Toro 421QE, the engine is supported at 3 points.  PTO, base of engine, and to bucket.  It is a nicely triangulated structure, which secures the engine and brace the chassis as well.  The only negative drawback is that these mounts are direct to metal, without dampeners like rubber grommets, so the engine does transmit all the vibration towards the handles and the operator.  I get quite a buzzing if I don't wear gloves without sufficient padding.

If I recall correctly, there's a triangular strut that comes down from the recoil/fan housing and fastens to a piece of tubing that runs the width of the machine.  Similar to the MTD set up but without the bracket going to the housing.  The PTO end mount is cantilevered quite a distance from the chassis frame and not made of the most robust material.  Thus the vertical crack in the PTO end mount.  It seem the reinforcement I put in is more than an adequate fix.   It appears to have contributed a fair amount of overall stiffness to the mounting set up.  Better than it was.  That's for certain. 

I like your MTD's mount, borat. That also supports it against front-back engine movement. My mount can't really do that effectively. It seems to have made a big improvement, mind you, but it's not perfect. Adding an attachment to the housing would be nice, but probably not something I'll undertake. It sounds like a lot of the machines have put in pretty robust mounts (Honda, Toro, even MTD, etc). At least you were able to replace and improve your mount, borat (the Craftsman that broke).

Red:

I didn't do anything to the MTD.  That's all stock and looks more than adequate.  Much better set up than the Craftsman before I fixed it.   

RedOctobyr wrote:
They have to, the newer machines are all 4 stroke engine that are heavier.  Some of them have 208cc which are not featherweight.  And they look pretty porky too.

Yeah, you're not kidding. I've played with some of the 4-strokes in stores, they are surprisingly heavy when you push down on the handles. Way lighter than a 2-stage, of course, but significantly heavier (or at least differently-balanced) than my 2-stroke machines. And the housings do seem to have grown quite a bit.

I saw a Husqvarna the other day that actually had LED headlights, on a SS! I thought that was interesting. It had a quick-style chute, but it used a drum with a crank on it. Two cables come off the drum, one pulls the chute to the right, the other pulls it to the left. It's a lot bulkier than Toro's QZR (?), but it seemed a bit more intuitive. It's also larger and gave the impression, at least, that it could be more robust.

The newer Husqvarna SS with the crank is more intuitive than the Toro Quick Chute.  Left to turn left, right to turn right.  The Toro is down to turn left, up to turn right.  I don't care for the Husq console with the lights, seems to block visibility to me.  And their chute crank, while intuitive, feels cheap. 

The Ariens 722EC has the crank chute that only need 180 degree rotation left to right.  This is my favorite and most intuitive system, feels robusts too.  If only they add remote deflector adjustment, like pull up and down on that same crank lever.  Anyways, I'm at SSSAS 2.  The Ariens is my next target acquisition.  :)  If only someone figured how to introduce forced induction or a nitrous shot to that 2 stroke engine.  Maybe it's a stretch to mention Tecumseh and turbo in the same sentence.