- Posts: 2041
- Thank you received: 388
What will you be using for spring?
- GT 14
- Offline
- Super Mod - Supporter
-
Registered
Kurt-NEPA wrote: GT. Engine RPM at PTO speed (540 rpm) is about 1800. That is about peak torque for an 8N. Funny thing is that the engine is only about 24HP. Not much more than a 520H, but the torque must be at least double. That belly mower is easy duty for an 8N in normal grass.
Thats about half the speed on the 520 and like you say 2x torque.
1978 C-101
1983 C-225
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- M Bailey
- Offline
- Supporter
-
Registered
- Posts: 658
- Thank you received: 116
Kurt-NEPA wrote: Thanks guys, That 8N belly mower is a bit rare, but they are out there. It took me two years to find it and it was 300 miles away. Well worth the trip. Woods made 5ft and 6ft belly mowers with mounting kits for various tractors. The 5 foot is more common, mine is a 6 foot. Mowing with it is just like a larger Wheel Horse. Its amazing how much faster it is mowing with a 6ft mower. It cut my time in half. The only down side is that it is not as maneuverable. Strange thing - I burn less gas with the 8N than with my 520H and the 8N is quieter. I love the sound of old Ford flat heads.
Here is another view
The first motorized vehicle I ever drove was a Ford-Ferguson around 1960. I was tasked with mucking out the barn into the manure spreader and then spreading said load onto the field. It turned out to be about 2 hours of shoveling manure for 5 minutes of spreading. I wouldn't trade those memories for anything. I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for those old Fords.
Major
"I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member." Groucho Marx
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- JustinW.73
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Super Moderator
-
Registered
- Small Engine Mechanic
- Posts: 351
- Thank you received: 51
GT 14 wrote:
Kurt-NEPA wrote: GT. Engine RPM at PTO speed (540 rpm) is about 1800. That is about peak torque for an 8N. Funny thing is that the engine is only about 24HP. Not much more than a 520H, but the torque must be at least double. That belly mower is easy duty for an 8N in normal grass.
Thats about half the speed on the 520 and like you say 2x torque.
But it is a 4 cylinder isn't it? You also have to remember, speed is not torque. Speed is distance*time, torque is the force (rotational force) being applied. And torque is really foot lbs.
1973 No Name 16
1973 Automatic 14
1966 856
1966 f100
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- GT 14
- Offline
- Super Mod - Supporter
-
Registered
- Posts: 2041
- Thank you received: 388
1978 C-101
1983 C-225
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Kurt-NEPA
- Offline
- Super Moderator
-
Registered
- Posts: 505
- Thank you received: 129
M Bailey wrote: I wouldn't trade those memories for anything. I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for those old Fords.
As you can tell, I have a soft spot in my heart for them too. I drove my first one as an early teen back in the 60's I was in my glory. When I retired and bought a place with 4 acres of grass I needed more than my aging Craftsman GT could handle. A new Kubota or fancy zero turn was out my price range, that's when I remembered the 8N I drove in my youth. Strange thing is that old tractor I drove back then was probably almost 20 years old. Many of these old Ford are still working today. Ford built the first one in 1939. Talk about old technology. Mine is a 1950, almost the last of the breed. What I like is that it was designed to be maintained and rebuilt by shade tree mechanics. What happened to that approach?
1988 520H
1995 520H
1998 520xi
2000 522xi
1950 Ford 8N
1955 Ford 660
Single Stage Blower
2-Two Stage Blowers
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Kurt-NEPA
- Offline
- Super Moderator
-
Registered
- Posts: 505
- Thank you received: 129
1988 520H
1995 520H
1998 520xi
2000 522xi
1950 Ford 8N
1955 Ford 660
Single Stage Blower
2-Two Stage Blowers
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- M Bailey
- Offline
- Supporter
-
Registered
- Posts: 658
- Thank you received: 116
Major
"I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member." Groucho Marx
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- JustinW.73
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Super Moderator
-
Registered
- Small Engine Mechanic
- Posts: 351
- Thank you received: 51
M Bailey wrote: Those old Fords were a small bore/long stroke engine, not much on horse power but long on torque. Very economical tractors to operate. Check the oil daily and the gas once a week tractors.
Pretty much the opposite of a jd 2 cyl. Huge bore, but the strokes weren't that long though were they?
1973 No Name 16
1973 Automatic 14
1966 856
1966 f100
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- M Bailey
- Offline
- Supporter
-
Registered
- Posts: 658
- Thank you received: 116
JustinW.73 wrote:
M Bailey wrote: Those old Fords were a small bore/long stroke engine, not much on horse power but long on torque. Very economical tractors to operate. Check the oil daily and the gas once a week tractors.
Pretty much the opposite of a jd 2 cyl. Huge bore, but the strokes weren't that long though were they?
Modern engines are mostly but not all "over square" meaning that the bore is larger than the stroke. "Square" that meaning the bore and stroke are equal, and "under square" meaning the bore is smaller than the stroke.
For my springtime chores the 416-8 gets garden duty with the plow and disc.
While the C-101 gets mowing duty!
Major
"I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member." Groucho Marx
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Kurt-NEPA
- Offline
- Super Moderator
-
Registered
- Posts: 505
- Thank you received: 129
1988 520H
1995 520H
1998 520xi
2000 522xi
1950 Ford 8N
1955 Ford 660
Single Stage Blower
2-Two Stage Blowers
Please Log in to join the conversation.