A tale of two Supers and some ?'s

[nophun]

A while back, I picked up my 1872 which I knew was partially apart, a project abandoned. When I got it home, I found it was missing a few important and expensive parts and the driveshafts (there were 2) were both worn out.

Today I accomplished my mission of finding a parts tractor; an 1882 with a much nicer Haban and what looks to have all of the parts that I need like driveshaft and muffler and a bunch of little things.

So, the questions: On the 1882, the axle shaft housings are much beefier that the 1872. Is this a model year change or did the PO swap out the rear end?? The hydro unit is the same on both; has the splined shaft that sticks out the back. Both units appear to be aluminum. Second: I read about the flex that cracks parts on here, would the end plate from the newer tractor frame cure this?

[Terry C]

Originally Posted by nophun

A while back, I picked up my 1872 which I knew was partially apart, a project abandoned. When I got it home, I found it was missing a few important and expensive parts and the driveshafts (there were 2) were both worn out.

Today I accomplished my mission of finding a parts tractor; an 1882 with a much nicer Haban and what looks to have all of the parts that I need like driveshaft and muffler and a bunch of little things.

So, the questions: On the 1882, the axle shaft housings are much beefier that the 1872. Is this a model year change or did the PO swap out the rear end?? The hydro unit is the same on both; has the splined shaft that sticks out the back. Both units appear to be aluminum. Second: I read about the flex that cracks parts on here, would the end plate from the newer tractor frame cure this?

First question: 82 series had bigger axle housings.
Second: No I had one with an end plate, still cracked the front mounts. Axle braces are needed, especially if you run a big Haban.

[nophun]

Originally Posted by Terry C

First question: 82 series had bigger axle housings.
Second: No I had one with an end plate, still cracked the front mounts. Axle braces are needed, especially if you run a big Haban.

Thanks for the reply. I'll add swapping rears to the project.

[J-Mech]

Originally Posted by nophun

Thanks for the reply. I'll add swapping rears to the project.

Why??
What's wrong with the rear in the 1872? They just changed axle design. It's not like there were issues breaking an axle tube on the older style. Leave the rears alone. No gain in switching.

[nophun]

Originally Posted by J-Mech

Why??
What's wrong with the rear in the 1872? They just changed axle design. It's not like there were issues breaking an axle tube on the older style. Leave the rears alone. No gain in switching.

If no strength advantage, I'll leave it be. I'm going to be making one out of two here, so I want make sure to take advantage if any of the parts are stronger or more durable, or just a better design.

[J-Mech]

Originally Posted by nophun

If no strength advantage, I'll leave it be. I'm going to be making one out of two here, so I want make sure to take advantage if any of the parts are stronger or more durable, or just a better design.

Not much advantage. The outer axle bearing is a ball bearing in the 1882 as opposed to the needle bearing in the 1872, but the needle bearings almost never cause issue as long as the seal is good and the rear doesn't get water in it. I wouldn't go to the trouble of switching. Not worth the gain.

Now, if you are wanting to use the driveshaft out of the 1882, then you will have to swap rears. The two tractors use completely different driveshafts. They aren't similar enough machines to use one for parts on the other. Some parts interchange..... but lots of differences.

[CubDieselFan]

So are you keeping 1872? You can use the CV style drive shaft from it, you will just need to drill and tap the input shaft on the hydro.

[J-Mech]

Originally Posted by CubDieselFan

So are you keeping 1872? You can use the CV style drive shaft from it, you will just need to drill and tap the input shaft on the hydro.

No, the 1872 uses a smooth hydro input, the 1882 is splined. He will need to swap rears, or buy the adapter from Jeff.

[CubDieselFan]

Originally Posted by J-Mech

No, the 1872 uses a smooth hydro input, the 1882 is splined. He will need to swap rears, or buy the adapter from Jeff.

The 1872 is splined. My 1872 has a splined input shaft. Pretty sure they all have it, just like the 1572 and 1772.

[J-Mech]

Originally Posted by CubDieselFan

The 1872 is splined. My 1872 has a splined input shaft. Pretty sure they all have it, just like the 1572 and 1772.

My mistake. It is splined but uses a roll pin. You are correct. Tap the shaft, and you can convert without swapping rears.