1450 Hydraulic Lift Question

[J-Mech]

Ryan,
The rockshafts are different from the 1450 to a "782" (that's what your 682 would then be). I also don't know if the long hyd cylinder that the 1450 used would work either. But, if you are serious...... I may know where a valve, cylinder, rockshaft, are for a 782. BUT, no rear end....

NO, none of it would fit the 129. Not easily anyway.

[jimbob200521]

Originally Posted by J-Mech

Ryan,
The rockshafts are different from the 1450 to a "782" (that's what your 682 would then be). I also don't know if the long hyd cylinder that the 1450 used would work either. But, if you are serious...... I may know where a valve, cylinder, rockshaft, are for a 782. BUT, no rear end....

NO, none of it would fit the 129. Not easily anyway.

I'm not too worried about it, the 682 has spring assist and the heaviest thing that will most likely be on it is a blade or deck. just figured for the price I found the 1450 components for if it was an easy swap I'd go for it. now maybe ill buy the 1450 and swap the motor from my 129 to it ;-) :biggrin:

[Yosemite Sam]

While it is true that some of the hydraulic lift parts are different between the 1450 and a 1X9 series tractors, I don't think it would take much to make one work on the other.

I believe that the only real difference is the location of the control valve, with the valve being located on the steering column on the 1450, and on the side of the dash tower on the 1X9's this changes the plumbing and the location of the "valve handle lever". With the differences being so small and so few, it is my belief that if you mount the valve on the 1X9, on the column (just as it was on the 1450) everything else should fall into place.

The cylinder, bracket, rock shaft and related parts are the same between the two.

[gmbadgley]

Depending on the condition of the 1450, it may be easier to swap engines.

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by jimbob200521

maybe ill buy the 1450 and swap the motor from my 129 to it ;-) :biggrin:

There are too many differences in the engines between the 129 and 1450 to make swapping feasible.

[jimbob200521]

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

There are too many differences in the engines between the 129 and 1450 to make it swapping feasible.

The motor swap was more of a joke, I love my 129, but for the record, it's got the K321 in it, so the motor used in both should be similar.

Then again, I have done more unexpected things in the past

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by jimbob200521

The motor swap was more of a joke, I love my 129, but for the record, it's got the K321 in it, so the motor used in both should be similar.

Then again, I have done more unexpected things in the past

While the engine blocks are basically the same between the 129 and 1450, the similarities pretty-much stop there (unless the 321 in the 129 is a Quiet Line engine).

It would be rare to find a 129 engine that has the mounting holes for an electric pto, even if it did have, once you mounted the electric pto there would then be no place on the crank shaft for the starter pulley. Using the manual pto would also be difficult as there are no provisions on the 1450 for the pto related parts needed to engage/disengage the manual pto.

After that we run into a whole different can of worms concerning the differences with the charging systems and wire looms between the two.

[FFGino]

If you take the parts from the 1450 and mount them in the 129 in the same manner that they were on the 1450, the only thing that you would still need to complete the job and have it work properly is to make up a bushing on a plate for the left (sitting on the tractor) side of the cowl. I've done this several times as the wide frame parts weren't available and the quiet line parts were.

Happy cubbing, FFGino!!

If you just swap the entire rearend over to the 129, you'll need to use the 129 linkage to the trans.