Cub Cadet 2182 PTO clutch

[Oak]

1574, I'm gonna call BS on that info. Xtreme makes clutches better than OEM, period. I just pulled up all 3 configurations of a 2182 clutch and they all are mounted with the drive pulley near the engine. Why do you think your 2182 is so different than every other one built? Here is a pic of my 2182 with the same numbers on the clutch 5210-30. It is a 1992 built machine with a serial number 832820. What is the serial number for your machine?
DSC02207.jpg
I believe many others on here have "upgraded" to an Xtreme clutch on here for their 2182's with no issues.

21 horsepower that the WG600 Kubota puts out is pretty wimpy to the machines built today.

[1711Cub]

Originally Posted by Oak

21 horsepower that the WG600 Kubota puts out is pretty wimpy to the machines built today.

I've never owned the WG600, but the same era Kohlers, which are rated at less HP have more usable torque than many modern engines. The whole HP rating for workhorse engines such as these is pretty useless IMHO.

[Oak]

1574, I get what you are saying about the correct rotation. Did you call Xtreme and talk to them? Here is the replacement for the Warner 5210-30.

https://xtremeope.com/p/xtreme-repla...arner-5210-30/

And this how yours mounts.
DSC02703.jpg

Screenshot 2021-10-06 at 07-55-04 Lookup Parts Via Diagram Cub Cadet US (2).jpg

[Gompers]

Originally Posted by 1711Cub

I've never owned the WG600, but the same era Kohlers, which are rated at less HP have more usable torque than many modern engines. The whole HP rating for workhorse engines such as these is pretty useless IMHO.

It's not useless, and the modern engines (mostly) have just as much usable torque. Horsepower is a dependent variable of torque and RPM, and since they all run (and are rated) at 3600 RPM, definitionally the more horsepower the more torque at the desired operating speed of the engine.

The difference is the shape of the torque curve and what happens when you start lugging the engine down.

For a small engine in most of these applications, what matters is the torque rise i.e. how quickly the amount of torque increases as a function of decreasing RPM. The engines (at least the Kohler ones) are generally designed to operate well past the peak torque number so that if you get into a situation where the engine has to slow down from it's desired operating speed (3600 RPM), the engine can recover from it with increased torque output and bring the output back up to 3600.

The steeper that curve, the more "grunt" the engine has. A flat curve would mean that you're always putting out the maximum amount of force and the only way for you to maintain the speed you desire once the engine starts to slow is to reduce the amount of load the engine is under (i.e. slow down the work). You can see the commands have decently similar and probably slightly better curves than the K singles (the scale on the graph is different) and better than the D600, at least as long as you don't drag them down past the peak too far.

Here's the CH18/20/22 curve (for the 77mm bore engines). I'd consider these modern engines, as Kohler is still making them today.


For comparison here's from the D600 in the 882/782d/1512/1572:


And here's for the big kohler K series singles:


I've never been able to find solid curves for the M18/M20/KT17/KT19/KT21, but they are fairly similar to the CH18/20 from what I have been able to find, though maybe slightly "peakier". I agree that they would still compare favorably to the modern stuff in terms of power output, but probably not efficiency.

I don't have a graph for the WG600, but the numbers I found says it makes 30 ft lbs peak torque at 2450 RPM. If it's rated at 21 HP at 3600 RPM, that means it'd be making 30.6 ft-lbs of torque there. That's actually negative torque rise. It also means that if the power curve from the CH18 above is correct, the CH18 can actually grunt down and do what the WG600 could do if you had it pegged on the governor all the time and lugged down to 2400 RPM or so. The difference is that the WG600 can keep doing that work happily at 3600 RPM (i.e. more horsepower). You just can't load it down past that or it's gonna not be able to recover unless you back off what you're doing.

This also plays into why I think the diesel cubs are kinda pointless, at least in stock form. Add a turbo and turn them up or whatever and they are better, but they are pretty gutless in stock form.

[1574trap]

OAKS -- i agree with you the extreme clutch is made better than original equipment and the better of the two i have received and sent back. the partsangle clutch and the extreme may have been correct but the clutches i received had no identification marking on either -- NONE. both had installation directions written in a generic manner -- to install a clutch the normal way -- PTO pulley away from the engine. trying to exchange USEFUL information with partsangle was impossible. the extreme clutch folks did not know a cub cadet 2182 from a Murray lawnmower. as said neither clutch had stampings or tags identifying the clutch and neither seller could furnish specific information on how their clutch were supposed to be installed on a 2182. i am paying for CORRECT parts and do not think either of these sellers would replace a damaged clutch if i had installed the one i received and it failed quickly due to a rotation issue. it is likely both clutches were correct but because i read the details of their generic installation instructions neither of the sellers could furnish useful information how their clutches were supposed to be installed on a CC 2182. you see the old warner clutch had a plastic sticker on the clutch for ID. the way pto clutches are made today it is the intent of the sellers to have a pto clutch capable of fitting a number of different mowers. 20 year or more after my 2182 was made there is not enough 2182's left to interest the clutch sellers. my CC 2182 is model 142-743-100 and sn 825xxx. i finally was able to exchange enough information with the warner PTO clutch folks to receive specific information from them on the correct clutch for a 2182. they say warner 5215-68 is the correct clutch today. after looking at the clutches on the warner pages never did see any ID on the clutches pictured ect. warner did not furnish useful information until the 3rd email.

[CubDieselFan]

You are over thinking this. The same clutch on your 2182 is the same one used on many different models.

[Sergeant]

Originally Posted by 1574trap

OAKS -- i agree with you the extreme clutch is made better than original equipment and the better of the two i have received and sent back. the partsangle clutch and the extreme may have been correct but the clutches i received had no identification marking on either -- NONE. both had installation directions written in a generic manner -- to install a clutch the normal way -- PTO pulley away from the engine. trying to exchange USEFUL information with partsangle was impossible. the extreme clutch folks did not know a cub cadet 2182 from a Murray lawnmower. as said neither clutch had stampings or tags identifying the clutch and neither seller could furnish specific information on how their clutch were supposed to be installed on a 2182. i am paying for CORRECT parts and do not think either of these sellers would replace a damaged clutch if i had installed the one i received and it failed quickly due to a rotation issue. it is likely both clutches were correct but because i read the details of their generic installation instructions neither of the sellers could furnish useful information how their clutches were supposed to be installed on a CC 2182. you see the old warner clutch had a plastic sticker on the clutch for ID. the way pto clutches are made today it is the intent of the sellers to have a pto clutch capable of fitting a number of different mowers. 20 year or more after my 2182 was made there is not enough 2182's left to interest the clutch sellers. my CC 2182 is model 142-743-100 and sn 825xxx. i finally was able to exchange enough information with the warner PTO clutch folks to receive specific information from them on the correct clutch for a 2182. they say warner 5215-68 is the correct clutch today. after looking at the clutches on the warner pages never did see any ID on the clutches pictured ect. warner did not furnish useful information until the 3rd email.

Though You Have finally found the Information You Looking for as finsruskw said Navigating Cub Cadet parts is actually Pretty simple

Electric PTO clutch By serial Number for the 2182

S/N 800,000 - 816,535
Current Model 717-3467
Old Model 717-3313

S/N 816,536 - 821,059
Current Model 717-3467
Old Model 717-3313

S/N 821,060 - 880,000
Current Model 917-3389
Old Model 717-3375.

Xtreme Model Warner 5210-30 Which replaces S/N 821,060 - 880,000 or Models 917-3389 & 717-3375. when You Look it Up By Model this is the one that shows up on there website

It would be Nice if MTD Provided the Warner Part Number as well In the description as some Manufacturers do that on certain Parts They sell In there Parts diagrams/ Catalogs

[Oak]

1574, now I'm confused.

Here is the one you purchased.
https://www.warnerptodirect.com/shop...utches/5215-68

Here is the Xtreme.
https://xtremeope.com/p/xtreme-repla...arner-5215-68/

They are both CCW rotation.

Look here in the Warner installation instructions. You should have a CW rotation PTO if I'm reading this correctly.
https://www.altraliterature.com//-/m...uals/p-8816-we

[R Bedell]

I, for the life of me, can't understand why this post keeps dragging on. The correct information was supplied in post #2.

[Oak]

I think Roland if you look at the info from Warner, they want the “leaf springs” to be pulled and not pushed inside of the clutch. 1574 is correct on that. The clutch has to be flipped on the 2182’s causing the clutch to turn in the wrong direction. It probably doesn’t matter with size of our engines. It’s a good point that I never looked at.