Aftermarket external reverse gearbox?

[JP0503]

Good morning all,

Been kicking around the idea of engine swapping the old Ford 8600 sitting in the fence row. The idea just happened upon me to add a reverser to the back of the engine so that maybe it will do better with a loader. Just looking for suggestions on where to find a gearbox like that, and if there are any good reasons why the rest of the tractor wouldn't like it. Thanks for your time

 

[Fritz Maurer]

Well first I don’t get the external part, if it’s going right on the back of the engine.
Second, if you would have to find something as short as the Dual Power… but they both won’t fit in the bell housing, unless your engine swap includes lengthening the frame… then you have to make something for the front bolster to attach to, if you are planning to use any other power plant than a 401… just some points to ponder.

 

[JP0503]

Well first I don’t get the external part, if it’s going right on the back of the engine.
Second, if you would have to find something as short as the Dual Power… but they both won’t fit in the bell housing, unless your engine swap includes lengthening the frame… then you have to make something for the front bolster to attach to, if you are planning to use any other power plant than a 401… just some points to ponder.

I was planning on using a 7.3 idi. Gonna need to build a frame for it anyway so the making space for it is no big deal. Keeping the dual power would be nice, but if it doesn't work oh well. It would be easier if I could mate the reverser onto the engine, even if it means a custom bell housing. Unfortunately the starter sits too low on the v8 and not doing an extra gearbox would mean modifying the bell housing on the transmission.

It might work better to mate the gearbox straight to the engine, then use the original clutch in the bell housing.

 

[used red MN]

What does a reverser box in front of the trans and “maybe it will do better with a loader” have to do with each other?? You need more speeds to choose from for backing up? You want to have/build a reverse operation loader? Save your time and money and put it towards an actual wheel loader if that is what you need. If JP are your initials that is all wrong, your last initial should be G for Goldberg.

 

[JP0503]

What does a reverser box in front of the trans and “maybe it will do better with a loader” have to do with each other?? You need more speeds to choose from for backing up? You want to have/build a reverse operation loader? Save your time and money and put it towards an actual wheel loader if that is what you need. If JP are your initials that is all wrong, your last initial should be G for Goldberg

You are absolutely correct lol. I don't need a wheel loader. I want to make the tractor that I have as useful as possible, and make a fun project out of it as well. Making this thing a loader machine isn't the end all be all, just an idea I was kicking around. If you notice in my previous reply I pointed out the fact that the starter bump on the bell housing would need to be relocated to swap the engine *that I already have* into the tractor. Additionally, I may have better luck securing the frame to the rest of the machine if I could make a large plate to bolt on to the bell housing without worrying about clearance for clutch and input shafts. It might be crazy, but I like the challenge of the engineering and problem solving.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

Consider that your PTO, and probably the hydraulics too, are driven off the flywheel. Most tractors of that era had a shaft-inside-a-tube arrangement where the transmission is driven off one, and the live PTO and hydraulics are driven off the other.

Your reversing gearbox would have to have the same kind of pass-through in order to retain those functions. You might be willing to live with no PTO, but you will also have no hydraulics, no dual power, no loader, no 3pt hitch.

Interestingly enough, CaseIH did exactly what you are proposing. If you look at the Farmall "1XXA" series tractors, especially from the rear, you will see a tractor that looks very much like a 7000-series Ford. These tractors have a shuttle transmission in place of the main clutch.

 

[used red MN]

If it has a cab you will be loosing that. Loaders adapted for reverse operation generally have the main booms going over the axle inside of the wheels. I am not real familiar with those Ford models do they have a the hydraulic pump on the engine? If not that is a problem if it is in the transmission and relies on rotation in the proper direction to work. I believe almost all tractors beginning in that era or slightly before rely on pressurized return hydraulic oil to lube transmission and final drive gearing.

 

[Fritz Maurer]

I had forgotten about that. You will have no PTO nor hydraulic pump unless your reverser has a hollow center. Only thing you will have is power steering. don’t need a wheel loader? That’s basically what you’re going to end up with when it’s all over.
I really don’t think that 7.3 is going to be worth all this effort . When the 1468 was current, nobody liked the power they had, and they are over 100 cubes bigger, in a comparable weight tractor. 1468 is a valuable tractor today but not for its power.

 

[JP0503]

If it has a cab you will be loosing that. Loaders adapted for reverse operation generally have the main booms going over the axle inside of the wheels. I am not real familiar with those Ford models do they have a the hydraulic pump on the engine? If not that is a problem if it is in the transmission and relies on rotation in the proper direction to work. I believe almost all tractors beginning in that era or slightly before rely on pressurized return hydraulic oil to lube transmission and final drive gearing.

The hydraulics and PTO are an issue, thank you for pointing them out. I was thinking of a front loader, not a rear mounted one. That should clear up some confusion. While it does have a cab, I'm not worried about using it.

Now knowing that the accessories are driven directly off the flywheel, a reverser is likely too much effort for what it's worth, unless I could use one off a different tractor. Even then it would probably be cost prohibitive.

Looking back to my original idea of just swapping the v8 into it, what precautions would need to be taken to make the clutch and flywheel work with the new engine?

 

[used red MN]

I was understanding you wanted the engine to power the drivetrain in the opposite direction of rotation. I see now you were aiming for a for./rev. shuttle box. That is still pushing fairly hard on the Goldberg scale.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

The hydraulics and PTO are an issue, thank you for pointing them out. I was thinking of a front loader, not a rear mounted one. That should clear up some confusion. While it does have a cab, I'm not worried about using it.

Now knowing that the accessories are driven directly off the flywheel, a reverser is likely too much effort for what it's worth, unless I could use one off a different tractor. Even then it would probably be cost prohibitive.

Looking back to my original idea of just swapping the v8 into it, what precautions would need to be taken to make the clutch and flywheel work with the new engine?

I would expect the 8600's flywheel to be weighted and/or balanced wrong for a V8. You would be best off using the 7.3 IDI's flywheel and drilling it to accept the 8600 clutch, flywheel, and pilot bearing. I'm more familiar with IH's than Fords, and IH uses the center shaft for driveline and the tube for IPTO and hydraulics. Olivers and I think Masseys are opposite, and the IPTO shaft splines into the flywheel. Not sure about Fords. Once you get the tractor split you'll see what you need to do.

The key will be in getting the spacing right so the shaft and tube interface with the clutch and pressure plate. You'll be able to get those measurements once the tractor is split.

 

[buickanddeere]

Good morning all,

Been kicking around the idea of engine swapping the old Ford 8600 sitting in the fence row. The idea just happened upon me to add a reverser to the back of the engine so that maybe it will do better with a loader. Just looking for suggestions on where to find a gearbox like that, and if there are any good reasons why the rest of the tractor wouldn't like it. Thanks for your time

TractorData.com Ford 8600 tractor information

www.tractordata.com

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

I had forgotten about that. You will have no PTO nor hydraulic pump unless your reverser has a hollow center. Only thing you will have is power steering. don’t need a wheel loader? That’s basically what you’re going to end up with when it’s all over.
I really don’t think that 7.3 is going to be worth all this effort . When the 1468 was current, nobody liked the power they had, and they are over 100 cubes bigger, in a comparable weight tractor. 1468 is a valuable tractor today but not for its power.

To be fair this is only a 100HP tractor. The 1468 and 1568 were trying to be 140HP and 160HP tractors.

Other tractors with the Perkins and Cat V8s performed better. IH's V8 was kind of a dog to begin with.