IHC cast hydro into 1864?
 

Hey guys, new to the site but not necessarily new to cub cadet tractors. This might be on the site somewhere but I've been unable to find. How many issues will I run into swapping a 169 hydro transaxle into an 1864? I have a 169 that I've had for years and an 1864 that I gave $200 for on Craigs List last summer (supposedly non-running). Turned out all the 1864 needed was a head gasket and ignition switch.
Many years back I built a cat O 3-point with a 3X6 inch lift cyl. for the 169 that bolts on as a unit in place of the rear trans cover. I'd like to thin the herd a little and the 1864 runs smoother, is quieter, has more power and power steering. But I don't believe the aluminum transaxle in the 1864 is up to the task of handling my 3-point hitch tiller (36 inch FMC w/ its own 18 hp engine). I'd estimate the tiller to weigh +/- 400 lbs. I have to put about 240 lbs ballast on the front of the 169 when its mounted to make it manageable.
Will the charge pump in the 169 handle the power steering in the1864 chassis? Not too worried about driveshaft, have access to mill and lathe, can make anything. Linkage issues??? (haven't taken covers off to compare side by side)
Thoughts???

I don't know if it will fit or not, but you might not want to part out a 169 since they are a rare model.

The aluminum rears with rear braces would handle the stress. There are plenty of cast rears out there without parting a 169. Just sell it and buy your parts.

Welcome to OCC.... :Welcome2:

The 169 is no beauty queen, can't honestly remember how I ended up with it. been 20 years or more. I know it had no engine at the time and the one I have in it is made up of old left over pulling motor parts (billet rod, forged pop-up piston/mated head and some other odds and ends that were laying around).
So you think that 1864 rear would handle the weight? I mean really, with 240 extra lbs clear out on the front of the tractor it just barely keeps the front on the ground. This tiller is REALLY heavy.

The aluminum rear has a stronger carrier and axle shafts.... put a set of the Xtreem Motorworks braces on the 1864 and you will have no problems.. way easier than swapping rears.. Don't be scared of the aluminum rears.. they are OK once you brace them back to the frame

X 2!!!!! :beer2:

Hey RAC65, how 'bout some pictures of that cat 0 you built.....:bigthink:

:popcorn:

You can swap a cast rear into the 1864, you'll need to use the pump from the 1864 because it has the splined input shaft and the pump on the 169 has the spirol pin type shaft. Just my 2 cents, as others have said put a set of Xtreme rear end braces on it and a 3 point hitch and be happy. I have a nice used Xtreme 3 point for sale that will fit the 1864. $300 plus shipping. PM me if you are interested. :beerchug:

I put a cast rear into a 2284 but only because the aluminum was destroyed. That was a little more difficult than putting it in an 1864 because I had to also swap the reduction gear. For the 1864, swapping the pump and installing a new cork gasket should be about it.

There have been intense opinionated debates on here about this very subject, it's a matter of opinions as to which is better and why. Just like what oil to use in the rear. The cast iron is heavier than the aluminum, but I've learned that unless the rear is broken and you already have the parts, it's not really worth it to do that swap, when wheel weights and/or loading the tires will add weight just the same.

The added weight of the cast rear isn't really an issue either way. Just concerned mostly with the axle loads when I'm hanging 400 lbs at the ends of the 3 point arms & 200 lbs on the front of the frame and the aluminum housings holding up. Also figure I can't bolt the 3-point assembly directly to the back of the aluminum case in place of the rear cover like I do on the 169 rear. I'll try to get a pic of current set-up when its light out.

Think you might be better to just mod your 3pt to mount on the 1864 like the original CCC design. Then sell your 169. They are on the rare list, and somewhat sought after

Attachment 96894
Hmmm, not sure I did that right. If it shows up it's the 3-point I built for the old 169 15 years ago or more. Bolts on in-place of rear cover, no other bracing. Will pick up way more than the tractor should with the large lift cyl. The lift links were new this spring, finally wore out the old ones. Arms and top link bracket came from cub add-on that was just partially there at a surplus store. Lift cyl is a shortened cross slide cyl off of a fork lift in the local scrap yard. Circuit spliced into the attachment lift for the 169. Use a little clevis attached to the frame to lock the factory lift into one place when using the 3-point. Works pretty good (has down-pressure too), that's why was looking at just transplanting whole shooting match into the 1864.