belt drive toughness

[6wheeler 662]

Mike, I always wondered that too. But that is how the CQ belts are. Maybe they take seconds from Gates. I know they are cheaper than Napa. But, if they don't fit? Cheaper isn't better. C-85, I was always told. Rear wheel drive eats up 30 to 35% of the horsepower just in the driveline.

[David_V 1]

Mike, I use the NAPA green belts now. They are a good fit and they haven't slipped yet. All of my tractors have them on the deck drive and trans drive with no problems. I have also tried Carquests "green" line from Gates. Seems like they' re either a bit too long or short. I couldn't ever get a good fit from them. The Napa belts are only about 15% cheaper than Toro belts but they are in town and available plus, they work well. As was stated before by MalMac, If you use it for what it is intended for? There will be no trouble. Now if I hook one of our 30' field cultivators behind my 520? I may have to put 5000# pounds of weight on the 520 and add another 200hp to the engine. Then, the belt might slip    

I bought one of those green belts. It didn't fit. I got one of their regular belts, same 82 inches, and it fit perfectly. I compared the two and the woven belt was thinner and sat lower on the pulley than the black one. That tiny bit of width made a huge difference.

[IthacaJeff 151]

My 1989 310-8 is on its second drive belt, the first lasted 21 years. Cost about $45 if I remember. 

No maintenance other than periodically checking the PTO clutch tightness. What would happen

with a shaft drive if it broke? Cost? My Deutz-Allis 1920 shaft drive has the U-joint grease fittings

buried so deep in the tractor's guts that it is impossible to grease them or even check them.

 

Shaft drive is WAY over-rated.

 

Jeff

[leeave96 488]

2. The other thing that we were told was that they said that there was a 6 to 1 ratio between the engine and transmission. They told us that most of the torque load was taken up in the transmission, so according to them there should never be much stress on the drive belt.

I can agree with this and it is an excellent point. There has to be some sort of gear reduction from 3600 RPM's else we'd all be mowing at interstate speeds!

[855ownerJoel 32]

There is a reason for everything.  First I have to agree with the weakest link is always where it breaks.  Second, on many things OEM parts, for me, have always seemed to be the best.  They are made to be an exact fit and are designed for the job intended.  The belt has the ability to flex a bit under load where steel to steel must break or stress at a minimum.  I have replaced shear pins on farm equipment and every time you shear a pin (IMO) you put stress on the hole and make the fit a little more loose each time (not good), with a belt you have a little forgiveness with the flex in the belt.  Buy good OEM belts and you will have great performance and something that will last.  Also, use the equipment for what it is intended for, if you abuse it (or any equipment) it still will fail.

[Keith 21]

I agree with what has been posted. The v-belts that WH used are fine for more than 20 HP

and eliminate most drive line parts that commonly wear on shaft drive.   You can get five years

of use from a v-belt and it is relatively inexpensive to replace.  The straightforward belt drive is

why I admire the Wheel Horse,  a reason these tractors can be repaired and kept in use for

many years into the future.  

 

A belt drive system could use synchronous belts,  aka timing belts.   Timing belts were not

invented when these tractors were designed.   Timing belts would require a clutch,  and 

are more costly,  but don't slip and are on the order of 98 percent efficient.  Limited slippage

is a good design trait of v-belts, reduces shock to the drive line in extreme use.  Timing

belts are commonly used in industrial power transmission applications.  Hydrostatic is best 

for a larger garden tractor because it provides variable speed and hydraulic lift.  

 

The comment about belts offering  gear reduction is on target.    Some small shaft

drive tractors use belts for gear reduction, with an intermediate shaft and clutch 

to drive a PTO.   That type of hybrid belt-shaft system can have cost advantages but

in some cases clutches aren't quite up to the durability that is needed. The simplicity

of belt drive system makes for a less costly transmission.

[GlenPettit 1,717]

Gates made and still does make the special belts for the Wheel Horse tractors,

the main difference is the angle of the sides of the belt, which are also called

Agricultural or Light Duty Belts.   (ie: HA, HB, HC or 2L, 3L, 4L).

Wheel Horse belts sometimes come in "fractional" sizes, rather than always whole

even standard sizes, and the widths/thicknesses change: (ie: HA is 1/2"W & 5/16"T,

HB is 21/32"W & 13/32"T).  I think the "ply" is different also.

In probably most cases, a true Wheel Horse (TORO) belt will cost about 20% more

but give you 50 to 200% longer life, compared to standard belts.  Always go with a

OEM Wheel Horse Belt, especially if the belt will get hard extended use.  

The Wheel Horse name and WH belt number will always be cast into these special belts. 

 

 

GATES Belt Cross-Reference charts:  www.Gates.com/part interchange/index

[squonk 42,551]

I usually get at least 10 yrs out of a Gates/Napa green belt. Nothing wrong with that. Were talking a gas motor spinning a pulley spinning the belt spinning another pulley. It's not rocket surgery.