Colt Case Ingersoll Garden Tractors

Came with this little diesel engine, a two cylinder Kubota z400. Unknown working condition, and it doesn't yet fit in the tractor. The PO got it from someone who was working on the repower but didn't finish.

Some parts are missing, mostly small stuff like a couple of loader pins.

That will be a cool and unique project to finish. Should have ample power!

puttputt wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 8:51 am That will be a cool and unique project to finish. Should have ample power!

I took a picture of the bushing used for the engine mount, that the PO came up with, so that you see it, first picture.

This tractor is not in as good shape as my other 644. But I need to make it functional asap, to sell the other one.

Sooo, why are you doing this Eugen. I guess I missed something, didn’t read posts, maybe read it and forget
( most likely) , or there wasn’t a post about doing this ?
I’m kinda in the dark here ( which is normal for me ), any way. What’s what here Eugen.

When you get that one running, send which ever one you don’t want to me.

Noel

Noel, the 644 that is working well and in much better shape cost me a good penny. Plus I refreshed it a bit, and it has 3pt hitch and hydraulic pto. Hoping to sell it for the same good penny. This basket case I just got was cheaper so I fix it, keep it and save some money. More headache, yes. But life is such.

I am questioning my own sanity, yes

Wow @Eugen that’s one heck of a project! Luckily you have more that enough skill to make it happen! I wish you could keep them both, but sometimes that just can’t happen. I’m looking forward to seeing it come together!

Eugen wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 11:25 am I am questioning my own sanity, yes

Noel.

It goes without saying that any of us would LOVE to get our grubby hands on a Kubota diesel powered 644.

You'll have to put the radiator up front, right? I'm presuming you won't fool with an electric PTO for a deck or whatever. I'm guessing that means the hydro oil cooler will go on the lower left side of the steering tower, like the later Ingersolls.

Does it have the newer style hydro tank? That's the way I'd want to go.

I can't wait to see progress!!

But if you get stumped real bad, I'll send you my shipping address....

Bob

thebuildist wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 3:57 pm It goes without saying that any of us would LOVE to get our grubby hands on a Kubota diesel powered 644.

You'll have to put the radiator up front, right? I'm presuming you won't fool with an electric PTO for a deck or whatever. I'm guessing that means the hydro oil cooler will go on the lower left side of the steering tower, like the later Ingersolls.

Does it have the newer style hydro tank? That's the way I'd want to go.

I can't wait to see progress!!

But if you get stumped real bad, I'll send you my shipping address....

Bob

Oh no you don’t Bob. I already spoke for either one.


Noel

Propane57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:13 pm

thebuildist wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 3:57 pm It goes without saying that any of us would LOVE to get our grubby hands on a Kubota diesel powered 644.

You'll have to put the radiator up front, right? I'm presuming you won't fool with an electric PTO for a deck or whatever. I'm guessing that means the hydro oil cooler will go on the lower left side of the steering tower, like the later Ingersolls.

Does it have the newer style hydro tank? That's the way I'd want to go.

I can't wait to see progress!!

But if you get stumped real bad, I'll send you my shipping address....

Bob

Oh no you don’t Bob. I already spoke for either one.


Noel

Looks like a great project Eugen. Looking forward to your progress!

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Eugen the purpose of myself having a 644 and a 646 was that the 644 had a hoe. In retrospect I have found that it's nice having two loaders in case one is giving me trouble I have a backup loader. If I was you, I would keep both until the diesel is up and running then evaluate the situation. Maybe the Kohler powered 644 is a better GT in the long run and sell the diesel powered one. Two tractors in the barn are better than one.

Keep the Peace
Harry

Thank you guys for all ideas. I have been really busy with my day job and family for the last few days, until very late at night, when I was so tired that I couldn't even concentrate to write a decent message here.

Was able to have a closer look at this tractor. It seems to me that it sat somewhere and rusted for some years, until some guy got it and decided to put the diesel engine in it and revive it. There are signs that this loader took quite some abuse: some of the holes where pins go are very much out of round. Some linkages bent, some hydraulic hoses pinched. I'll show pics when I get around to it. No cracked frame that I could see, so that's ok. Not so many things missing, as far as I can see: some of the frame parts at the front, for instance the posts that hold the hydraulic tank. All in all, not too bad.

The thing is, I need this tractor functional asap so I can sell the other 644. Funds do not allow to keep both, however nice that would be. Therefore, this time around this tractor will NOT go through a thorough "restoration", rather it will be a "resurrection". Some day in the future, depending on where my life goes, I might have time to do a proper restoration.

Now, the diesel engine re-powering. First, I don't know the condition of this engine. The seller said he never got it to run, he bought the whole package from someone else. Would it be strong enough to use with this loader? I also don't know that. There was no Case 620 that I know of. So, if Case considered that the minimum HP figure for the loader was 14 HP, do I want to risk and put a 10 HP engine in it? Sure the diesel has more torque than a gas engine, at the same horse power, but still, there's quite a distance between 10HP and 14HP.

I tried to start the diesel engine but wasn't able to. Granted I didn't put much time into it. But it has enough unknowns right now that it doesn't exactly qualify for the quickest solution to get the tractor running. Plus, as @thebuildist correctly identified, there will be complications with the hydraulic oil cooler, and the diesel engine radiator. Another potential complication is the hydraulic pump coupling that the original owner did; it's a little flimsy to me.

I have a Kohler K321 that's been freshly rebuilt, so it should be easier to use for this tractor. I also have a newer 15HP engine with a hydraulic pump properly attached to it, which might fit well in this tractor even though it has no front PTO. This tractor will be only on loader duty, not mowing, so no need for the front PTO. I just have to check what's needed to connect that hydraulic pump to the existing pipes.

@Propane57, I have bought a lottery ticket. If I win over $1M, you will get the running 644 delivered to your door. If you refuse it, it will go to @thebuildist

Well, I can't argue with that!

Sounds good Eugen. I guess your out of luck Bob, cause I won’t refuse it.

It’s called a “ refresh “ Eugen.

Noel

If everything is there from the original tractor, I'm with you in putting one of the gas engines in for now to get it going. Then play with the diesel when you have the time to deal with it. I think there's just too many things that could take alot of time to get worked out.

@Eugen I put a Z482 in the Bride. Basically the same block . You are welcome to look at it next time you are over .

Propane57 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 07, 2022 3:07 pm Sounds good Eugen. I guess your out of luck Bob, cause I won’t refuse it.

It’s called a “ refresh “ Eugen.

Noel

I refuse to believe that you could refuse to refuse it!

What a bunch of refuse!

I guess you're making sense. But if I were anywhere near you I would personally help you get that diesel engine in there. It's just such a nice end result.

And I don't think Kubota made any water-cooled diesels less then about 16 or 20 hp. One of the little Hatz style air-cooled diesels could be 10hp or under, but I think anything water-cooled is going to be plenty of power.

But again, I recognize you're doing the responsible thing.

just not the FUN thing.

thebuildist wrote: ↑Thu Sep 08, 2022 7:03 am I guess you're making sense. But if I were anywhere near you I would personally help you get that diesel engine in there. It's just such a nice end result.

And I don't think Kubota made any water-cooled diesels less then about 16 or 20 hp. One of the little Hatz style air-cooled diesels could be 10hp or under, but I think anything water-cooled is going to be plenty of power.

But again, I recognize you're doing the responsible thing.

just not the FUN thing.

I appreciate it Bob. I can do fun after, when things aren't so hectic. It is water cooled and it is 10 hp. The z400 engine was used in the Kubota G3200 mower. Must not have been very popular, not that many around of this engine.

Back to reality though. Today I did some scouting in Princess Auto (similar to your Harbour Freight but probably fewer options and stuff). I have this more modern and new, never used 420cc engine claiming 19 ft lbs of torque and 16 hp. It came with a parts OHV 446 at some point.
It also came with a new hydraulic pump and proper mounting. The pump has 0.732 displacement and 12.7 GPM.


A little more than the original, but I suppose that should be fine. Has ORBF 12 inlet and 10 outlet. The result of my scouting was some fittings: a 3/4 ORBM to NPTM straight adapter, and then an NPTF-NPTM 90 degree elbow. Will try to connect a 3/4 hose on this to go to the tank.

For the outlet I got an 1/2 ORBM - 1/2 JICM.




I'm thinking to replace the current steel line that goes to feed the TCV with a flexible hose of appropriate size, to give me flexibility in mounting the engine to the frame. Might not have yet the right fittings or hose.

Oh yeah, and I had to replace the L095 flex coupling that came with the pump and motor, seemed to me it was too small. Got the L099. Bore size 3/4 on the pump side, and 1" on the engine side.

Came across this today. The continental f140 engine 2.0L four cylinders. Local out of a combine. Look at the great shape it looks like. So a small diesel engine would be cool in the 644, but how cool would this Continental be in a 444 for garden duty?! I won't get it but I wish I could.

Eugen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 9:46 am Came across this today. The continental f140 engine 2.0L four cylinders. Local out of a combine. Look at the great shape it looks like. So a small diesel engine would be cool in the 644, but how cool would this Continental be in a 444 for garden duty?! I won't get it but I wish I could.


80CE13E3-2D90-4D45-8B85-29F4FAA83B01.jpeg

That would be like having 4 K301 nose to tail in compacted form .

Obviously I didn't think it through. Transmission and all that. The MH20 used this engine. Nice little tractor!

You wou think the onans were fuel missers compared to the continental. I feed a few of them.

Spike188 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 12:48 pm You wou think the onans were fuel missers compared to the continental. I feed a few of them.

Indeed, this would guzzle gas like crazy


Anyway, back to the 644. I'm pondering now what would be the best way to connect to new pump to the system. This is what the original looked like, but what I want is to have flexible hydraulic hoses so that the engine could be moved around for best fit on the frame, and not be constrained by the rigid steel hydraulic connections.

What I'm slightly unsure about, are two things.

1. The pump inlet feed connection. The original pump has the steel pipe with the little bump on its end so that the 3/4 hose can be clamped securely to it. The new pump only has the ORBF size 12 port, and without thinking too much about it, got the ORBFM to NPTM straight adapter, then an NPTF-NPTM 90 degree elbow. Might just be ok clamping a 3/4 hose on it, but would be happier if there was something better to clamp on here. Can go with this hose all the way to the hydraulic oil tank, I think there would be enough clearance on the side there. Once I put the engine on the frame for mock up I can see that better.

2. The original pump outlet went directly into that steel pipe which goes to the TCV. As I said, I want this pipe replaced with a flexible hose. The little fly in the soup here is that the original steel pipe has a few bends so that it clears nicely the various items in that small place, including the steering cog. A hose in straight line from TCV to pump would not be nice. A compromise would be to pay attention to parts in that area that are moving, and/or are hot (exhaust?) and tie the hose to keep it away from those. Ideally I had a shorter steel pipe connected to some length of hose to have enough flexibility for engine repositioning.

I'll admit, it is a pain to bend and flare 5/8" (JIC10) steel hydraulic tubing. But i've successfully done it, and it can be a better end result than hose. It can be tightly routed, it's not heat sensitive, and unlike hose, it never "just gets old".


For a bender I use something like this: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/2255800643015789.html Mine was from ebay, about 95 including shipping.

It doesn't bend as tight of radius as some of the factory parts, but it's still possible to make most needed shapes.


And I mentioned earlier that I use an inexpensive eccentric flaring tool.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Eccentric-Flar ... 3405799442
Mine came with a 45degree flaring cone. That cone is difficult if not impossible to remove, so I held a grinder flap disk up against it, grinding away the cone as it freely spun. I stopped when I felt like I had removed about 8degrees of cone, so now it's a 37degree flaring tool.

Unless this tube needs some very close/tight bends, that's the route I'd go. You might consider it.


Bob

Bob, it's a great suggestion, but around here I wouldn't even know where to get hydraulic tubing from. Do you know a source @DavidBarkey ?

So, how will I build that little backhoe?

Eugen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 2:40 pm Bob, it's a great suggestion, but around here I wouldn't even know where to get hydraulic tubing from. Do you know a source @DavidBarkey ?

So, how will I build that little backhoe?

Here are backhoe plans for sale, or use something of known size like a front tire for scale and draw up your own plans from the pictures

https://www.loaderplans.com/


Gordy

Eugen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 1:47 pm

Spike188 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 12:48 pm You wou think the onans were fuel missers compared to the continental. I feed a few of them.

Indeed, this would guzzle gas like crazy


Anyway, back to the 644. I'm pondering now what would be the best way to connect to new pump to the system. This is what the original looked like, but what I want is to have flexible hydraulic hoses so that the engine could be moved around for best fit on the frame, and not be constrained by the rigid steel hydraulic connections.

What I'm slightly unsure about, are two things.

1. The pump inlet feed connection. The original pump has the steel pipe with the little bump on its end so that the 3/4 hose can be clamped securely to it. The new pump only has the ORBF size 12 port, and without thinking too much about it, got the ORBFM to NPTM straight adapter, then an NPTF-NPTM 90 degree elbow. Might just be ok clamping a 3/4 hose on it, but would be happier if there was something better to clamp on here. Can go with this hose all the way to the hydraulic oil tank, I think there would be enough clearance on the side there. Once I put the engine on the frame for mock up I can see that better.

2. The original pump outlet went directly into that steel pipe which goes to the TCV. As I said, I want this pipe replaced with a flexible hose. The little fly in the soup here is that the original steel pipe has a few bends so that it clears nicely the various items in that small place, including the steering cog. A hose in straight line from TCV to pump would not be nice. A compromise would be to pay attention to parts in that area that are moving, and/or are hot (exhaust?) and tie the hose to keep it away from those. Ideally I had a shorter steel pipe connected to some length of hose to have enough flexibility for engine repositioning.


644hoses.png

I have never worked on 600 series . But all the 200 and 400 tractors I have had , all have flexible hose from the pump to the TCV. Check you other tractor. I would go that route if you are putting anything in there for a pump and or engine that is not stock as you may not get proper alignment . There is a place in the south end Barrie I get custom hoses made while I wait . Chuck Cooper at Omniflex They can make almost any thing .

@Gordy, I've been thinking to partially copy the big 680 backhoe shape.

@DavidBarkey this is not the time for me to complicate things, I want to get this 644 functional asap, so I'll go the easiest route for now, with a hose. It would be nice to know though, where to buy hydraulic steel tubing, if I wanted to do more stuff. I'll ask around.

Eugen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 4:44 pm @Gordy, I've been thinking to partially copy the big 680 backhoe shape.

@DavidBarkey this is not the time for me to complicate things, I want to get this 644 functional asap, so I'll go the easiest route for now, with a hose. It would be nice to know though, where to buy hydraulic steel tubing, if I wanted to do more stuff. I'll ask around.

Don't know ,I have not got into steel line in a long time . I would imagine you could buy it through any of the Hydraulic shops like Sunnyside in Midland or Western in Barrie . But for one small piece it may cost you more for a length of tubing than to have it made .

I suggest you take a look at my Power steering install thread, https://casecoltingersoll.com/showthrea ... ed-to-646a which talks about using rubber hose for the pump output and what fitting you need to go from the SAE 10 to hose bib for the suction line input.

pictures in the photo album: https://photos.app.goo.gl/1fbGxQfyTfoFVLku8

Eugen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 1:47 pm ld be the best way to connect to new pump to the system. This is what the original looked like, but what I want is to have flexible hydraulic hoses so that the engine could be moved around for best fit on the frame, and not be constrained by the rigid steel hydraulic connections.

What I'm slightly unsure about, are two things.

1. The pump inlet feed connection. The original pump has the steel pipe with the little bump on its end so that the 3/4 hose can be clamped securely to it. The new pump only has the ORBF size 12 port, and without thinking too much about it, got the ORBFM to NPTM straight adapter, then an NPTF-NPTM 90 degree elbow. Might just be ok clamping a 3/4 hose on it, but would be happier if there was something better to clamp on here. Can go with this hose all the way to the hydraulic oil tank, I think there would be enough clearance on the side there. Once I put the engine on the frame for mock up I can see that better.

2. The original pump outlet went directly into that steel pipe which goes to the TCV. As I said, I want this pipe replaced with a flexible hose. The little fly in the soup here is that the original steel pipe has a few bends so that it clears nicely the various items in that small place, including the steering cog. A hose in straight line from TCV to pump would not be nice. A compromise would be to pay attention to parts in that area that are moving, and/or are hot (exhaust?) and tie the hose to keep it away from those. Ideally I had a shorter steel pipe connected to some length of hose to have enough flexibility for engine repositioning.


644hoses.png

sdunt wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 4:20 pm I suggest you take a look at my Power steering install thread, https://casecoltingersoll.com/showthrea ... ed-to-646a which talks about using rubber hose for the pump output and what fitting you need to go from the SAE 10 to hose bib for the suction line input.

pictures in the photo album: https://photos.app.goo.gl/1fbGxQfyTfoFVLku8

Thank you Scott! That is extremely helpful!

I can get these fittings, fairly reasonable.

Eugen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 1:47 pm What I'm slightly unsure about, are two things.

1. The pump inlet feed connection. The original pump has the steel pipe with the little bump on its end so that the 3/4 hose can be clamped securely to it. The new pump only has the ORBF size 12 port, and without thinking too much about it, got the ORBFM to NPTM straight adapter, then an NPTF-NPTM 90 degree elbow. Might just be ok clamping a 3/4 hose on it, but would be happier if there was something better to clamp on here. Can go with this hose all the way to the hydraulic oil tank, I think there would be enough clearance on the side there. Once I put the engine on the frame for mock up I can see that better.

Bear in mind that for this suction line you're guarding against a little different set of problems.

You don't need a bump on your steel tube. That bump acts as a barb to prevent the hose/clamp from blowing off. We're sucking, not blowing. It might suck up too far onto the tube, but it'll never blow off. So a collar or ring to stop the hose from sliding too far onto the fitting wouldn't hurt. But a bump behind the clamp is superfluous.

You don't need a "high pressure" hose, as it has literally negative internal pressure.

You DO need a highly rigid/non-collapsible hose, because with the negative internal pressure, the the outside atmospheric air pressure is trying to squish it. If it does collapse, you'll starve your pump of oil and likely damage it. It may be that you choose a "high pressure" hose because its high pressure construction also happens to give it "high rigidity". But evaluate your options accordingly, and be sure you're getting a "rigid" hose regardless of its pressure rating.

For the same reason, flow restrictions and anything that could cause fluid turbulence are especially to be avoided on the suction line. Even more than pressure lines, you want as large and smooth of a fluid path as possible. It doesn't need to be any larger than the actual tank outlet or the pump inlet. But it shouldn't ever be any smaller, and you don't wan't excess transitions with hard edges, hard turns, inner grooves, etc. You're after big and smooth with gradual/flowy bends. So choose your fittings accordingly.

For what it's worth.

Bob

@FUTZ I'll reach out to you offline about this.

@thebuildist thank you for all the recommendations, it all makes sense to me.

I'm curious @sdunt why you chose the 1" fitting. Isn't the tube on the cooler 3/4" diameter?

I just realized yesterday this engine that I'm thinking of using doesn't have a fan on the flywheel side. Will have to find a way to put a fan for the hydraulic oil cooler.

I used a 4603-16-12 -> 1" Hose Barb x #12 SAE/ORB Male 45° fitting https://www.discounthydraulichose.com/4603-16-12.html for the pumps suction inlet on my 646 because that was what was on the tractor originally. The steel line that runs around the side of the engine is a 1" line . (on a 1973 - 646 SER# 9680512)

I will second the advice to use Suction line for the connections between the tank and the pump inlet.. It can be a major PIA to install.
https://www.surpluscenter.com/Hydraulic ... 9-1279.axd

In my case I only needed short 6 - 8 " long pieces so I put the hose in a pan of water and brought the water to boiling then installed the suction line over the hose barb - bulges. Used my welding gloves while holding 212 degree hose......

P.s. Yes the tube - hose to the COOLER is 3/4 which is the return to the tank. The suction side is 1".

sdunt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 12:24 pm I used a 4603-16-12 -> 1" Hose Barb x #12 SAE/ORB Male 45° fitting https://www.discounthydraulichose.com/4603-16-12.html for the pumps suction inlet on my 646 because that was what was on the tractor originally. The steel line that runs around the side of the engine is a 1" line . (on a 1973 - 646 SER# 9680512)

I will second the advice to use Suction line for the connections between the tank and the pump inlet.. It can be a major PIA to install.
https://www.surpluscenter.com/Hydraulic ... 9-1279.axd

In my case I only needed short 6 - 8 " long pieces so I put the hose in a pan of water and brought the water to boiling then installed the suction line over the hose barb - bulges. Used my welding gloves while holding 212 degree hose......

P.s. Yes the tube - hose to the COOLER is 3/4 which is the return to the tank. The suction side is 1".

To add to that . The cooler is on the return side which is being pushed through as opposed to the suction side which has to be pulled through . It is easier for the pump to push that to pull , so thus the difference in size .

I've been really busy the last few days, thinking I'm going to write something here at night but was too exhausted.

Good points you guys made. It's clear what I need.

I find it interesting that the original inlet fitting is just a push in o-ring type. I should be able to turn on the lathe an adapter from sae orb 12 to 1" female o-ring push in thingy hole.

Eugen wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 2:30 pm I find it interesting that the original inlet fitting is just a push in o-ring type. I should be able to turn on the lathe an adapter from sae orb 12 to 1" female o-ring push in thingy hole.



FA8376E1-9C8B-4C40-BABB-E6B4041DA9AA.jpeg

I test fit those , mark the position. Then with new oring and add a bead of loctite to the tube outside of where the oring is ,so that when fully pressed in the loctite only engages on the out side of the pipe to prevent movement . Might be over kill , but over kill is underrated in my mind .

I would do that Dave, but I think I'll get the fitting from @FUTZ and call that done. He also gave me a good idea to mount a small electric fan right to the hydro oil cooler.

Note how much larger the ID of the push-in o-ring pipe is than the SAE12 fitting. That's why they chose that.

I'm not saying the SAE can't work, I'm just pointing out the logic of the original choice, and the the priorities it reveals.

You might consider boring out some of the threaded portion of the SAE to barb fitting. It's currently designed to contain 3000 psi, and it really only needs to be strong enough to physically not fall out of the hole, much like the original pipe. I'd personally err on the side of strength, but I'd guess you could remove around .100" from the ID and still have more than plenty of meat.

Bob

Eugen wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:15 pm I would do that Dave, but I think I'll get the fitting from @FUTZ and call that done. He also gave me a good idea to mount a small electric fan right to the hydro oil cooler.

I run a 12v electric fan from a car on Frankie for years now . Never a problem . Something like this would be all you need .
https://www.amazon.ca/DNA-Motoring-Radi ... LK0D&psc=1
If you use it only in summer have it run all the time like the mechanical fan , but if you plan on useing it for snow then put a thermo switch in to control it .

If you're going that route, I recently saw this bargain: A set of 2 slim fans plus a mounting kit.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09STMX2CS?ta ... th=1&psc=1
Click the box to apply a 10% off coupon.

And at checkout add in this promo code for another 20% off 209KVD9B

26 bucks for two fans isn't too shabby...

It all came from a website I keep an eye on: https://struggleville.net I have no connection to or relationship with the site.

Bob

thebuildist wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:20 pm Note how much larger the ID of the push-in o-ring pipe is than the SAE12 fitting. That's why they chose that.

I'm not saying the SAE can't work, I'm just pointing out the logic of the original choice, and the the priorities it reveals.

You might consider boring out some of the threaded portion of the SAE to barb fitting. It's currently designed to contain 3000 psi, and it really only needs to be strong enough to physically not fall out of the hole, much like the original pipe. I'd personally err on the side of strength, but I'd guess you could remove around .100" from the ID and still have more than plenty of meat.

Bob

I did notice that and was wondering why. But what you said made me dig a little more into this. Found some info about the recommended size of hoses for various hydraulic application. turns out that the hose ID depends roughly on two factors: flow rate (gpm/min) and flow velocity (feet/s). If you do a search, you'll find something called a nomogram, which is a chart on which you choose the flow rate, the flow velocity from a recommended range, and draw a line between the two, which will intersect a column of numbers that gives you the diameter of the hose in inches. But there is also a formula:

d = sqrt ( 0.408 * GPM / V)

The recommended flow velocity for suction hoses is between 2 and 4 feet/second. The original 644 pump is spec-ed at 9.5 GPM at 3600 RPM. Let's choose V = 4. Then we get

d = sqrt (0.408 * 9.5 / 4) = 0.98 in

I guess this explain the 1" suction hose?

This newer pump I got has 12.7 GPM. If I were to do things properly I should get a hose with diameter

d = sqrt (0.408 * 12.7 / 4) = 1.14 in

Will a 1" suction hose collapse?

How about we calculate the velocity given the 12.7 GPM and 1" hose?

V = 0.408 * 12.7 / d^2 = 0.408 * 12.7 = 5.18 feet/second

I think this is probably fine.

Now, how about the pump inlet diameter? This newer pump has a SAE #12 ORB inlet. The nominal size for ORB #12 fittings is 3/4 in. Also the max flow rate for a 3/4 fitting is way higher than what the pump is capable (12.7), so I don't think the pump will get tired sucking oil through the SAE 12 fitting.

Finally, what to make of the transition from 1in hose to 3/4in fitting? Not sure, but can't think of anything to be worried about.

Obviously I'm just thinking out loud here, so please step in and point out if my thinking is wrong.

@thebuildist and @DavidBarkey thank you for your suggestions regarding the radiator fan. I will look around and see what reasonable option I will go for.

It sounds like you're approaching this in a calm, methodical fashion as you usually do. That portends well. And I think you're right based on your calculations your approach will work.

Having said that, if it were me and if I had a lathe, which it sounds like you do, I would totally take the 15 minutes to set up that inlet part in the lathe and skin out of its ID however much I could without being over concerned about its overall strength. It's free, and it certainly can't hurt anything. Your 1-in line is a smidgen undersized as you've already pointed out. And this is a smidgen undersized in relation to the 1-in line. So as I say if it were me I would just minimize that undersizedness in so far as I easily could.

Now I've been thinking this whole time that the tubing part, the part with the barb / bump, is for a 1-in hose. Is it only for a 3/4 in hose? If so I think I would look for one for a 1-in hose. To me that would be the best way to make the transition from the one inch hose into the 3/4 SAE.

For what it's worth.

Bob

The other thing to consider, and I know I'm willing to go farther off the reservation than most people are, is to consider mounting up your new pump in the lathe and bore it out identical to the inlet area of the old pump. And reuse that old inlet tube.

Again strength is totally not an issue. So even if it doesn't have a cast boss that's fully big enough for that, as long as The aluminum is at least a half inch thick, and the ID of what you bore out is the same as the id of the original pump, that inlet tube would seal without the slightest issue.

Just worth throwing out there...

thebuildist wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 7:17 pm The other thing to consider, and I know I'm willing to go farther off the reservation than most people are, is to consider mounting up your new pump in the lathe and bore it out identical to the inlet area of the old pump. And reuse that old inlet tube.

Again strength is totally not an issue. So even if it doesn't have a cast boss that's fully big enough for that, as long as The aluminum is at least a half inch thick, and the ID of what you bore out is the same as the id of the original pump, that inlet tube would seal without the slightest issue.

Just worth throwing out there...

It's a good idea Bob, but unfortunately, it wouldn't work, the thread diameter on the inlet port is such that if I enlarged it to 1" the threads would still be there, it would not be a smooth surface.

thebuildist wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 7:13 pm
Now I've been thinking this whole time that the tubing part, the part with the barb / bump, is for a 1-in hose. Is it only for a 3/4 in hose? If so I think I would look for one for a 1-in hose. To me that would be the best way to make the transition from the one inch hose into the 3/4 SAE.

Yes, the original fitting/tube is for a 1" hose, and I would also get one for a 1" hose, just that it would screw into the SAE #12 port. Once I get the fitting, I'll see if I can enlarge the ID. If it's easy to do and possible, sure, I would do it.

@thebuildist I want to say that I appreciate the good discussion on this topic. Your input makes me do some thinking

My version of powder coating

But hay, it's really good quality rust paint

Purists please look away

You can always paint over it down the road if you want.

Keep the Peace
Harry

Harry wrote: ↑Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:49 am You can always paint over it down the road if you want.

Keep the Peace
Harry

@Harry all jokes aside, I do intend to bring it to the original yellow. As I've said before, no Case dealership anywhere near me, so for now it's better to have it protected. I intended to ask @Spike188 where he got the yellow paint for the backhoe restoration but just didn't get around to it. I will send him a message now.

Eugen wrote: ↑Tue Sep 20, 2022 5:32 pm My version of powder coating

But hay, it's really good quality rust paint

Purists please look away


4197EA8C-1B49-4DEE-A6B2-97A50053A7E9.jpeg

Being the ABSOLUTE PURIST that I am, I am shocked. SHOCKED! and saddened that you would subject a genuine Case tractor to such conditions.

What gives you the right to paint it like that????

thebuildist wrote: ↑Wed Sep 21, 2022 10:57 am

Being the ABSOLUTE PURIST that I am, I am shocked. SHOCKED! and saddened that you would subject a genuine Case tractor to such conditions.

What gives you the right to paint it like that????

forever shamed!!!

I do things like that to get a reaction from the purists. Like the fenders and tires on my 646! It backfired on me with members liking it, no negative comments.

Keep the Peace
Harry

That's because you did a nice job, they look good, and are practical.

Oh I like your oversized rear @Harry !!! I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If I was any closer to that combine cemetery I'd get the big wheels for one of the tractors.

I don't know about you, but I don't think Harry's oversized rear is any of my business....

Bob

thebuildist wrote: ↑Wed Sep 21, 2022 4:25 pm I don't know about you, but I don't think Harry's oversized rear is any of my business....

Bob

Luckily the context is tractors!

thebuildist wrote: ↑Wed Sep 21, 2022 4:25 pm I don't know about you, but I don't think Harry's oversized rear is any of my business....

Bob

Here in the boonies of Canada it is not so easy to buy metals. Shipping is crazy of course, and the stores are far. Right now I'm focusing on getting the 3/4" rod and the tube to make the bushing at the end. I measured the original bushing welded on the tower, and it is 3/4" ID, and about 0.24" thick. The metal supermarket that's an hour away has this:
Dimension A on the tubing is 1.25". I'm thinking that this, with the wall diameter of 0.25", will give me an inside diameter of about 0.75".

For the rod I have another option:
This is a chrome plated hardened shaft. Do you guys think the chrome plating is a bad idea here?

For the bushing I also have the option to turn one of the 1.5" pins that came with some parts from a car lift. But the steel on these pins is so hard, it's really hard to work with it on the lathe. Not sure what to do, the price on that DOM tube is not the greatest.

I don’t know if hardened chrome rod is needed. The rod in my 648 shows no evidence of chrome plating. I think @Harry mentioned somewhere on here that he added grease fittings on his, that’s a pretty good idea.

I'd be inclined to avoid the chromed rod if possible. Unless you're going to go ahead and remove it before you install it.

Once the chrome is pierced by wear or rust, it'll score and gall the bushing ID pretty badly.

Can you get this shipped to you?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/324609483430

Bob

thebuildist wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 11:19 pm I'd be inclined to avoid the chromed rod if possible. Unless you're going to go ahead and remove it before you install it.

Once the chrome is pierced by wear or rust, it'll score and gall the bushing ID pretty badly.

Can you get this shipped to you?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/324609483430

Bob

Yes, the rod from ebay would cost $70 total. Thanks guys, I need to think about this.

@Eugen If you have time to wait, I can check with some of my clients. There may be some in Cambridge.

Spike188 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 8:08 am @Eugen If you have time to wait, I can check with some of my clients. There may be some in Cambridge.

Thank you @Spike188 , I think I got a lead on the rod, but still looking for a decent source for the 3/4in ID tubing with a thicker wall to weld on the tower as support for the rod. I might just just get one foot of DOM tubing from the metalsupermarkets in Barrie. it's annoying to pay $50 for a foot of pipe.

Eugen wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 8:48 am

Spike188 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 8:08 am @Eugen If you have time to wait, I can check with some of my clients. There may be some in Cambridge.

Thank you @Spike188 , I think I got a lead on the rod, but still looking for a decent source for the 3/4in ID tubing with a thicker wall to weld on the tower as support for the rod. I might just just get one foot of DOM tubing from the metalsupermarkets in Barrie. it's annoying to pay $50 for a foot of pipe.

Would it be more affordable to get some larger rod and bore it out 3/4"?

Bob

@thebuildist sorry I thought I replied. No, metal is very expensive here plus I'm not set up for boring larger holes like this. But I reused the original tubing to make two supporting pipes in the tower.