Pulley/sprocket sizes on Woods 59CF-1 mower

[Urbish]

I have what I'm reasonably sure is a Woods 59CF-1 mower on my 1948 Cub (non-fast hitch). The PO replaced the sprockets (on the PTO and jack shaft) with two pulleys and a short belt. They used a rather large pulley on the PTO and a small one on the jack shaft. I'm curious what the diameter of the sprocket and pulley (on the jack shaft) is on the original fast-hitch mower. Can one of you provide that? I gather from the parts manual that both sprockets were the same size.

I want to roughly calculate the speed ratio and compare to my setup. I think mine is spinning way too fast. I'll post photos later. Also, mine being a non-FH tractor, I have to remove my drawbar to put the mower on. I gather from what I have read on here that the 59CF-1 is a rare beast. I might consider setting up an equitable trade for a non-FH 59" mower. Any thoughts/advice?

Jim

[Clark Thompson]

Jim,If I remember correctly the sprockests should be both about 3 inches. then the pulley to the belt should be 6 inches.. I would get rid of the chain drive and go to the 59 C drive. will solve a whole lot of expensive problems in the future. Unless you plan on using a fast hitch.

[Urbish]

I took some pictures and measured the pulleys. PTO: 6.5", Jack Shaft: Both 3.25". So it would appear that I have a 1:2 speed increase which is roughly in line with what the chain drive had as well.

[Clark Thompson]

I have never seen a belt drive set up like that on a cub. The picture that shows the belt drive looks ( mule drive 2) to me like it would run the mower way too fast. Faster the mower less power. I would suggest using the proper mule drive for the 59 -c.

[spgeid]

what you have is a pulley system for a fast hitch mower setup. Instead of a pulley on the PTO and a smaller pulley on the jack shaft, it should have a chain drive one to one ratio(19 teeth each). Then the 6.25 pulley on the outside of the jack shaft. If you look at Rudis manuels for woods mowers you can see the setup for a fast hithc 59c mower. What type of brackets does your mower use to connect the mower arms to the final drives?

[Urbish]

I will post photos tonight. For what it's worth, the speed is spot-on as the large pulley is the correct diameter. However, since the jack shaft output pulley is smaller than it should be, the belt has some misalignment issues with the lower mule drive idlers. I may move the large pulley to its proper location put the small one up top for a proper 1:1 between the PTO and jack shaft (thus reducing the speed of the mule drive) and just use a shorter belt between the PTO and jack shaft. If that doesn't work, I'll have to get some sprockets and some chain and set it up properly.

[Smokeycub]

My 2 cents. I think I would eliminate the jackshaft and use the mule drive with the one long belt if I could. The blade speed should be close to 2000 rpm. There should be some sort of dog legs for the mower to attach to at the back and the draw bar would probably need to be removed or turned around. If you can't get that mule drive to work then I would do as Clark mentioned and get a mule drive for a 59C1.

I want to roughly calculate the speed ratio and compare to my setup. I think mine is spinning way too fast

The ratio is about right at 2:1 between the PTO pulley and the pulleys on the mower. The mule drives have run at those speeds for years and seem to hold up fine.

[Urbish]

My 2 cents. I think I would eliminate the jackshaft and use the mule drive with the one long belt if I could. The blade speed should be close to 2000 rpm. There should be some sort of dog legs for the mower to attach to at the back and the draw bar would probably need to be removed or turned around. If you can't get that mule drive to work then I would do as Clark mentioned and get a mule drive for a 59C1.
The ratio is about right at 2:1 between the PTO pulley and the pulleys on the mower. The mule drives have run at those speeds for years and seem to hold up fine.

I have the Fast Hitch doglegs. I flipped them both around so that they mount into the forward holes on the final drives, with the leg still dropping down in along the centerline of the final drive. This way they are completely out of the way of my drawbar (which I hadn't spun around yet when I took these photos as I was still in belly-blade mode). I used 3/4" spacers between the doglegs and the final drives to bring them close enough together to meet the rails on the mower deck. I should mention that I have been using this setup this way for about 6 months without issue. I'd rather not spend $80 on a new belt if I don't have to. Like I said, I will put up some other photos tonight.

[spgeid]

I had an issue with pulley alignment for my Cub-22 mower on my loboy. I was able to use a double pulley on the PTO to correct the problem. http://www.surpluscenter.com has alot of pulleys cheap to

[Urbish]

I had an issue with pulley alignment for my Cub-22 mower on my loboy. I was able to use a double pulley on the PTO to correct the problem. http://www.surpluscenter.com has alot of pulleys cheap to

My problem isn't radial alignment, it's alignment from the jack shaft pulley to the planes of the mule drive pulleys, since my jack shaft has a small pulley instead of the proper large one. Here are some more photos as promised.

[Don McCombs]

Here's what the Fast Hitch mule drive looks like, properly configured...
Your upper pulley is too large.

[Urbish]

Here's what the Fast Hitch mule drive looks like, properly configured...
Your upper pulley is too large.

Dan, thanks for the input and the photo, but I disagree. The Woods 59CF-1 parts list calls out (#47) a "1BK 6.1H SHEAVE", which is a 6.1" pitch diameter pulley. If you read my posts above, the PO did away with the chain drive and for whatever reason put a 6.7" pitch diameter pulley on the PTO and roughly 3" pulleys on the jack shaft. Either way, the net ratio of the mower to the pto is slightly higher than original (2:1). You can see from the parts diagram that the pitch diameter of the pulley is about double the pitch diameter of the sprocket. Maybe your pulley is actually too small?

[Scrivet]

I'm not sure what problem, if any, you are trying to fix at this point. The only issue I see is having two belts vs chain setup is just another place to slip. If it's worked like this for six months without issue why mess with it though? When it comes time to replace a belt, then put the big pulley on the bottom to cure your alignment woes. Buy two new correct sized belts (big one is going to need to be a bit longer and the short one is going to need to be a little bit shorter for the pulley reconfigure) and mow off into the sunset.

[Urbish]

:lost: I'm not sure what problem, if any, you are trying to fix at this point. The only issue I see is having two belts vs chain setup is just another place to slip. If it's worked like this for six months without issue why mess with it though? When it comes time to replace a belt, then put the big pulley on the bottom to cure your alignment woes. Buy two new correct sized belts (big one is going to need to be a bit longer and the short one is going to need to be a little bit shorter for the pulley reconfigure) and mow off into the sunset.

I was concerned that my ratio was a little high, which appears to be the case now that I have gathered enough information. Original setup is 1:1.56 (PTO to jack shaft = 1:1, jack shaft to mower spindle = 1:1.56). My setup is 1:1.72 (PTO to jack shaft = 1:1.72, jack shaft to mower spindle = 1:1). So I suppose I'll do as you suggest just to correct alignment as I think the ratio is close enough. I don't think I need a longer mower belt. The mule drive idlers are at the bottom of their adjustment slots. I should be able to bring them up to give me the necessary slack.

Thank you all for the information. For what it's worth, Messick's website has some nice Woods mower assembly drawings that are clearer in some cases than the scanned ones on Rudi's site (Rudi's site has been helpful beyond measure!).

[Urbish]

I pulled the mower a couple of weeks ago to install my moldboard plow. Upon reinstallation, I was getting some belt slippage in deep grass. If I tensioned it enough to prevent slippage, the PTO bearings were howling. Looks like I will be replacing them soon.

In the meantime I bit the bullet and bought some sprockets (Browning 50H19H) to convert this drive back to the way it was intended. They are the correct replacements for the originals (Woods #3589). MRO Supply had them for $43/ea. With the big sheave on the bottom now, I have proper alignment to the mule drive. If you look at my earlier pictures, the belt was running into the mule drive idlers at an angle which was prematurely wearing my belt.

I'll pick up a #50 master link tomorrow and I should be good to go!