154 vs older version 1966 loboy

[IH Cub 70]

Not being real up to date on changes I have a few questions I hope someone has insight to. My 1966 Loboy has individual rear brakes, enclosed clutch housing, and a gear type starter. The 154 I just purchased ia a 1970 which has one rear brake, exposed clutch that I can see through a cover panel, and a noiseless starter which as I haven't lifted the hood as of yet reminds me of the starter / generator of the cub cadets. The 66 hydraulic is built into the machine.... the 70 looks aftermarket with a shaft off the front crank to drive the pump. The steering sector jumps up and down like the older version however the gear box is mounted by the dash. As this has considerable slop I will have to address this also.
Were these items improvements or cost savings at time of manufacture ? The engine looks the same from outward appearance.

[BigBill]

The 154 is quite different than the fcub loboy. Its a mixed match between the cub cadet and the fcub in design. I really think the people at IH went after the estate owners in the design of the 154's. If you look at the numbers produced of the int154's surpassed the fcub loboy for a few years so there was a demand for the 154's design. (its a cub cadet on steroids) IH did offer some attachments for the 154 for the farmer too like the 3pt rear pto powered tiller.

The 154/185 have the starter / generator, a live PTO with a clutch, hydraulics with a normal valve setup using the tranny for the hydraulic tank. If you keep the engine tuned properly with a good charging system with a good battery it will start in any kind of weather. (Mine does)The dual right and left brakes were an option. The 3pt hitch was an option too. The 3pt hitch did make it more versital when it came to after market 3pt attachments. Then you have the 13.6x16 turf tires over the standard 8.3x24's. And the standard 12" rims over the optional 10" rim turf tire. Were talking 15hp (154) and 18hp (185). The clutch was mounted at the tranny. The owner needed to make sure its adjusted correctly between the throwout bearing and the flywheel brake. Its a good machine if regular maintenace was done on it. Neglecting it was its downfall and thats not the tractors fault. I find it to be a very good machine too.

While the fcub loboy is an exact copy of the highboy fcub, its only lower. It still has the look of farm tractor. Were talking 9hp. Its easy to work on because there's no fully covered areas in sheetmetal. It has a Geared flywheel and starter. There's no clutch on the PTO and the PTO isn't a live PTO.

The int184 is a totally redesigned beast. The clutch was moved forward to the engine. It still had the live pto with an electric clutch. It also has the normal starter on the geared flywheel and an alternator.

They all use the hydraulic rocker shaft design and the engine is pretty much the same except for the HP. The newer fcubs they used the same engine hp upgrades as the int numbered tractors.

I like all of them and they all had there spot in IH history. Heck i even like the seat time i get on my cub cadets even though i look funny sitting on them. ("Big" Bill) You would be surprised how many people who passby wave to me on my older cub cadets. I have sparked a few locally to start collecting them too.

I hope to have the farmall SA, SH, and MD someday too. That would make my collection perfect.

[BigBill]

With loose steering it can be a few things. I've seen the upper bushing in the steering column work up out of the tube. The tie rod & drag link ends being worn out. The link that connects the tie rods to the drag link is loose on the swivel stud. I've seen these really worn and loose. You may want to checkout the steering box too were the nut holds on the level to the steering box. These are very similair to the cub cadet and if we tighten up the nut it will take out some of the play.

[IH Cub 70]

Big Bill;
Thanks for the input. I haven't seen any articles comparing the two and have very little experience with either. Now that I have two I'm more inclined to do some research. We have 55 acres, five of which is lawn. My older Loboy has a sickle mower on it presently ( it also came with a woods 59" underbelly unit ) and it is great for rough cutting. The 154 has the orig. IHC underbelly five foot mower which it was purchased with new. Incidently both machines were one owners which is kind of odd for their age. I just like the design and size as I have new John deere 4110 for lawn work and a New Holland TC 55 with a back hoe. There is a Bolens HT 20 with mower and blower here somewhere also.

[Thackery]

Good subject, I too have one of each FCub, normal Lo-Boy Cub and a recently purchased 154.

It took a loot of looking to get the 154 in my head. I think I already posted about looking for the missing? starter, etc.

I like the fact that the clutch is easily seen and worked on, which mine needed.

I have read that the 154 is the mowing machine. I would think with 15HP on the light weight frame it would be great. I have not put the deck back on mine yet. I would think it would be great for a 3 acre or more lawn without a lot of obstacles.
Some of the other differences I can see both good and bad. I'm more of a traditional Cub guy so the 154 is not my favorite. To bad it has that ugly art-deco loking nose.

Seems like parts are readily available which is nice. It's easy to work on like a Cub.
Best of luck with yours, keep us posted.

Thackery