How Good are Older Cub Cadets?

[drivadesl]

I've been looking for an older lawn/garden tractor pretty much for utility use around my yard. In my searches, this site recommended a few brand names, such as simplicity, bolens, cut cadet, gravely etc. The CC appealed to me as they have the "look" I like in a machine like this, so I've had my eyes open on craigslist and Ebay. Well I haven't been able to actually go look at one, cause as soon as I ID something, and send an email, its sold. I realize these are pretty collectible, but what is it about these vs some of the others that make them so desireable? I've read up on the IH Cadet forums, and people really seem to go for these, but bottom line, are they so much mechanically superior to the other names mentioned? I realize these use a shaft vs belt drive is that it? I'm talking older models 60's to early 80's vintage. Thanks.

 

[radman1]

I think some of the desireability is the nostalgia. We had one in the 70's. In their day, they were kind of the king of the hill. Riding mowers were not common. The frame and tranny are rugged and well built. Mower deck was rugged but noisey. The weak link seemed to be the motor. Overhauled 2x. After it died the 3rd time, it was pushed to the side. I think we finally sold it on a auction. It always seemed underpowered when the mower was engaged. I can't quite remember the model.

 

[JESSE1]

We had a '65 Cub Cadet 100. 10 hp Kohler with the 3 speed trans. The transmission was the same one used on the bigger Cub tractors. Ours had a 42" belly mower. Dad bought a plow, disk and cultivator for it. They were a very heavy built garden tractor. Everything was either steel or cast iron. Wish I still had it. If you can find one in good, restorable shape, buy it!

 

[KentT]

I've been looking for an older lawn/garden tractor pretty much for utility use around my yard. In my searches, this site recommended a few brand names, such as simplicity, bolens, cut cadet, gravely etc. The CC appealed to me as they have the "look" I like in a machine like this, so I've had my eyes open on craigslist and Ebay. Well I haven't been able to actually go look at one, cause as soon as I ID something, and send an email, its sold. I realize these are pretty collectible, but what is it about these vs some of the others that make them so desireable? I've read up on the IH Cadet forums, and people really seem to go for these, but bottom line, are they so much mechanically superior to the other names mentioned? I realize these use a shaft vs belt drive is that it? I'm talking older models 60's to early 80's vintage. Thanks.

I'll admit my bias up front, so take that with a grain of salt...

IMO, "direct drive-- no belts" is just a good marketing ploy that was used agiainst lower-quality competition (primarily Murray and MTD and box-store brands they made and labelled), as is "cast-iron front axle." They're hyped to be better, but in reality, they don't make that much difference at all IN COMPARISON to the quality brands you mentioned...

IMO, you should target a garden tractor (quick clue is bolt-on rear wheels) instead of a lawn tractor (rear wheels attach with keys or pins) made by any of the brands you mentioned, plus add Wheelhorse (Toro) to the list. Your biggest concern should be readily available parts and attachments, new or used. Given that, here's my overall impressions:

Cub Cadets -- good parts availabliity, superior at putting power to the ground such as pulling a moldboard turning plow, but their mower decks aren't great and they don't cut well (scalp badly). Snowblowers not up to par with the competition. Avoid the red ones made by AMF, and concentrate on only yellow ones.

Gravely -- hard to find, both tractor and parts and they're very expensive, but the tractor is an absolute tank with great traction. Front PTO was optional if you're considering snowblowers, etc. and no rear PTO at all due to rear-engine design. Also direct drive, BTW.

Wheelhorse -- relatively easy to find used implements and parts availability is OK. Probably one of the best for use with a snowplow, due to the way it mounts. Mower decks and quality of cut is better than average. Fairly easy to find, and overall quite affordable to own and maintain...

Simplicity -- good parts availability, new and used, and affordable prices -- at least in the areas of the country where they were commonly sold (not common in Deep South or West Coast). Future parts availability is somewhat of an unknown because of new Briggs and Stratton ownership and their cost-cutting measures. Best mowing decks and quality of cut in the market, and their tillers and snowblowers also do a good job...

Bolens -- very poor parts availability -- abandoned in the market, with the name now owned by MTD and put on MTD machines. Good quality machine and attachments, but...

John Deere -- good parts availability, and fairly easy to find, both tractors and attachments. Good overall machines, with a wide range of attachments, but also likely the most expensive of the lot, due to name-brand recognition.

My two cents...

 

[ToadHill]

I have 2 old CC's for dragging stuff around. The engine in them is a 12hp Kohler and in my opinion they are bulletproff. After over 35 years the mower decks have rust holes in them, but I've welded them up and in the last 12 years I've never had to replace a spindle. I've found I had to rewire them after all these years but it is a very simple wiring system.

I'll bet they outlive me.

 

[Fordlords]

In reference to Cub Cadet: "Avoid the red ones made by AMF, and concentrate on only yellow ones."

There were never any Cub Cadet tractors made by AMF. Cub Cadet was bought from International Harvester by MTD in June of 1981. Prior to that date there were red Cub Cadet '82 models made by International, and MTD continued the International Harvester designs up until the late 1980's. Red '82 models were sold at International tractor dealers, and the yellow ones at Cub Cadet lawn and garden dealerships.

The older International built Cubs are the most popular among collectors, as MTD did some things to cheapen the machines after the takeover, such as switching transaxle housings from cast iron to aluminum. Are the older Cubs mechanically superior to other popular brands of their time? The answer IMHO is no. It's just a cult following, and all of the older brands have their cults, just based on personal preferences. Things I like about the old Cubs are very strong transaxles, both gear and hydrostatic. They also have strong frames and most models had the famous Kohler K series cast iron engines. In all, the International built ones were not compromised, having about all the best components that were available at the time- but again so did many of the other names of that time.

-Fordlords-

 

[bontai_Joe]

Since you asked about Cub Cadets specifically, I'll share my opinion. I'm a Deere guy (have 3) but would grab a good condition Kohler powered Cub if I found one. The rear axle as mentioned is the same one used in the older Farmall Cub tractors ( a tractor that was powered by a 4 cykinder gas engine and large enough to do some small scale farm work). The design dates back to I believe 1961 for the first garden tractor and the current 2000 and 3000 series machines are basically still using the same drive train. I don't think they are superior to any other of the main name brands, but I pretty much agree with Kent's comparison of the brands except his perception of problems with the red ones. They are just as good as the yellow ones. A couple of particularly good models to look for are the 149, 1250, 1450, 1650 among others.

 

[BruceR]

We had a '65 Cub Cadet 100. 10 hp Kohler with the 3 speed trans. The transmission was the same one used on the bigger Cub tractors. Ours had a 42" belly mower. Dad bought a plow, disk and cultivator for it. They were a very heavy built garden tractor. Everything was either steel or cast iron. Wish I still had it. If you can find one in good, restorable shape, buy it!

Jesse,
You are close to one of the best CC resources in the Country.

Cub Cadet Supply Room

Bruce

 

[artfull dodger]

Also check out the ihregistery.com website, dedicate to IH and CCC/MTD built cub cadets. And he is correct AMF never was involved with the Cub Cadet line of tractors. It took MTD several years to change much in the design, and even the alum rear ends are robust enough for running ground engaging implements. The change to alum from cast iron was an EPA thing as IH offered the tooling ect to MTD, but at that time the casting of iron, which is a very dirty and poluting process was in the cross hairs of the EPA and they declined to buy the tooling to produce the Cub 3spd transmission and differential assembly. The diesel cub cadets didnt come till after the CCC/MTD buy out, the diesel being sourced from Kubota. If you look at the red or 82 series style machines, avoid the KT17 series 1 kohlers as they tend to blow up if used on any hills or slopes. The series II is better, having a presurized oil system. A nice red 82 series can be had cheap with a blown up kohler, then repowered with up to a 23hp honda kit from small engine warehouse, you might have close to 2k into it, but it will run circles around currrent model machines. Cub cadet decks, while not the best, can be improved by making sure the deck is level side to side, welding up or replacing worn out deck hanging hardware and a fresh set of blades or if a later model stamped metal deck, getting a set of "Gator" blades for it. I had a nice model 149 that I restored that cut super nice with a 44" mower deck. The first model cub, called an Original as it had no model number, had a square 38" mower deck that while not effectient at blowing out the grass, had an incredible cut as the blades overlaped each other and were drived by a cogged timing belt. The next series of tri-blade decks for the 70/100 also seem to be one of the better cutting mower decks when in proper tune. Cheers Mike

 

[KentT]

I don't think they are superior to any other of the main name brands, but I pretty much agree with Kent's comparison of the brands except his perception of problems with the red ones. They are just as good as the yellow ones. A couple of particularly good models to look for are the 149, 1250, 1450, 1650 among others.

My bad on the AMF reference guys-- it was a CRS brain cramp. As far as the "red-vs-yellow" I was just repeating things I've heard from CC guys -- not because of the color differences but because that period of production had quality problems.

Oh well, I said up front I was biased and to to take it with a grain of salt...