post hole borer

[vtwarthog]

Anyone ever try using a post hole driller/borer on a 154? If so how did it work. What brand was it?

[John *.?-!.* cub owner]

I have never heard of anyone trying one, but considering the 154 reputation for pto clutch problems, I would be a little hesitant, especially if you have very hard, or rocky soil. In my area you can rent a 2 wheeled post hole auger fairly reasonable, or if you have a helper, a 2 man hand held unit.

[gitractorman]

You also would have to either find one that would work with the high speed, wrong direction, and wrong size PTO that is on the 154, or find one of the highly sought after Hub City PTO reducer/reversers.

Once you jumped that hurdle, and got the PTO down to a standard 540 rpm, I would bet that it would run a 4 or 6" auger without problem, as long as the soil is basically topsoil. If you have to dig in gravel, clay, tree roots, or anything else, I would become very concerned with the excesseve wear on the PTO clutch as John mentioned above.

Through all of the construction work that I have done, there have been only two times that I needed a bunch of holes dug. One time I rented a 2-man auger and we drilled 16 holes in about 3 hours, fairly painlessly, but in some nasty western NY clay.

The other time we were drilling holes on a construction site, and a New Holland skid steer with a small hydraulic pump would not turn a 6-inch auger, so we brought in a much bigger tracked Bobcat, with a hydraulic auger the size of a 5-gallon bucket, and it had no problem with the 6-inch auger.

I would have to say that it would be one of the last things I would personally look for to use on almost any tractor, Unless I had a couple hundred acres that I was planning to fence in.... then I would probably have a much more substantial tractor than a 154 to use.

[BigBill]

I really don't think the 154 is heavy duty in the PTO area enough for a post hole digger. They did have one for the farmall cub. You could probably fab a drill press type post hole digger its been done on www.machinebuilders.net somewhere i seen it there or at least plans for fabricating one. I really like the drill press type post hole digger because your not holding an arm while the screw is flopping around and might take you out. I seen one on a ford 8n that was very dangerous. If it ever popped up out of the hole and went sideways who ever is standing there is out of business for sure.

If i was ever to put one on a 154 i would add a seperate clutch or a shear pin on it too so you don't hurt the pto on the 154.

[outdoors4evr]

I have yet to see a tractor mounted post hole digger that didn't have a shear pin. Also, I have yet to see a 154 PTO that wouldn't kill the engine.
A tiller can kill a 184 without clutch slippage. I am sure that a tiller can do the same to a 154.

[vtwarthog]

Guess that was a bad idea. I once had a ford model 851, which was around 40hp, and a post hole digger. I drilled 118 holes in 5 hours with no trouble but it was pasture land and easy drilling. I do have a larger (50 hp) diesel IH to use if I ever need to do that again.. I've never actually worked a cub or 154 very much. just pulled with them. Thanks for the advice.

[John *.?-!.* cub owner]

A 154 is a good rig, but they were primarily designed as a lawnmower, rather than a farming tractor.

[BigBill]

A 154 is a good rig, but they were primarily designed as a lawnmower, rather than a farming tractor.

To me its a super duty mowing machine. Its a great comfortable ride while mowing too. There so misunderstood....
But if setup for farming i think it can do the tasks too but the people at IH were after the estate market were the owner of many acres to mow wanted a more modern looking tractor to mow with he didn't like the farm tractor look. If you look at the production numbers the IH number series out sold the fcub. Indeed they had the nitch in the market at that time. Could it be the smaller farms were disappearing at that time and the demand for the fcub was low i'm not sure.

With the design of the "live" PTO thats the only way they did it by putting the clutch in the rear, that puts the 184 design as an after thought. I have no complaints about the 154's design yet. I also like my fcub too they both do have there work cut out for them. If i have any really heavy plowing to do(blade) i use my 4x4 jeep tractor.

[Landreo]

I don't know if a post hole digger was ever made for the numbered series, likely not. If you have tractor with a normal 540 pto and 3 point hitch, then I would get one for that tractor. A few holes can be drilled with a 1 or 2 man auger.

I don't know IHCs's reason for the numbered series but I have only seen them as estate mowers and state/county road crew workers. Most of my thousands of hours on the 154s was as a state worker mowing grass. Works well for that, may work for farming with a 3 point hitch. The offset cubs were outdated by the time the numbered series came out so I am not suprised they may not have been selling well.

[gitractorman]

Well, we need to clear some hings up. The IH sold only around 44,000 numbered lo-boy tractors, where they sold a little over 250,000 farmall cubs. However, during the years that the numbered lo-boys were being produced, IH did produce and sell more numbered lo-boys than f-cubs, year by year.

The numbered lo-boy tractors were geared primarily as a large estate mower, as were the earlier offset lo-boy tractors. They offered 3-point hitches and a few attachments for the gardener or landscaper to use, but that is all they were ever intended for. None of the lo-boy tractors excelled at farming, plowing, disking, etc., as they really just did not have the ground clearance needed for large acreage work.... that was the intent of the f-cub.

The demise of the f-cub and the lo-boy have more to do with the advent of compact diesel tractors than anything else. In the late 1970s, early 1980s, names like Kubota, Yanmar, and Mitsubishi were flooding the market with smaller 17-25 hp diesel tractors that were priced similar to a lo-boy, but had available standard 540 rpm pto, power steering, 4x4, hydrostatic drive, etc., and were MUCH more powerful machines than the gasoline powered f-cub and lo-boy tractors. Many have speculated that if the f-cub and especially the lo-boy had been offered with a diesel engine and/or a hydrostatic drive, they would have remained in production for much longer.

Ironically, about the same time, IH basically folded, sold off the ag division to Case, and the lawn/garden division to MTD, so those companies geared production towards machines that were their strongest suit. The f-cub and lo-boy just did not fit in any longer. MTD had the Super Garden Tractors, with hydrostatic drive and diesel engines available, that were much better suited for mowing than the lo-boy, and Case had a laundry list of small diesel machines that could easily handle the market that the f-cub filled, again with standard 540 rpm pto, power steering, 4x4, etc.

[BigBill]

I think the Pto rotation, size(splines) and speed not being 540rpm actually the norm really hurt the sales of the IH cubs. Nothing is interchangable. Plus the fcub wasn't a live PTO. They sat back fat dumb and happy with what they offered for too long. They never really looked ahead at the hydro or 4x4 and even diesel engines as options.

They were no different than any other american industry that i have worked for in the past. No one thought about the future or developing for the future. Again my hats off to the guys/gals at UTC, Otis elevator there engineering group is one of the top ten in the country there always on the edge and looking ahead to the next best thing. Its not how we can make it better, its lets design a whole new product.