Snowblower Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Are the MTD / Craftsman / Yard-Man / Cub Cadet / Troy-Bilt shave plates meant to be installed above or below the auger housing? The factory set-up machines I have seen have it on the inside, above the auger housing, but the exploded parts views seem to indicate it should be installed below the housing, between it and the ground.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,333 Posts
You want the scraper to scrape the ground, not the housing. You want the scraper to protect the housing. You don't want any chance of the housing touching the ground. In this diagram, the scraper would attach from the bottom. You always want the carriage bolt heads to be showing, think of slickness of the snow moving over the smooth heads. The nuts and bolts threads face the ground because they will get ground down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tabora

·
Registered
Joined
·
994 Posts
I have a 2004 or so Craftsman 11/30 and the shave plate fits on top of the auger housing in a lip. The overall width allows the shave plate to fit within the auger housing. The carriage bolt has a flat head that fits the square hole in the shave plate and the round hole in the auger housing lip and the nut attaches under the auger housing. The shave plate is too narrow to fit outside the auger housing on the ground side.

My Ariens is set up exactly the same way.

Good luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
So, I guess whoever did the engineering drawings was REALLY out of sync with reality... Thanks for confirming!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,077 Posts
I've done (and still do) quite a bit of technical drawing as a contract or freelancer. There are times companies just don't want to bring back an outside source or incur any more fees for changes and then they publish.

More and more firms are using their engineering department for their final tech manual drawings. If that is the case here, then they either missed it, or are too lazy...under deadline stress, overworked, etc., to make final changes.

That's been my experience anyway. Then we end users get to decipher and work out the assembly/reassembly bugs...:icon-hgtg:

So, I guess whoever did the engineering drawings was REALLY out of sync with reality... Thanks for confirming!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I've done (and still do) quite a bit of technical drawing as a contract or freelancer.
Yeah, me too. I used to do the technical manuals and illustrations for Konica Photo Imaging's consumer film to digital imaging software, and the in-plant equipment that produced the products. I was a stickler for important details, though, such as which way bolts go through an assembly, which imply a specific assembly order. :wink2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,077 Posts
I could kind of tell. When you circle/elipse an area on a drawing when you post is your give-away to me...:smile_big:

I am also known to be too much of a stickler on detail. I lost a pretty big long-term military field manual job for a support contractor to the Apache Hellfire program recently. I was chosen to do about 3 years worth of work, then someone up the chain said my drawings were too detailed and it would/could aid in the reverse engineering of their systems if the manuals got into the wrong hands. Field reports from tech soldiers said they loved my (the contractors) manuals as the easiest to follow. They went in-house with much shorter time-frames allocated.

Figures my obsession with detail lost me a good chunk of change. Such is life...but the show must go on. :eek:

Yeah, me too. I used to do the technical manuals and illustrations for Konica Photo Imaging's consumer film to digital imaging software, and the in-plant equipment that produced the products. I was a stickler for important details, though, such as which way bolts go through an assembly, which imply a specific assembly order. :wink2:
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top