I recently tried swapping over a vsx160 (with mulching disk) from an old worn out steel deck, to a few year old vantage steel deck that had a Briggs on it. I riveted on the mulch plug support etc. so I could use the mulching feature. Everything went smoothly, however I found the blades don�t seem as low to the ground on the new deck as they did on the old one. The old deck had the plastic height adjuster and 8� wheels, whereas the newer deck has the holes for height adjustment in the deck, and smaller wheels. I was cutting at notch 5 (or 5th lowest) on the old deck, where I am now cutting at notch 2 (2nd lowest) on the new deck. I know notch heights aren�t going to beat the best indicator of height, but when the newer deck had a standard power torque and blade disc, it seemed to cut lower than it does now. I guess my questions are - is there a difference in the older and newer steel decks, and is there a height difference in the standard and mulching blade discs? Otherwise, out with the tape measure for me.
Hi John, no idea, never looked at the difference, I know the plastic height adjuster will rivet onto any of the bases, I just have never looked at where each slot in the plastic is compared to the holes, I would think the plastic slots go lower so this may be the difference. I can check tomorrow. What is important is the height the blades sit inside the body, because all those bodies are the same height/depth
I agree about the plastic height adjuster possibly going lower, but I wouldn�t think by too much. I would have to change the whole rear axle to try it, as the height adjuster handle won�t allow 8� wheels on the current axle - I learnt that before (different handles and I think it�s easier to change the whole axle than pop the clips off bits and pieces etc.). I might check the blade disks to see how far the blades mount from where the blade disk mounts up to the boss.
I know the flat height adjuster won't allow the 8 inch wheels, I have to modify them to clear the wheel. If you have just swapped a PT onto another Victa base then they are the same height, unless you have swapped a standard PT on to a Tornado base because the Tornado base is 20mm higher but it is also a bigger cut. If you have swapped a standard PT base for a standard PT base then your blade carrier height will be exactly the same, only difference is the height adjuster
Cheers Norm. Perhaps the blade disc is slightly different, the blades are worn or it is my expectations that need to change. There is still about 6mm or so of thread on the crank below the nut, has anyone spaced the blade plate down further with washers of a suitable size between the plate and the boss? How do you modify the handle to suit bigger wheels?
I wonder if someone had put a standard long shaft Briggs on that newer deck. There is the Victa model about 50mm extension and the normal Briggs with about 75 mm extension. That would certainly make the difference you are talking about. All that it means is you are now back to the correct height.
I fitted a powertorque to a steel base that originally had a Briggs. It was a donor base where the orignal Briggs was cooked within 12 months. Vantage model, holes in deck for height adjustment, 7� rear wheels (I think, 6� maybe?)
Last edited by jds303; 30/12/1812:35 PM. Reason: Added detail
Ok so I just compared the 2 bases, the base with the holes in it with the flat adjuster in the lowers hole, center of axle is at the bottom of the base, on the plastic adjuster in the lowest slot, the axle center is 20 mm above the bottom of the base
It looks like the base models had the flat adjuster with 7 inch rear and 6 inch front. Delux models with the bigger rear wheels needed the rear axle lowered to keep the base level
As Jeff said it is possible that the engines are different enough by having different length crankshafts or even different mounting hole position to make up the difference. What you need to check is the orginal position of hte carrier before the change and after then you would know if it is the mounting that made the difference.
I recently had to replace an old Briggs L head horizontal with a new Briggs OHV horizontal on a log splitter. Due the positioning of the mounting circle (actually 4 bolt square mount) for the pump I ended up having the shorten the crankshaft by 5/8" so the LoveJoy coupler would fit correctly. Another option was a custom spacer but cutting the crankshaft was the better less expensive option.
AVB with these Powertorques there is 2 different length cranks but the longer crank is not that common , they did this so that so they could fit PT's straight onto a base that was used for Briggs without having to use a 20mm spacer under the Briggs. In John's situation it was a case of making the deck sit level when they were fitting bigger diameter rear wheels and the only reason for the bigger wheels was they were then classed as an upper level model. I did come across a newer Briggs with a short shaft because it was fitted on a pressure washer. I did contemplate fitting that motor onto a Powertorque base without a spacer because this would have the shaft the right length but then this caused the motor to sit too low and the fuel tank fouled on the body
I thought the Victa were using a short shaft Briggs. I seem to remember seeing a short shaft Briggs once. I actually had to make it longer by welding a couple of blade bosses together to fit a Rover.
I have never seen one of these 20mm adapters for fitting a long shaft Briggs to a Victa. Are they common?
Tnx Norm. I am learning as I go. So please bear with my crazy ideas. It can't be as bad as for two service manuals here for the same basic setup on an UTV and both are wrong on the test measurements. It didn't dawn on me that a 5 K ohms variable resistor couldn't possible measure 800 K ohms. I reckon I have been smack up the side of the head one time too many with the frying pan but it did dawn on me in the middle of the night.
Hi Jeff I have seen short shaft Briggs on Victa bases, but the motor has been turned sideways so the fuel tank is at the front, no idea how they got on with the bolt holes, never bothered looking and from memory the ones I have seen were probably vertical pull start. All the other Briggs fitted on a Victa base need the spacer because of the fuel tank fouling on the chute. Here is a pic of a couple of them one plastic, one alloy, the plastic one is more common. The plastic one shown is missing the spacer sleves but you get the idea. I have seen plenty that have had the motor packed up on nuts or a pile of washers
I have never worked on a Victa Briggs. I avoid Briggs like the plague. I did have a short shaft Briggs here once from a Scott Bonnar so I assumed thats the way Victa went. I might need one of those 20mm spacers to lift the PT on the 24 if the pulley height is not right. I think it will be wrong.
So they should be pretty common. Have to redrill some of the holes for the PT. Alloy would be best. I'll have a look at the Bunnings mowers next time I am there. I was going to use a stack of washers but the spacer would be neater. Still have to use washers on the 4th bolt.
Jeff if MF had got down a bit lower with his pics of the Briggs fitted on the PT bases at Bunnings we might have been able to see the spacer ring. They may not need it on the OHV motors because the fuel tank I think is probably at the rear now as on all the Chondas I haven't tried the rings on a PT , never needed to and I guess the bolt holes will be wrong
i have been to Bunnings. Looks like they are still using it but only on the PT style bases. Not on the newer type. Its a plastic ring and quite flexible. The actual spacers look metal. Very like the one Norm showed.
No big deal. Certainly could not do anything with that type. Maybe the alloy.
