OutdoorKing Repair Forum Forums Collectors Corner Rotary Modern Replacement Parts for Southern Cross KXD-2

Hi Ian and Jack,
The air filter will be a much better unit than the standard one. Mine is packed with a felt like material which probably doesn't breathe very well.

I have had a look under my mower and would say that the blade plate is a replacement, mine has four blades fitted instead of the two. I would say it was replaced so as to fit the extra blades. Good news is that I have found a brand new set of blades

Incredible find there Paul.

I'll be keen to check them against the measurements on my illustration posted earlier.

P.S. Perhaps your disc is a 20" Rover plate? I should imagine they would fit reasonably comfortably. And the O.E.M. "Big Bob" and Supaswift plate (Part #900172) might also be a "fit". I did come across one generic "unbranded" blade plate that looked like a very good fit, as it had the 10mm centre hole and the outer holes were just over 300mm from the centre, but for some reason I can't find it again. I will post it up if I ever come across it again.

Masport also make a similar blade holder. The big problem with the brand names is companies tend to be very protective of their products and do not like seeing them used "inappropriately" on other brands. If you ask an online merchant for dimensions, you generally get a reply like "Please send us the make and serial number stamped on your machine and we will be happy to provide the information on the correct part." I guess this is mainly because of modern health and safety concerns, as they think we are all stupid and will do stupid things like try to install a blade with a 12mm diameter hole on to a product with a 10mm hole, for example. They also cannot guarantee their product under circumstances outside of their control and they have problems with people voiding warranties. They think all old machinery is dangerous and should be scrapped so that people will keep buying new products. etc. etc. etc. This is all fair enough, as I realize there are a lot of stupid people out there who would do silly things, which is why I have been mainly investigating the "universal" or "unbranded" blade holders. But modern compliance issues do make life difficult for people trying to retrofit old and outdated machinery. I knew an inventor who also found such issues challenging.

Interestingly, the parts merchants have no qualms about selling O.E.M. parts that fit many different makes and models. I guess this is because they have tested the parts for themselves. But one thing I've learnt is they never listen to the advice of the everyday "stupid people". I once argued with a merchant that a O.E.M. belt would fit my mower, but he refused to listen and I ended up ordering a very expensive "brand name" belt with the official part number. He had to eat his words, because when the part arrived it was the same O.E.M. belt that I had wanted him to order in the first place, just sealed in a brand name packet!

For those who have an original Southern Cross blade holder, I have an engineering contact who can manufacture high tensile bushing adapters to convert the 10mm hole on the SC blade holder to suit modern 12mm blade holes. If anyone is interested please send me a PM.

Of course there is nothing like the genuine original parts!

Evidently, the air filter was originally positioned at the rear of the engine, not on a snorkel.

G'day vint-mow
I guess that could well be correct - although snorkels may have been an option.
That's a wonderful colour photo there. It must be an early machine; as SC moved to
the trip-release started by the mid-1960s. I also note they used more than one
make of carby over the life span of their most-successful model, the KX-D.

Cheers
----------------------
Jack

Photo comes from a scan of a colour advertising brochure that was sent to me by Ian Matthews. Hope he doesn't mind me using this clipped photo from the brochure. Yes it was the early model KX-D.

Generally speaking, I wonder in which year did the first mowers come out with snorkels? They seem to become popular in the late 60s and were pretty much standard from the 1970s on.

Thanks to Paul, I now have all the correct blade specification for the KXD mowers.

Please forgive crudeness of my illustrations! As for measurements, please note that some "smidgens" were brought up or down from the nearest whole mm.

Hi vint_mow,
That's an interesting question.
You inspired me say something HERE.

I think you are more than a bit humble there.
Before we had nothing; now we have more than something! Thank you.

I have argued that a reversible blade in the 1960s is pretty much
unheard of in residential lawnmower design. But SC did it!

Is your intention to reproduce the blade?

Cheers
-------------------
Jack

Thank you for answering my question regarding the likely date of the earliest snorkels.

I was planning on making a few inquiries about getting those blades re-made, but I'm not sure if there will be enough interest. I could end up with hundreds of blades and only end up selling a few. I admit it is a very tempting idea to follow up on.

Jack, I was also asking you about the original design of the flywheel screen. At present I am none the wiser. However I have learnt that the following modern replacement parts fit the KXD-2 housing perfectly.

Tecumseh Starter Cup 590551

Tecumseh Engine Recoil Pull Start 590420

Tecumseh Flywheel Screen 590417

This begs the question, did Clinton/Tecumseh share some design features with SC, or was this entirely coincidental?

Just to explain what I have been getting at with the flywheel screen. I wonder if the original screen on the KX-D was stationary or rotating (fixed to the flywheel) and also whether it was horizontal or vertical?

Sadly these screens were often the first things that people threw away or lost when doing some maintenance. Most vintage mowers no longer have any screens. They were possibly more of a hindrance than a help if truth be told, and they did significantly cut the amount of air flow back by as much as 40-50%.

The only illustration that gives us some idea is the one in the manual, which suggests a vertical (upright) screen that was separate from the flywheel. I can only guess that the screen was fastened to the recoil bolts, but the illustration does not really show this. Perhaps the screen tucked neatly under the opening in the cowl and there was a metal ring that held the screen firmly in place with the recoil starter bolts. Otherwise I am at a loss to know what could have held it in place and prevented it from making contact with the fins on top of the flywheel (presuming of course that it was not spinning with it, which seems highly unlikely).

Is this design unusual? I have been unable to find anything like it on any other engines from the period, but then again, I admit I have not seen many. It seems to have more in common with more modern concepts of a "finger guard" than a grass screen. This is what makes me wonder if it was a stationary screen. The way the illustration shows the screen fixed to the cowl and separated from the flywheel does suggest that it was a stationary fixture.

Good morning all,

I would think that the screen sat on top of the cowl and hard up against the underneath of the starter. I am pretty sure I have one that came with my mower, when the temperature cools off a bit I can have a better look.

The screen was for two purposes, not so much fingers but keeping out grass and rodents. I will find it and post a pic.

Many thanks Paul. This heat has been unrelenting. Looking forward to a cool change, whenever that may be.

Measurements on the screen will also be greatly appreciated.

Now I am another kilo lighter, here are some pics. Measurements will come later as the tape measure is in the shed and I am not going back out there!







:-)

Thanks Paul, greatly appreciated. Should be easy enough to make one of these. I'm guessing the perforations are around 4-5mm diameter.

Yes it is very easy to shed a few kilos just walking to the mail box lately. Even the air feels like it is on fire. I'm very tempted to put an air conditioner in my shed!

I've been trying to think what these screens remind me of. Then it dawned on me. Design-wise they look a lot like the screens on some chainsaws, e.g. some Homelite models. While searching the net I came across another very similar screen on an old Briggs and Stratton, but oddly enough it was a rotating screen. And it looks a lot like the Tecumseh screen (Part No. 590417) that I have already mentioned, however the Tecumseh screen comes in at 4-5/8" diameter and about 3" hole in centre, so probably a lot smaller than the Southern Cross screen. The Tecumseh, like the Briggs and Stratton, is also a rotating screen, not stationary. Whether a rotating screen could be attached to a Southern Cross is anybody's guess at this stage. Looking at the cowl on my KXD-2, there is not a lot of clearance there, but it certainly may be possible to fit one.

G'day all

It is fantastic that members help out other members.
A big thank you to Paul for the thoughtful images...
I mean,a contrasting background that gives great detail.

I think 4-5 mm diameter might be a tad large...?

From what I think vint-mow is saying, this was a static screen,
not affixed to the flywheel, but supported and held by the sandwich
between the cowling and the starter assembly.

This is an interesting post because it concerns the minutiae or
detail of quality restorations of the EC-B SC engine.

-------------------
Jack

And in Oz, snakes.
Seriously - the mechanic in my family business once found a small tiger snake wound around the flywheel fins of a Briggs. Which explained why it was hard to pull over. Fortunately he was a very strong bloke, so the snake got a bit minced, before he took the cowling off!

Hi Glo Mod Gadge

What was this Tiger snake trying to do ...?
Does this give extra meaning to the Esso slogan I recall:-
http://www.exxonmobil.com.au/UK-English/about_history_esso_tiger.aspx

Cheers
-----------------
Jack

Hi Jack, not sure how many would remember the Esso add that "put a tiger in your tank" and the tiger tail you could get to tie onto your petrol cap and having it flap in the breeze

Thanks Jack. Yes "stationary" screen = static screen.

I am very thankful to Paul for his help.

I tend to be a "fussy" renovator. I even go so far as trying to match up bolts that were from the period, rather than use modern bolts. If I do use modern bolts, I try to age them by removing the Zinc coating and grinding off any lettering on the heads. I only use modern replacement parts if I can't find the original ones, which I replace once I finally get hold of the originals.

The engine mounting bolts on my Southern Cross are 5/16" x 2-1/2" UNC. They have *AJAX* stamped on the heads. I don't think they ever had any Zinc coating. They just look like plain, mild steel, and are probably only about Grade 4 or maybe less. I am inclined to think these were the original bolts, as Ajax was one of the big bolt manufacturers at the time. The nuts and bolt heads are also a smidgen larger than today's 5/16" x 2-1/2" bolts.

Oddly enough I still have four of the original bolts that were used to fit the Southern Cross blades, but by today's standards they look a tad dangerous. Two of them are slightly bent. In fact I suspect they would bend long before they would ever break, which perhaps made them safer than today's high tensile bolts, which are more prone to sudden and catastrophic failure if you hit something hard. Incidentally, some years ago I had just bought a brand new Supaswift mower and took it for a spin along the footpath. Unknown to me a vandal had broken off the metal post that showed the position of the underground HP fire main. The butt of the post was stuck up several cms but concealed in the grass. Of course I hit it with one hell of a jolt, which not only cracked a blade, but also sheered a blade bolt almost clean through. The mower has never ran the same since. I wonder if I had done this in the old SC, the blade carrier may have cracked, but I am sure the blade bolts would have simply bent and buckled.

The Briggs and Stratton & Tecumseh flyscreens I've measured from that period have all had around 4 mm diameter perforations. Today's screens are more like 2-3 mm.



Air flow is considerably compromised the smaller you go in size, so a compromise has to be reached between stopping debris (and snakes/rodents) and air flow. The pattern of the holes (and distance apart) also greatly influences the amount of free air space available. I'll be interested to hear from Paul which hole size Southern Cross chose for their screens.