Export thread

As the pedal is unique, the logic is that at the beginning of the pedal stroke, the clutch is activated/disabled and then the brake.
Separately everything works, but there is a jump when leaving and a certain delay in starting the brake, seeming that the functions are overlapping.
When disassembling, I could see several worn components that I believe are causing the inconvenience.

Parece que esta peça já foi virada um dia...




Some components are not part of the diagram but perform the same function.

The sum of these gaps and others that are difficult to photograph must be the cause.
Am I right in my reasoning or is there something else?

There should be an adjustment on the rod that activates the brake which usually also has an over run spring
You back it off so that the drive cutch just starts to slip before the brake engages or dissengages .
The brake is either on or off there is no slip because it works by locking the diff so the wheels turn in opposite directions which is why it is so abruptIT is exactly the same as the P position on an automatic transmission

I only identify an adjustment in the approximation of the pads to the disc.
And it makes sense to start the brake only after disconnecting the transmission (by belt) from the gearbox.
On the pedal shaft, there is an ear with an oblong hole, which allows the brake to be activated some time (angle) after disengaging (or together?) the clutch.

Not a set of linkages I am familiar with
On all I have worked on the rod # 29 would pass strait through the brake lever a long way
Then there is a compression spring and a nut passes that so you can adjust when the rod pulls the brake lever on .
If the brake rod pushes the lever to activate the brake then the spring & adjuster nut is forward of the brake lever .
In the middle of the brake lever is a stud & nut
That moves the lever closer or further away from the pins that push on the brake pads so there is an adjustment there as well .

Rod #29...#26 is a spring...
But I believe that in fact there is something different that is not showing up in the diagram... I'll clear that doubt tomorrow.

The image of the brake rod is wrong for the style transaxle brake lever shown. The spring you are noting is on the brake caliper and is to pull it off. Also is #161 spring present and correctly connected.

Why are you not posting the equipment model number?

I am getting so frustrating with posters asking for help but refusing to provide the info we need to even look up the equipment. Come on folks not every mower is the same setup by a long shot. Just because it is a Murray doesn't mean a lot as they were built by Murray Ohio, Husqvarna , and MTD. Some things I can gradually work it out but it takes time and some days I am too busy to done it as I got own shop problems to research...

I am to a point of just stop trying.....

Yes Sr. ...


Motor
Model - 31P777
Type - 0602 B1
Code - 100209ZD

Did I forget something?

PS.: I just remember that my mower is frankenstein's cousin.

This image of the MST 206-565C showing the brake engagement lever, circled in red.



Your mower was built by Husqvarna but I not able find 960420056-03 maintenance level (-03). All I am finding is maintenance level -04. So I don't know what the changes that were made between level 03 and level 04. And Husqvarna site don't find either version. Damn I hate OEMs that hides things.

The rod should one with a thread end, spring, washer, and nylon lock nut and not what is being shown in the image of the brake/clutch system.

Sorry can't be of further help but yes the info in your post was very helpful in looking the mower and is much appreciated.

My system is...

No threaded rod, bushing...
I think it was made during the period when employees didn't know who was going to be the boss...kkk...
The adjustment can only be made by the central screw of the brake assembly.

And don't worry... as I said before, any opinion is welcome.

Your comment about the various owners of Murray is interesting... it seems that Murray is an unwanted child, an ugly duckling that nobody wants...

So it could be that my deck (Husqvarna) originally came with the machine... and I'm blaming the previous owners.

Well, my assessment of my system can be seen in the following scheme:

As soon as I finish resolving the gaps I will confirm... or not...

First caliper connector is different than I usually see. I just wonder we could even get that part if ever needed but that explain the different setup for the brake rod. .

Briggs which is the holder of the Murray line just farms out equipment to different OEM for manufacturing. They also farm out the Snapper line. I got a ZTR and rider here that I service that actually Husqvarna parts (Husqvarna PN on the parts). Otherwords Snapper line currently is actually made by Husqvarna for the Snapper line which Briggs owns.

Makes finding parts different as Briggs is higher on the same parts that I can get from Husqvarna.

It sorta like Craftsman mowers which currently can be a Husqvarna or MTD (now Black and Decker owned). Most of the late models are MTD built.

What a salad! All to reduce costs and maximize profit...

Just a gap that I couldn't remove...junction between #188 and #64, because #64 has welds and I preferred not to change it, but it turned out much better than before.
By the way there is another mistake in the diagram...#188 goes first in #167 and then in #64.

Spring # 161 left me stressed to put it on...it is very strong and I tried for more than half an hour with no success, it was only with the help of my son, who is at home office today.

I confirmed the pedal travel sequence... tomorrow I'll try to film it, because here the night has already come.

Bange said:

Your comment about the various owners of Murray is interesting... it seems that Murray is an unwanted child, an ugly duckling that nobody wants...

So it could be that my deck (Husqvarna) originally came with the machine... and I'm blaming the previous owners.

Well, my assessment of my system can be seen in the following scheme:
View attachment 65442
As soon as I finish resolving the gaps I will confirm... or not...

Click to expand...

Murray was the biggest manufacturer of mowers in the USA making mowers for just about every one apart from Toro & MTD
I know this because in the Murray master parts list is the colour code prefixes and they contain all of the makers propriotity colours , ie, JD Yellow, Viking Green , 2 different Husqvarna oranges , ford blue etc etc etc
However like every listed business it is always for sale all you have to do is buy a majority of the shares .
So Murray was owned by a variety of other companies , many of which saw it as a cash cow, so starved it of developement capital .
Murray made mowers for a lot of people including some for Noma ( who also made mowers for other companies ) who went bust and to protect their debt Murray bought out Noma but it was too big a fish to swallow so Murray went bust . When this happened B & S ( who was also going bust ) was owed a small fortune so they bought Murray to protect their debt.
When they did this MTD played B & S like a fiddle threatening to no longer fit B & S engines to any of their mowers if B & S continued to run Murray in opposition to MTD so B &S broke up Murray , closed down the USA factories and shifted the export business to China.
AFAIK B & S Ended up with Ferris & Simplicity the same way , I know for a fact they got Victa that way as Victa's debt to B &S was against shares and Victa owed B &S so much that this ended up being over 20% of the share value & under Aust business law if you acquire more than 17% of a business's share you either have to sell down to under that level of make a take over offer and the instant that the share market gets a sniff that any business is in trouble the deck jockies dump the share for any price they can get so the share price of Victa dropped 72% in a month
Then when the "agreement" time had expired MTD dropped B & S engines and the drop in sales volumes combined with the cost of taking over Murray was too much for B & S so they went bust .

Despite what most think there is next to no profit in making lawn mowers .
Most have gone down the high volume low profit margin path so the end user sees the lowest possible ticket price ( car makers are doing the same ) .
The big danger with this is if you loose a few percent of market share then you quickly go into a loss situation.
General Motors have been running their production lines at a loss for ages .
They make all of their profits from the various arms of GM finance
I would imagine Ford is very close to being the same

This is a big dogfight... around here Ford closed, GM is extinguishing a shift for 10 months and VW is paralyzing some production lines.
The politic is not good, legal uncertainty and currency stability, is and will still push away big companies.
In US the competitiveness is great and the one who "profits" is the customer... here the financial politic keeps investors away and some importers alternate with the same product, with high import fees, the customer (like me) suffer to buy and to maintain.
Our population (market) is large, but with low purchasing power.
The US government creates long-lasting rules and has a market with reasonable freedom... here, everyone who enters changes everything.

Goes like this
Companies start up with venture capital
A venture financier wants to get back 2 or more times the money they put in some time down the track
When the original shares get to the return level the venture capitalist sell out to the dividend seekers
The dividend seekers want maximum dividends so internal investment is curtailed.
Thus building the new fully automated production line that will make 3 times as many mowers at 2/3 the price does not happen in favour of pushing the suppliers for cheaper parts
Executives all have the same MBA qualifications and use the same flawed tools to determine the health of the company and of course their bonuses .
In many cases & B &S was one of these the executives hid the actual state of the company by using BS statistics and taking big payouts till it all came crashing down
Since the days when the financial system of company governance was set up things have changed drastically
Now a massive company like B & S would have 5 to 10 institutional investors that combined hold 50% or more of it's shares and these big shareholders do not care about B & S .
All they look at is the dividend to share ratio and because of their voting power, force directors into a maximum possible dividend situation where many times companies like B & S who were actually making anet loss borrowed money to pay a dividend .
Back when the share market was born, this happened because institutions like banks were limited to how much exposure they could have to things that did not guarantee a return because a bank is liable for the security of the depositers money.
So a "risky" finance product called a "share " was invented and a share was just that, if the company made a profit I get a percentage of that profit and if it made a loss I got nothing or my stake was diluted by selling more share which is of course a loss .
The job of a director was to ensure the company was using the shareholders funds prudently so as not to cause the shareholders to loose their money due to bad management .
However US courts have now changed that and apparently ensuring the dividend is the highest possible amount is not the prime objective even if that level of dividends will send the company broke

Businesses like B & S who used to actually make things sold off all of the manufacturing divisions in order to maintain high dividends and then bought in the parts they needed from the people they sold the various sections off to and used that to force down prices which is the sort of thing that those who believe a spread sheet is true think is a good thing.

It is not and eventually B & S had nothing left to sell and was making 10% gross profit in place of 80% gross profit on every engine .

The same thing happens in the auto industry and while this does keep ticket prices low, it weakens the business to the point that innovation stops and the quality of the product that the consumer purchases declines to the point that nothing is true value for money any more .

MBA'steach the future managers that workers are not people which lives, houses ,children & loans but dehumanizes them into "variable units of production" so when B & S got taken over by the finance company they had no problems shifting production to a new state because the hourly rates for the variable units of production were 5.7% lower in that state , and they will have no problem shifting all production to China, India , Africa or any where else where the labour rates for the variable units of production + freight are lower than the cost of the variable units of production in their home country ( and that includes Aust ) .

So now the system is broken and has been broken ever since the "greed is good" managements of the 80's compounded by ever reducing oversight by governments who value donations to the party, personal kick backs higher than the well being of the population .

The same Wall St thieves who brought us the GFC in the 90's are all still there stuffing their pockets with your money because governments keep on interveining in the system that you expouse as being so good.
All of those banks that just failed should have been allowed to fail & go broke
All of the managers who made a mess of things should be facing the courts and all of the share holders should have lost all their money .
The only government intervention should have been was to protect the depositers money, take every remaining cent out of the failed banks & place it with a better run one

Currently we basically have a non functioning government in Washington DC due to all the infighting. And our states are not much behind. Until they stop the infighting, sit down, and actually work together things are going to stay in a mess.

Heck I can't even get the IRS to do their job, I have been owe refunds for the last three years. I finally got a refund from 2020 last month. They are still owing over $1500 to me. They come after you if you don't pay but us taxpayers are not paid when they owe us or at least I am not and they don't care. Can't even talk to real person at the IRS about this either.

BTW why keep you money in a bank in the first place? So they can pay you very little interest and charge high interest to the ones that need loans. My current bank will not even give me an application for a credit card. Website says apply online but there is no place to do it. I walk in the other day and ask for an application and teller say they don't give out applications. Have to talk and it will be at least 30 minutes before someone can even do that. Then how in the heck they provide you a CC in the first place?

Every country has its problems... we are not technologically advanced, but our agribusiness is excellent and the current government is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs... do you see where this is going?
With a democratic narrative that is better for the population, they take upon themselves the mission of taking care of citizens without asking if they want to, and they reduce initiatives and increase egalitarian poverty, but fill the pockets of the "comrades" around... and the population gets used to this situation and when they wake up they are already cubanized, venezualized, etc...
I want to go to Liechtenstein, but only carrying the sun and the beach from here...

I managed to shoot in a good position...
You can see the ear with the oblong hole, the brake rod and the clutch belt.

In reality, the start of the brake will depend on adjusting the distance between the disc and the brake pads, which is regulated (in my case) by the central screw and on the threaded rod for others.

Looking for a better angle to shoot, I noticed that the #64 axle (pedal) could come out without too much trouble by removing 4 bolts from the rack and 2 from the bottom bushing of the steering wheel shaft... the only remaining slack will go away!


... but I will have to remove spring #161 again...

I made a cape to put on the end, but it won't last long, because this piece (#188) has three movements and should be like #202, with pivots.

I bought these spherical terminals to modify the drag links to be adjustable and two more smaller ones to see if I can improve the #188... I'm waiting for it to arrive...

It arrived!
A few minutes, while filming the deck.



Mas agora só semana que vem...