Abby's Guide to Outdoor Power Equipment (Lawn Mowers, Snow Blowers, Chain Saws and more)
Username Password
Discussions Reviews More Guides
Abby’s Guide > Outdoor Power Equipment (Lawn Mowers, Snow Blowers, Chain Saws and more) > Discussions > Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!

Outdoor Power Equipment (Lawn Mowers, Snow Blowers, Chain Saws and more) Discussions

Search For:
jrtrebor


Location: Michigan - 3 hours north of Chicago on the lake
Joined: Feb 10, 2010
Points: 535

Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Original Message   Feb 23, 2013 10:22 pm
Well I couldn't let it go.
It was just bugging me why the thing was so pitiful when it came to it's throwing distance.
So a few days ago I removed the steel that formed the center hub around the auger shaft.
Then made plates to support the center of the paddles and welded them in place.
Now it looks like most of the other Toro SS blowers out there.

Tried it out, and it really didn't make much if any difference in the distance.
And it had no effect on the engine performance.
So back into the garage we went.
Decided there was only one more thing to modify.
So I removed the stock pulley and replaced it with a stock pulley from another Toro SS.
Most of the pulley's are the same. But I think it may have come off a CCR 2000.
The stock SC pulley is 7 1/2" in diameter.
The replacement one is just a little less than 6" call it 5 7/8"
So a full 1 1/2" smaller.

Now the blower is set up just like most other Toros out there and the impeller
will be running at the same RPM as those blowers.

The really good news was that after I measured what new belt length I was going to need.
I found a great and helpful belt supplier on line.
vbeltsupply.com
I gave them the measurements told them what I needed and they said no problem.
$21.00 ($10 for the belt $11 shipping) and four hours later it was on it's way.
I should get it Monday afternoon.  So by Monday night I should know something.
It will be interesting to see how the added auger RPM directly effects the throwing distance.
And how the engine responds.  Removing the center hub steel plates probably dropped off
about 6 or seven pounds.  We'll see!

 


Replies: 19 - 28 of 28Next page of topicsPreviousAllView as Outline
hirschallan


If it aint broke don't fix it !!


Location: Northern Hills of NY
Joined: Aug 25, 2005
Points: 316

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #19   Feb 26, 2013 2:06 am
I think the main difference is very simple. The SC is like a moving shovel.The paddles just get the snow into the machine without any direction only relying on the funnel action in the back to get it out. That's where the problem is, it loses velocity as it gets rearranged at the funnel stage where the the snow so to speak crashes trying to exit. On the other hand, the CRAFTSMAN has a real auger set up where the snow moves from the right and from the left and meet in the center. The two snow streams merge as one focused stream and are not disturbed by a funnel action in the rear so when the snow hits the small flat area it merely continues the stream effect and gets out with the velocity of the paddle. When conditions are right it will really fly.

borat


Joined: Nov 10, 2007
Points: 2692

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #20   Feb 26, 2013 9:00 am
Hirschallan:

The only problem with that theory is that the smaller Toro SS machines pump snow very effectively and toss it quite a distance as well.   The only way my Craftsman/Murray machines surpass the Toro 221 is by considerable increase in rpm.  Jacked up, they're hard to beat.  I doubt that there's a stock SS machine built that can match an "improved" Craftsman/Murray. 
This message was modified Feb 26, 2013 by borat
jrtrebor


Location: Michigan - 3 hours north of Chicago on the lake
Joined: Feb 10, 2010
Points: 535

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #21   Feb 26, 2013 11:06 am
It think in designing the SC Toro tried, or was trying to design a machine.
That would have the snow moving, or snow processing capacity of a 2 stage.
Unfortunately what they seem to have wound up with.  Is simply a large SS machine
with a poor throwing distance.

My thought is this.  The 210R that I have has no problem handling 10 maybe 12"
of average weight snow.  It will throw it twice as far as the SC.
And although SS machines can be used for greater depths.  That really is not what they are designed for.
If your working with those kinds of depths on a regular basis. Your really needing a 2 stage anyway.

 Taking into consideration that my 210R or the 421
have only a 2 1/4" smaller bucket opening. It seems to me that the additional
2Hp of SC engine would have had enough power to handle the increased snow
from a wider bucket.  So why not just forget about building a SS blower that can maybe
handle 18" of snow volume.  Why add a third paddle to make that possible.  When the trade off seems to be
 a sizeable drop in throwing distance.  What they ended up with, is a blower that won't complete with a
2 stage.  And a blower that won't throw as well as some of their other Single Stages.
When it's being used in snow depths of 2 - 8"
I'm not saying that a long throwing distance is all that matters.  Because it's not.
But having an average throwing distance of at least 10 - 12' is an important performance factor.
Simply having a 24" SS blower with adequate power and a decent throwing distance.
Would still have given Toro a blower that no one else was offering.
Who cares if The SC will handle 18" of snow more easily than another SS blower.
If it won't throw it clear off your driveway.  Then what advantage does it really have
over a 210R, 421QR.
The Toro Power Curve designed augers with two paddles work extremely well.
The newer model SS blowers those including the 4 cycle engine. Have no problem
handling 8 - 12" of the right kind of snow.  I think Toro tried to fix or change something that
was working fine the way it was. Meaning they added a third paddle.



borat


Joined: Nov 10, 2007
Points: 2692

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #22   Feb 26, 2013 1:28 pm
It certainly does sound like a bit of a paradox.  Basically a nieche machine with no nieche.   Might be handy in situations where the snow must be thrown foward and rethrown in the same direction due to limited confines.  Sort of like a sidewalk between closely spaced houses.   Otherwise, I'd be going with a 221/421 or similar SS machine for most jobs and having a dual stage for the situations that overwhelm the SS.
aa335


Joined: Nov 29, 2008
Points: 2394

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #23   Feb 26, 2013 2:46 pm
jrtrebor wrote:
It think in designing the SC Toro tried, or was trying to design a machine.
That would have the snow moving, or snow processing capacity of a 2 stage.
Unfortunately what they seem to have wound up with.  Is simply a large SS machine
with a poor throwing distance.

......

 I think Toro tried to fix or change something that
was working fine the way it was. Meaning they added a third paddle.

While the SC Is a failure in execution, it's concept is plausible as a tough single stage machine that isn't shy to take on EOD piles.

To Toro's credit though, I do admire their ingenuity in the snowblower market.  Other companies are more conservative, they refine on working products, but do not take risk in out of the box thinking, basically putting in larger engines, pulleys systems, and impellers, but the overall design remains fairly the same.  For Toro, the gas powered shovel, the drum auger on two stage machines, and the Powershift designs are out of the box risk taking approaches.  Some of these designs come and go, however, Toro has perfected the Powercurve rotors found in today's SS machines and are frequently copied.  I love the Powercurve rotors design.  It's simple, lightweight, cheap to maintain.  Best of all, it doesn't sap too much power from the engine and the throwing distance is impressive.

I have a place for a SS and one for a 2 stage machine.  The Snow Commander will never replace both of these.  If I were to keep just one machine, it will be the single stage Toro 421QE.  I am more capable with a shovel and a 421QE combination, more so than a Snow Commander by itself.
Bill_H


Location: Maine
Joined: Jan 12, 2008
Points: 354

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #24   Feb 26, 2013 3:39 pm
aa335 wrote:
The 3 paddle system is like a having more fine tooth on a hack saw.  It takes smaller bites off hard snow more effectively.  The trade off is distance.

By removing the center hub pieces, I think you may be defeating the original design intent, which is to limit the snow ingested by the paddles.  The hub and the paddles creates small compartments to collect snow, no more than that.  The amount of snow it takes in, the same amount gets propelled upward.  Also, the center hub pieces acts like a flywheel, to keep the rpm consistent and not bump up and down under load.


Totally agree here. The hub pieces prevent snow from being picked up that won't be thrown, and the three blades also result in less weight of snow to throw per blade per revolution. I was also thinking of the flywheel effect, but still wondering if that advantage overcomes the additional mass that must be brought up to speed. The primary thing affecting distance is the speed at the part of the blade that has the most snow on it, combined with any frictional losses caused by bouncing off the chute at an extreme angle. At the center the speed is so low it may not even be able to clear itself, aside from the effects of gravity and vibration. Another important thing to consider is the gap between the blade and the bucket - sort of like what a Clarence kit on a 2 stage overcomes.

Who the hell let all the morning people run things?
jrtrebor


Location: Michigan - 3 hours north of Chicago on the lake
Joined: Feb 10, 2010
Points: 535

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #25   Feb 26, 2013 5:16 pm
Bill_H wrote:
Totally agree here. The hub pieces prevent snow from being picked up that won't be thrown, and the three blades also result in less weight of snow to throw per blade per revolution. I was also thinking of the flywheel effect, but still wondering if that advantage overcomes the additional mass that must be brought up to speed. The primary thing affecting distance is the speed at the part of the blade that has the most snow on it, combined with any frictional losses caused by bouncing off the chute at an extreme angle. At the center the speed is so low it may not even be able to clear itself, aside from the effects of gravity and vibration. Another important thing to consider is the gap between the blade and the bucket - sort of like what a Clarence kit on a 2 stage overcomes.
Snow never remains in the center of the bucket around the shaft.  For the simple reason that snow is always being pushed into
the bucket as the blower moves forward.  The snow is always being forced or pushed to the back of the bucket by the incoming snow.
Until you stop pushing the blower forward. 

I don't really understand why Toro felt the hub pieces were needed.  All they had to do was look at the performance of their other
models that don't have hubs. e.g. the 210R, 421, 621 and many others.  Why do those models perform so well without hubs?

Why add the hub and a third paddle.
In my opinion it's simply a flawed design.

But I do give Toro credit for some of the other innovations on the SC.
The tilting feature that let you control the amount of forward pull works very well.
The larger diameter and wider tires makes it much easier to push and pull.
And the extra pair of wheel underneath comes in handy when just moving the blower around.

MN_Runner


Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Joined: Dec 5, 2010
Points: 618

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #26   Feb 26, 2013 5:24 pm
So are you ready to give up on this low performing machine and move on to a next project?
jrtrebor


Location: Michigan - 3 hours north of Chicago on the lake
Joined: Feb 10, 2010
Points: 535

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #27   Feb 27, 2013 11:11 pm
MN_Runner wrote:
So are you ready to give up on this low performing machine and move on to a next project?

LOL, That's a good question.
Everything that I've done to the blower so far can be easily undone.
And put back to stock.
I wouldn't mind taking off the third paddle and seeing how it performs with just two.
But that modification would be a little more difficult and time consuming to undue.
So I guess I'm done with it.
We got 8" of the wettest snow I've ever seen last night so I had it out again today.
The Toro 210R ran circles around it.  The only reason I still use it is that I love the powered chute
set up that I put on it. I do a few small commercial parking spots and it really helps out.
My 210R has a different chute rotation design that won't let me swap the set up off the SC.
Was thinking about buying a used CCR2000.  It has a chute crank that would except the powered chute motor.
Then I could pull the engine off the SC and put it in the 2000.
That would probably make a great machine.  Part out the SC sell the Suzuki engine out of the 2000
and maybe come close to breaking even. Also thought about trying to fit a Honda 6.5hp into a CCR2000.
 
It never ends!
aa335


Joined: Nov 29, 2008
Points: 2394

Re: Snow Commander... Throwing distance answers coming soon, I hope!
Reply #28   Feb 28, 2013 1:55 am
jrtrebor,

I like both plans you have for the CCR2000.  Although that Rtek engine from the SC has a longer crankshaft, that might be a challenge fitting into the compact CCR2000 chassis.   You may have to fabricate a adapter plate to move the engine 2 inches to the right.  I venture to say that CCR2000 will have quite an impressive throwing distance.  As far as putting a 6.5 hp Honda engine in the CCR2000, that sounds awesome if you can fit it in there.  The engine is quite larger than the Rtek.  If it does fit, I think that combo would make a good slush blower, just from looking at the closed auger assembly design and the torquey engine.


This message was modified Feb 28, 2013 by aa335
Replies: 19 - 28 of 28Next page of topicsPreviousAllView as Outline
Outdoor Power Equipment (Lawn Mowers, Snow Blowers, Chain Saws and more) Guide   •   Discussions  Reviews  
AbbysGuide.com   About Us   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Contact Us
Copyright 1998-2014 AbbysGuide.com. All rights reserved.
Site by Take 42