Kaye2
Guest
Been wrong before but the 3500 and 670T are one in the same except for age and maybe hp rating. The difference in the long and short tail would be quite a bit more cleaning capacity with the extra length.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Combines l2 short long shoe
posum
Guest
Metric designations were adopted in 1978 670-T would be 6 cylinder 7.0 liter T for turbo---same engine as earlier 3500 series. Shoe box may swapped out for long shoe I thinkIJIJ Did this on my partner's l-3; but this was long shoe for long shoe from salvage yard. but I would think it would work if you could find one in good shape.
sidekick
Guest
Not an authority here but I'd say the 3500's all had piston cooling from jet on top of main brg and sometime the 670's went to rifle drilled rods with a nozzle above the wrist pin for cooling.Guessing the 3500's had the smaller wrist pins which were enlarged for 670's.Same bore and stroke.I don't think the differences would matter for longevity with proper service_maintainence.
Peteguy
Guest
Yes, 3500_670T is basically one in the same: there may be slight improvements on the 670, but in a nutshell, yes, same engine. The long shoe can be swapped in quite easily. I think it was even a field installed update kit. We have ran across a few l's with long shoes here in KS. Really, the whole shoe is less than 6 inches longer, IMO, it is closer to 3 or 4 inches longer. We have not noticed much increase capacity-wise, surely irrigated crops would allow the long shoe to shine. We personally like the short, as it holds up better. the long tends to crack out at the rear holes more often. Also, we do not see much capacity loss, but we run a rigid and a petersen adjustable air foil chaffers in our short shoe l2's, so that may explain it. Good luck!