I recently bought a 77 powerwagon equipped with the dodge snow plow package. This system has the belt-driven hydraulic pump for the plow cylinders. Does anyone have a manual for this system? I need a part # for the pump. The pump ran dry and now does not build enough pressure to lift the plow. I read somewhere that these pumps are just a Chrysler model .94 power steering pump. I would really like to keep the belt-driven pump instead of retro-fitting with an electric one. Anybody have a part number for the .94 ps pumps?
sno fiter part #
- Status
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
I might try going to the Dodge dealer and finding the oldest guy behind the parts counter (Usually the manager) ... they usually know where all the old dusty catalogs and/or parts are.
I've never even seen a real-live Snow Commander, let alone know anything about them.
I've never even seen a real-live Snow Commander, let alone know anything about them.
Joined
·
1,232 Posts
Congratulations, friend! You're in command of possibly the most bulletproof snowplow system ever devised (I run a similar Fisher belt-drive setup on my Dodge). Post us a photo or two.
As far as part numbers, I'm not sure but I've heard a p.s. pump will work. You could also mount a Fisher pump on there, although you'll have to dig a little for the bracket. I can give you all those part numbers.
Check at plowsite.com, also call Stork's Automotive in Pennsylvania, they have a ton of old stuff there.
You're absolutely right to stick with the belt-drive, though...beats electric hands down, in my opinion.
A few pics of the rig. Note the 3lb Maxwell House coffee can that is now doing duty as the resevoir for the plow pump. The plow pump is mounted lower left, where the ps normally is. The ps pump is relocated to the top center. It has the large rad, the extra trans cooler, the clearance lites.The only thing it seems to be lacking, besides the proper resevoir, is the decals.
Attachments
You're absolutely right to stick with the belt-drive, though...beats electric hands down, in my opinion.
Other than there's more 'in-the-way' junk and weight under the hood, and loosing HP to the drive-line by having to run another pump...
Personally, I think the electric motor/pump that mounts to the (Detachable) plow is the way to go. And every plow manufacturer does it that way now. I guess that's the difference between 70's tech and 00's tech.
But .... Ya got what ya got, and if it WORKS, it doesn't matter... As long as it gets the snow out of the way....
Other than there's more 'in-the-way' junk and weight under the hood, and loosing HP to the drive-line by having to run another pump...
Personally, I think the electric motor/pump that mounts to the (Detachable) plow is the way to go. And every plow manufacturer does it that way now. I guess that's the difference between 70's tech and 00's tech.
But .... Ya got what ya got, and if it WORKS, it doesn't matter... As long as it gets the snow out of the way....
Joined
·
1,232 Posts
Actually, I spoke with a Fisher tech. about this last year. They abandoned belt-driven hydraulics out of necessity--with more and more stuff crammed in the engine compartment in the 1990s, there simply wasn't room anymore for the belt drive pump and reservoir. In his opinion, the belt drive was a superior, more reliable system and they would've stuck with it if it was practical. Of course all the marketing language from Fisher and others makes electronics sound like a quantum leap advance in technology that delivers better performance.
The blade does respond quicker and move faster with electronics. And maybe, as you suggest, Bherder, the extra pump robs the motor of a little power. But the load on the vehicle electrical system is pretty substantial with the electronic setup...and the fluid stored outside the engine compartment doesn't warm up as quickly or as much. There's a lot more maintenance involved with the electronic setup and more potential hassles...with belt drive, you pretty much adjust your belt tension, top off the reservoir and you're good to go.
And I'll take a closer look at your photos and post some of my setup.
Personally, I would take belt-drive anyday. Sometimes simpler is better.
I'll try to post the Snow Package section of the FSM tomorrow if I get time. And yes, it does say the .94 p.s. pump with external reservoir is correct. I believe you can get remans from Rock Auto for about $75. Not sure where you'd find new...
In his opinion, the belt drive was a superior, more reliable system and they would've stuck with it if it was practical.
I would say 'simple' .... Simple is not always bad, sometimes better, but not always. (Points in the dist were more 'simple' ... But not better)
Of course all the marketing language from Fisher and others makes electronics sound like a quantum leap advance in technology that delivers better performance.
It IS better. I've run plow with both. Outboard motor/pump is MUCH faster. (This counts when you're trying to not get hung up on the train-tracks..)
It's really NOT 'electronics', all it is, is an outboard motor/pump, with simple switches.
And maybe, as you suggest, Bherder, the extra pump robs the motor of a little power.
Yeah, it does.
But the load on the vehicle electrical system is pretty substantial with the electronic setup...
Not if you got a big-assed alt, and big enough gauge wire to handle it..
There's a lot more maintenance involved with the electronic setup and more potential hassles
Actually, there isn't. A broken hydralic hose is a lot more hassle (AND MESSY) than an electrical connection. An outboard electrical pump/motor is WAY quicker to change-out than an under-the-hood pump. Been there....
I would say 'simple' .... Simple is not always bad, sometimes better, but not always. (Points in the dist were more 'simple' ... But not better)
Of course all the marketing language from Fisher and others makes electronics sound like a quantum leap advance in technology that delivers better performance.
It IS better. I've run plow with both. Outboard motor/pump is MUCH faster. (This counts when you're trying to not get hung up on the train-tracks..)
It's really NOT 'electronics', all it is, is an outboard motor/pump, with simple switches.
And maybe, as you suggest, Bherder, the extra pump robs the motor of a little power.
Yeah, it does.
But the load on the vehicle electrical system is pretty substantial with the electronic setup...
Not if you got a big-assed alt, and big enough gauge wire to handle it..
There's a lot more maintenance involved with the electronic setup and more potential hassles
Actually, there isn't. A broken hydralic hose is a lot more hassle (AND MESSY) than an electrical connection. An outboard electrical pump/motor is WAY quicker to change-out than an under-the-hood pump. Been there....
Joined
·
1,232 Posts
Well, you've clearly settled on your opinion and I on mine (of course mine's not just opinion, it's Fact--heh, heh).
We could debate the specific points endlessly, doubt anybody here on the forum's much interested.
"Different strokes" as they say. Bottom line is, you set either one up correctly and keep it maintained, you're going to be just fine.
I've never actually owned the electric setup, but there are a number of professionals over on Plowsite.com who run both and prefer the belt-drive as more "bulletproof."
But back to the thread topic: pwgnplow, I'm posting the section of the '74 FSM describing the plow package (they called it the "Snow-Fiter" back then but it appears it didn't change much in 3 years). If you have any more questions, just ask, and please share your ideas and setup pics.
And here's a shot of my pump setup--this is the stock Fisher configuration:
![]()
We could debate the specific points endlessly, doubt anybody here on the forum's much interested.
"Different strokes" as they say. Bottom line is, you set either one up correctly and keep it maintained, you're going to be just fine.
I've never actually owned the electric setup, but there are a number of professionals over on Plowsite.com who run both and prefer the belt-drive as more "bulletproof."
But back to the thread topic: pwgnplow, I'm posting the section of the '74 FSM describing the plow package (they called it the "Snow-Fiter" back then but it appears it didn't change much in 3 years). If you have any more questions, just ask, and please share your ideas and setup pics.
And here's a shot of my pump setup--this is the stock Fisher configuration:
The alternator is going to be running regardless.
Joined
·
1,232 Posts
De nada.
It makes sense to me--no hose connection to keep on eye on, and takes up less space overall. I think Meyer may have had a similar pump. The Fisher pumps are about $200 new, but I've seen NOS stuff around for less. I need to pick up a spare myself. If you went that route you'd have to locate (or fabricate) a bracket--do-able, but would take some time.
Did you check over to Rock Auto? They have a couple reman. pumps with reservoirs listed for your truck. The AC Delco is part number 36717024 and says it replaces 36-6055, 88985349. Saginaw was the manufacturer of the .94 pump. I would guess one of those reman pumps at Rock Auto would work (the other brand is A1-Cardone). Both well under $100.
Joined
·
608 Posts
M-cook,Well, you've clearly settled on your opinion and I on mine (of course mine's not just opinion, it's Fact--heh, heh).
We could debate the specific points endlessly, doubt anybody here on the forum's much interested.
"Different strokes" as they say. Bottom line is, you set either one up correctly and keep it maintained, you're going to be just fine.
I've never actually owned the electric setup, but there are a number of professionals over on Plowsite.com who run both and prefer the belt-drive as more "bulletproof."
But back to the thread topic: pwgnplow, I'm posting the section of the '74 FSM describing the plow package (they called it the "Snow-Fiter" back then but it appears it didn't change much in 3 years). If you have any more questions, just ask, and please share your ideas and setup pics.
And here's a shot of my pump setup--this is the stock Fisher configuration:
![]()
That Fisher pump on yours looks just like an early-60s style Chrysler (Federal, perhaps?) P/S pump with an elongated reservoir. Interesting.
I notice that you use a fractional-horsepower (small engine-type) drive belt on that pump; I can tell from the green color. Is that what Fisher specified, or do you simply find that the system works best that way?
Jeff
Joined
·
1,232 Posts
I don't think I've seen those...I'll try to find out who makes the Fisher pumps. Interesting that they're still available new--Fisher belt driven systems were sold up into the early nineties, I believe, and people who have them are loathe to give them up.
Interesting you should notice that. When the plow was initially installed on my truck by a garage (they got a bunch of stuff wrong which I went through a lot trouble to correct, as you may remember from that crankshaft pulley ordeal this fall), they put one of those green belts on. Assuming that it was yet another mistake on their part, I checked with my contact at the Fisher tech. dept. about it. He said, no, in fact the green belts are preferred because they last longer. So that's what I've been using. Not sure exactly what the difference is, but it's clearly a different material.
The old fella down at the fire dept., who's been a GM wrench turner since the stone age, complained to me recently that belts made these days don't last nearly as long as they used to, and the same with hoses--anything rubber, he says, is inferior in recent years (he maintains the local school district's fleet of buses, so he changes a lot of them). You have any observations about belt life? I pretty much replace my rubber stuff every 4 years as preventive maintenance...probably overkill, but we all know a broken belt or hose can ruin your day quick...
Joined
·
608 Posts
M-cook,
I haven't noticed any unusual decrease in belt/hose life recently, though I believe that they are all now "Hecho en Chine". I get mine from NAPA which I believe sells Gates brand.
If the FHP belt works on your plow pump and Fisher recommends it, use it.
I was always taught that such belts were not designed for the sort of torque/RPM under which automotive applications could put them. However, they must be pretty tough to withstand the beating which they get driving trannys and PTOs on power equipment, so I don't really see why they should give you a problem when tasked with the job of driving your pump.
Jeff
I haven't noticed any unusual decrease in belt/hose life recently, though I believe that they are all now "Hecho en Chine". I get mine from NAPA which I believe sells Gates brand.
If the FHP belt works on your plow pump and Fisher recommends it, use it.
I was always taught that such belts were not designed for the sort of torque/RPM under which automotive applications could put them. However, they must be pretty tough to withstand the beating which they get driving trannys and PTOs on power equipment, so I don't really see why they should give you a problem when tasked with the job of driving your pump.
Jeff
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
