3cx 11 Crack Keygen Game

Alright, I wanted to give 3CX a spin in order to form my own opinion about the system. The install was simple.

I spun up a Server 2012 R2 VM with Core + GUI and joined it to my domain. I then installed 3CX and it turned on the IIS role and configured itself with no problems. It took me a minute to figure out how to add a customer VoIP provider (voip.ms) because I was looking at the menu on the left and the main box on the right. I missed the header strip above each page at first, but after I found it, that went smooth. I like how it sets up with their own STUN server easily for extensions as my server was in a collocation space and my phone was in my home office.

I have a 86 3cx i dont see any filter or screen. Only thing is see on it is a drain on the pan. Does anyone know if it. Re: 1985 JCB 3cx transmission no filter??? In reply to jcb3cx, 23:34:54. WOuld u know where to find the serial numbers on this transmission? I hope i didn't fry the transmission i. Disc Park Brake (JCB Part No. The part may look different from picture due to part being sourced from different manufacturer but will be of same high quality. If no JCB Machine Serial Number. eBay!

This meant I would not need to deal with a VPN, simply port forwarded a couple ports. I had to use google to figure out how to use the autoprovisioning with a Yealink T38, but again it only took a minute. After that I rebooted the phone and was making calls.

Things went south from there. I had already noticed that I was unable to select email delivery for my voicemail.

Next I noticed when I hit the DND soft key, my phone showed DND but 3CX status said DND was off, I tried to hit *61 manually and was promptly told that this is not a feature available in 3CX Free edition. Next I wanted to make a default IVR simply saying Press 1 for Jared Press 2 for Bob, etc. Nope sorry that feature is not available in Free Edition. At that point I said screw it and decided to type up this post. I will be removing the VM tomorrow.

We tried it too. The free edition was too crippled for anything but a basic calling demo. Maybe okay for home use.

But I can't imagine any business using it. It is truly only for the desperate. The paid version too wasn't up to par with other options. Much better, but lacked some connectivity and extensibility options and was too hard to use and costs too much in licensing even imagining that it were free. We found that 3CX was too costly and too difficult to manage and configure and too inflexible to realistically 'bubble to the top' in nearly any case. We tried it too.

The free edition was too crippled for anything but a basic calling demo. Maybe okay for home use. But I can't imagine any business using it. It is truly only for the desperate. The paid version too wasn't up to par with other options.

Much better, but lacked some connectivity and extensibility options and was too hard to use and costs too much in licensing even imagining that it were free. We found that 3CX was too costly and too difficult to manage and configure and too inflexible to realistically 'bubble to the top' in nearly any case. Alex4926 wrote: Actually, I have to agree with 3CX. DST changes on different dates in different parts of the world A quick browse on shows a general consensus in the world on Sundays. Iran does it on specified dates. Greenland on Saturday, Palestine and Libya on Friday. So most of the world uses specified Sundays.

You write your programs for the majority of users and add advanced options for the minority. Yealink actually does this well in their phones.

This screen shot was from a push of my 3CX test so everything is disabled. But you get the idea.

You know there is a demo key available for Version 11 and Version 12 that unlocks all the PAID features for testing. We have HUNDREDS of customers on 3CX in cloud. We love it and our customers almost all have very good things to say (no one solution will make everyone happy). It has all the features In the paid edition that customers look for. We have several call center customers on 3CX PRO edition with a power dialer and campaigner solution that in almost every other system we looked out was extremely cost prohibitive. We tested 42 different software based voip platforms and felt very confident in out selection of 3CX and 3CX Multiteant as our primary premise and cloud solution.

I would definitely recommend getting a demo key to test a full version. If you need help getting one let me know. The free edition does look like more of a demo-ish sort of thing. And quite crippled. I would think you would really need a trial of one of the higher versions to evaluate it well.

Its certainly not a 'free' product in the same sense all FreePBX / asterisk based distros are, but its not open source so I can't really fault them for trying to make sure people buy the product. They have to get paid somehow. I am considering it in case my staged elastix box does not work out.

It certainly looks easy to configure and manage. I'd prefer to use a Linux box rather than a Windows box. System uptime will likely be better on Linux, and things like full system backups are pretty easy with Linux (tar is way faster and easier than anything you can do with VSS in Windows).

If you don't have command line knowledge though, basic system administration can be difficult - not necessarily with the PBX related stuff, but for instance installing a new NIC. It might not work. I had to download an compile the drivers myself. And of course it didn't work right, and I had to make a small change than recompile, etc etc. There aren't many Windows phone systems out there, so 3CX definitely has a niche. Nick3198 wrote: The free edition does look like more of a demo-ish sort of thing.

And quite crippled. I would think you would really need a trial of one of the higher versions to evaluate it well. Its certainly not a 'free' product in the same sense all FreePBX / asterisk based distros are, but its not open source so I can't really fault them for trying to make sure people buy the product. They have to get paid somehow. Yes it is not open source, but I think that too many basic calling features are missing to make the free edition worth anything. A lot of small places can easily just use an Asterisk distro and save the costs of the paid version all together.

As long as you have a VM infrastructure and a way to backup the VM level there is so little needing done with the underlying OS that it just makes sense. Nick3198 wrote: There aren't many Windows phone systems out there, so 3CX definitely has a niche. That is true.

I don't disagree that asterisk offers a better value. It is after all, free. Which was more or less my point. Its hard to beat free, provided you get what you need from it.

What I was getting at is that open source and closed source companies have different business models, and I don't think you can really fault either one of them for it. Closed source projects have to employ programmers, and they have to make money to make up for this. It just isn't in their best interest to make a usable product that is also free. Companies that are open source have a different agenda. They want to get paid for support, training, etc. This fits, because usually open source project support forums are filled mostly with people asking questions and not many (qualified people) answering. The paid support is there to give you real and qualified answers.

Depending on the specific application / project, you might spend more money on an open source project over a closed source one. I'm not saying that is true with Elastix - I honestly have no idea yet. I'm still doing a lot of work to get off the ground here, and I haven't made up my mind. I'll be perfectly honest. Elastix and the other asterisk distros have quite a few rough edges. So far, nothing major, but there were a lot of things that took quite some time to get figured out. I had a yum update wipe overwrite my amprotal.conf file, I had to run amportal chown after the last update.

You talked about VM's, but getting elastix to run in a Hyper-V VM is not easy with a 2.4.iso. You have to install into virtualbox and rebuild the ramdisk image (mkinitrd).

Or, you can just install directly from 2.3 and do a yum update. Additionally, the timing in a host based VM sort of sucks with Linux, and they still haven't ironed out all the issues there (but its much better than it was). To some people, these little things are major headaches. I've dealt with most of them OK, and I've put up with them because it is free. On the other hand, however, if I were to run in to too many bugs, or important unsolvable bugs. I'd throw my hands up in the air, say f*** it, and pay for something like switchvox or 3cx, provided it worked without too many hiccups.

Nick3198 wrote: I'll be perfectly honest. Elastix and the other asterisk distros have quite a few rough edges. So far, nothing major, but there were a lot of things that took quite some time to get figured out. I had a yum update wipe overwrite my amprotal.conf file, I had to run amportal chown after the last update.

You talked about VM's, but getting elastix to run in a Hyper-V VM is not easy with a 2.4.iso. You have to install into virtualbox and rebuild the ramdisk image (mkinitrd). Or, you can just install directly from 2.3 and do a yum update. Additionally, the timing in a host based VM sort of sucks with Linux, and they still haven't ironed out all the issues there (but its much better than it was). To some people, these little things are major headaches.

I've dealt with most of them OK, and I've put up with them because it is free. On the other hand, however, if I were to run in to too many bugs, or important unsolvable bugs. I'd throw my hands up in the air, say f*** it, and pay for something like switchvox or 3cx, provided it worked without too many hiccups. The fact that you even tried to perform a yum update is defeating the purpose of Elastix. Use PBX in a Flash (what I use for my company) or raw FreePBX if you are going to go this route. The point of things like Elastix is that you should not be touching these parts of the system. Yes, you can, but generally should not need to for the majority of installations.

As for using Hyper-V for your Elastix install, I have no idea what you are doing wrong. I installed it on my Server 2012 test box with no issues. Hmm no, I did have an issue with the fact that I forgot that Hyper-V creates IDE disks by default. Once I made sure to create a SCSI disk everything worked fine. George Bardissi wrote: Its all preference.

3CX is definitely widely used out there. We prefer it but we are windows guys not linux guys.

3CX is widely used as a non-comparative evaluation. It is very little used in comparison to Asterisk, of course.

Why do Windows people prefer it? I've wondered this for a while. To use Elastix requires no Linux experience or exposure as this is an appliance - everything is exposed only through the web interface. Like any appliance, the purpose is to make things easier than doing management of an app plus the OS. Sure if you want to drop to Linux you can, but Elastix does not expect you to do that.

Jared Busch wrote: Nick3198 wrote: I'll be perfectly honest. Elastix and the other asterisk distros have quite a few rough edges. So far, nothing major, but there were a lot of things that took quite some time to get figured out. I had a yum update wipe overwrite my amprotal.conf file, I had to run amportal chown after the last update. You talked about VM's, but getting elastix to run in a Hyper-V VM is not easy with a 2.4.iso.

You have to install into virtualbox and rebuild the ramdisk image (mkinitrd). Or, you can just install directly from 2.3 and do a yum update.

Additionally, the timing in a host based VM sort of sucks with Linux, and they still haven't ironed out all the issues there (but its much better than it was). To some people, these little things are major headaches. I've dealt with most of them OK, and I've put up with them because it is free. On the other hand, however, if I were to run in to too many bugs, or important unsolvable bugs. I'd throw my hands up in the air, say f*** it, and pay for something like switchvox or 3cx, provided it worked without too many hiccups. The fact that you even tried to perform a yum update is defeating the purpose of Elastix.

Use PBX in a Flash (what I use for my company) or raw FreePBX if you are going to go this route. The point of things like Elastix is that you should not be touching these parts of the system.

Yes, you can, but generally should not need to for the majority of installations. As for using Hyper-V for your Elastix install, I have no idea what you are doing wrong. I installed it on my Server 2012 test box with no issues.

Hmm no, I did have an issue with the fact that I forgot that Hyper-V creates IDE disks by default. Once I made sure to create a SCSI disk everything worked fine. I'm not sure why you are saying that. PBXIAF, FreePBX (distro) and Elastix are extremely similar.

Elastix simply provides an additional front end to FreePBX (which is a front end for asterisk), along with a few other services. Elastix = Freepbx 2.8, at least for the PBX related stuff. The only real difference is who is maintaining it, and how they choose to deploy it.

I agree that normally you'd want to avoid updating a production server. But when staging a server for testing, which hopefully you'd do before you actually deployed it, I don't really see an issue with it. There were some rather severe security bugs afflicting a couple of the modules and asterisk itself, so personally I wanted the patches/updates to circumvent these issues. Obviously, there were issues with the update process. And I chose to work through them rather than default back to the last stable release from almost a year ago.

That was just my prerogative. That's the whole point of staging before you deploy. My point though, was that obviously no one bothered to adequately test these things before they put it into the elastix repo. Its a stark difference from most commercial software.

It doesn't make elastix bad, and obviously it was my choice to update, but its like I said - rough edges. I don't think updating a year old software is really unreasonable, and the failures present seemed to be quite basic and easily preventable (just not obvious to an asterisk novice). Anyways, I guess what I'm getting at is that you can't just brush off the problems I had and say 'oh you shouldn't have done that'.

The maintainers of Elastix create the distro, control what updates I see, mark the updates as 'stable' and release them. If the updates are important to me, and they effectively break the system, then that really isn't on me. It just means the update process requires the user to tinker and fix things.

Don't get me wrong. In the overall scheme of things, if I do use a FreePBX+asterisk based system like Elastix, I can chalk it up as a learning experience. Since it is open source, I came in expecting some issues like this. It still represents the best value to me so far, so I'm still trying to make it work. The Elastix portion of the endeavor hasn't been that bad so far - I've been able to get over these issues I had. I'm just pointing out that such things do exist, and it did require some command line work.

As far as Hyper-V goes, its apparently a known bug, at least with Server 2008 Server 2012 has better emulation for its SCSI HD controllers, and better Linux support. That is probably why you didn't have problems. The timing in most host based VM's is still awful though. If you do a dahdi_test, you will not stay above the suggested 99.975%. I hear bare-metal hypervisors do better though (i.e. Nick3198 wrote: I'm not sure why you are saying that.

PBXIAF, FreePBX (distro) and Elastix are extremely similar. Elastix simply provides an additional front end to FreePBX (which is a front end for asterisk), along with a few other services.

Elastix = Freepbx 2.8, at least for the PBX related stuff. The only real difference is who is maintaining it, and how they choose to deploy it.

I agree that normally you'd want to avoid updating a production server. But when staging a server for testing, which hopefully you'd do before you actually deployed it, I don't really see an issue with it. There were some rather severe security bugs afflicting a couple of the modules and asterisk itself, so personally I wanted the patches/updates to circumvent these issues. Obviously, there were issues with the update process. And I chose to work through them rather than default back to the last stable release from almost a year ago.

That was just my prerogative. That's the whole point of staging before you deploy. My point though, was that obviously no one bothered to adequately test these things before they put it into the elastix repo. Its a stark difference from most commercial software. It doesn't make elastix bad, and obviously it was my choice to update, but its like I said - rough edges. I don't think updating a year old software is really unreasonable, and the failures present seemed to be quite basic and easily preventable (just not obvious to an asterisk novice). Anyways, I guess what I'm getting at is that you can't just brush off the problems I had and say 'oh you shouldn't have done that'.

The maintainers of Elastix create the distro, control what updates I see, mark the updates as 'stable' and release them. If the updates are important to me, and they effectively break the system, then that really isn't on me. It just means the update process requires the user to tinker and fix things. Don't get me wrong. In the overall scheme of things, if I do use a FreePBX+asterisk based system like Elastix, I can chalk it up as a learning experience. Since it is open source, I came in expecting some issues like this.

It still represents the best value to me so far, so I'm still trying to make it work. The Elastix portion of the endeavor hasn't been that bad so far - I've been able to get over these issues I had. I'm just pointing out that such things do exist, and it did require some command line work. As far as Hyper-V goes, its apparently a known bug, at least with Server 2008 Server 2012 has better emulation for its SCSI HD controllers, and better Linux support. That is probably why you didn't have problems. The timing in most host based VM's is still awful though. If you do a dahdi_test, you will not stay above the suggested 99.975%.

I hear bare-metal hypervisors do better though (i.e. Hyper-V is a Type I hypervisor same as ESXi and Citrix.

If you are gong to test on Hyper-V from Server 2008, you should not compare to ESXi 5.x. Hyper-V Server 2012 is as free as is ESXi and Citrix's solutions. As for DAHDI, it is not relevant as you are not going to be passing hardware through it in the first place.

Almost no legacy POTS gear (the only thing you need dahdi for) is supported for hypervisor hardware pass through. That is why the first answer is always to use a gateway device that connects back to the PBX with SIP. On the security front, I will agree with you that it could be better, but that is the price you pay for ANY packaged system. You will always have to wait for the system developers to release a patch. The fact that Elastix allows you to get around it at your own risk is simply a bonus for those with the knowledge and skills.

Additionally, most of the security issues are mitigated if your PBX is behind a secure external firewall (not just locked down with IPTABLES) as it should be. If you practice good security and restrict the inbound connections that you do have to open (SIP/RTP) to the host IP then you have again mitigated the risk at a level prior to the PBX itself. Finally, PBX in a Flash and Elastix are completely different concepts.

Elastix is designed as an appliance that you never do anything to outside of the web interface. PBX in a Flash on the other hand is designed to get you up and running with the basics only on the understanding that you can/will set up all the details yourself.

Yes they are both wrappers on FreePBX at a high level, but that does not mean they are the same thing. Jared Busch wrote: Nick3198 wrote: I'm not sure why you are saying that. PBXIAF, FreePBX (distro) and Elastix are extremely similar. Elastix simply provides an additional front end to FreePBX (which is a front end for asterisk), along with a few other services.

Elastix = Freepbx 2.8, at least for the PBX related stuff. The only real difference is who is maintaining it, and how they choose to deploy it. I agree that normally you'd want to avoid updating a production server.

But when staging a server for testing, which hopefully you'd do before you actually deployed it, I don't really see an issue with it. There were some rather severe security bugs afflicting a couple of the modules and asterisk itself, so personally I wanted the patches/updates to circumvent these issues.

Obviously, there were issues with the update process. And I chose to work through them rather than default back to the last stable release from almost a year ago. That was just my prerogative. That's the whole point of staging before you deploy. My point though, was that obviously no one bothered to adequately test these things before they put it into the elastix repo. Its a stark difference from most commercial software.

It doesn't make elastix bad, and obviously it was my choice to update, but its like I said - rough edges. I don't think updating a year old software is really unreasonable, and the failures present seemed to be quite basic and easily preventable (just not obvious to an asterisk novice).

Anyways, I guess what I'm getting at is that you can't just brush off the problems I had and say 'oh you shouldn't have done that'. The maintainers of Elastix create the distro, control what updates I see, mark the updates as 'stable' and release them. If the updates are important to me, and they effectively break the system, then that really isn't on me. It just means the update process requires the user to tinker and fix things. Don't get me wrong. In the overall scheme of things, if I do use a FreePBX+asterisk based system like Elastix, I can chalk it up as a learning experience. Since it is open source, I came in expecting some issues like this.

It still represents the best value to me so far, so I'm still trying to make it work. The Elastix portion of the endeavor hasn't been that bad so far - I've been able to get over these issues I had.

I'm just pointing out that such things do exist, and it did require some command line work. As far as Hyper-V goes, its apparently a known bug, at least with Server 2008 Server 2012 has better emulation for its SCSI HD controllers, and better Linux support. That is probably why you didn't have problems. The timing in most host based VM's is still awful though. If you do a dahdi_test, you will not stay above the suggested 99.975%. I hear bare-metal hypervisors do better though (i.e.

Hyper-V is a Type I hypervisor same as ESXi and Citrix. If you are gong to test on Hyper-V from Server 2008, you should not compare to ESXi 5.x.

Hyper-V Server 2012 is as free as is ESXi and Citrix's solutions. As for DAHDI, it is not relevant as you are not going to be passing hardware through it in the first place. Almost no legacy POTS gear (the only thing you need dahdi for) is supported for hypervisor hardware pass through.

That is why the first answer is always to use a gateway device that connects back to the PBX with SIP. On the security front, I will agree with you that it could be better, but that is the price you pay for ANY packaged system.

You will always have to wait for the system developers to release a patch. The fact that Elastix allows you to get around it at your own risk is simply a bonus for those with the knowledge and skills. Additionally, most of the security issues are mitigated if your PBX is behind a secure external firewall (not just locked down with IPTABLES) as it should be. If you practice good security and restrict the inbound connections that you do have to open (SIP/RTP) to the host IP then you have again mitigated the risk at a level prior to the PBX itself.

Finally, PBX in a Flash and Elastix are completely different concepts. Elastix is designed as an appliance that you never do anything to outside of the web interface. PBX in a Flash on the other hand is designed to get you up and running with the basics only on the understanding that you can/will set up all the details yourself. Yes they are both wrappers on FreePBX at a high level, but that does not mean they are the same thing. Yes I suppose comparing Hyper-V within 2008 and Esxi is not fair. Sure Hyper-V in server 2008 still technically has direct access to the hardware, but the host OS also has priority and quite a few things suffer as a result.

I guess I should have said 'host dependent' instead of 'host based'. I suppose you could run the (free) standalone Hyper-V server in core mode, but honestly Hyper-V's value to me is only when running alongside the standard Windows OS. As far as dahdi goes, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it still used for conferences and IVRs? Sierra Hull Secrets Rarity. In terms of security, I place very high importance on it.

I will be the first one to agree that you should have proper network protection. But even leaving SIP open can lead to potential vulnderabilities: The same is probably true even with proprietary vendors, but you probably won't have too many of those bugs publicly reported. The bottom line is that, personally, I don't see this as some 'optional' thing. For my purposes, its a requirement. Honestly, I think it should at least be seriously considered as a requirement for everyone else who deploys *any* phone system. Security in layers is necessary. Patching the host OS and PBX is part of that.

As far as PBXIAF, I'm still not sure I really follow you. Are you talking from in terms of the Elastix maintainer's philosophy or something like that?

To be perfectly honest, installing PBXIAF was basically the same experience as Elastix. I didn't really have to know more or less to do the same thing. The only major difference was the interface, where Elastix is more like the old FreePBX menus.

I was running the same version of asterisk, making extensions and setting up trunks. Once you navigate to the correct spot, its not even all that dissimilar. Edited Oct 14, 2013 at 1:44 UTC. Nick3198 wrote: In terms of security, I place very high importance on it.

I will be the first one to agree that you should have proper network protection. But even leaving SIP open can lead to potential vulnderabilities: Like I said, restricting the SIP/RTP to the IP of the trunk provider will mitigate that risk.

At that point the only source of the hack would be your trunk provider. Nick3198 wrote: Patching the host OS and PBX is part of that. Then maybe you need to run Asterisk raw and do it all yourself.

By using anything not 100% done yourself you have already made the decision to abide by the rules of the other person's distribution update practices. You will most certainly not get this level of security updates (or even notices) from propriety vendors.

Jared Busch wrote: Nick3198 wrote: In terms of security, I place very high importance on it. I will be the first one to agree that you should have proper network protection.

But even leaving SIP open can lead to potential vulnderabilities: Like I said, restricting the SIP/RTP to the IP of the trunk provider will mitigate that risk. At that point the only source of the hack would be your trunk provider. Well, its not just the SIP trunk provider that will be connecting to the system. You could have SIP soft phones from travelling laptops, android phones / iPhones, etc. Not every user will necessarily be able to connect via VPN or use things like port knocking. You have to consider how other people might operate. Accommodating roaming users is normal, and its often labelled as a selling point in most of the proprietary systems that I've seen.

Maintaining the best security while doing it is part of the job. Regardless of what you consider to be ideal for deployment, this is part of my requirements for a phone system, and it will be part of a lot of people's requirements as well. Try as you might, its just not possible to cover all people's needs with one type of deployment. Jared Busch wrote: Nick3198 wrote: Patching the host OS and PBX is part of that. Then maybe you need to run Asterisk raw and do it all yourself. By using anything not 100% done yourself you have already made the decision to abide by the rules of the other person's distribution update practices.

I don't think you are being fair. I think we both know that anyone considering Elastix or any other FreePBX variant is not going to be eager to learn raw Asterisk. I'd just pay for a closed source phone system at that point. It would take too long, and the lack of user interface simply means a steeper learning curve. Also, I'm not sure why you say I'm not abiding by the rules. I didn't get a set of rules with my elastix ISO download. I read through the entire book of Elastix without tears, and it encouraged me to update.

And I got the book through their site. The maintainers released those updates themselves, and they aren't from the beta repository, they are from the Elastix 'stable' repository. A repo, that was enabled in the ISO by the Elastix maintainers. I'm pretty sure that they WANT you to update if you feel its warranted or needed (which I certainly do). Jared Busch wrote: You will most certainly not get this level of security updates (or even notices) from propriety vendors. Well if your argument is that you should never install them, then what good is this?

I do agree with this last statement though. If I thought it was inherently insecure, it wouldn't be very wise to use it. As I said, I think its very important to have security fixes, which is why I chose to use them.

I'm still not really sure why you are so set against this. Look, I know a lot of people here are very heavily invested in Asterisk based systems, Some of you even support and sell such systems. I'm hoping I can use it too. I'm not here to step on anyone's toes, but I don't think I can be expected to partake in the Elastix circlejerk. IMHO, no piece of software is perfect and none of the asterisk distributions are exceptions to this rule. I was merely voicing the problems I had and how I encountered them.

I would think that is what a forum like this is all about. Its nothing against you personally, I'm just expressing my experiences and opinions.

RFSTech wrote: Nothing you said here is constructive. I did not need a demo. If I wanted a demo I would have done one. I wanted the free version to see how well I could set it up and how it would compare to other products I have used. My opinion is fairly obvious. It seems like a great PBX but the free version is WAY too limited to draw anyone into the product.

It is a crippled demo version. There are simply too many things it cannot do. One or two additional basic PBX features would make the free edition a very viable competitor to Elastix and PBX in a Flash for small offices that have internet service too poor to go hosted, but can use a FXO/FSX gateway or the like.

Well before the overflow through the dipstick. There was another leak. I Was dozing brush and the machine wouldn't go anywhere. Bill Phillips Eating For Life Pdf To Jpg. I checked the dipstick and it was empty and smelled burnt. I guess the burnt smell was from working it with low fluid. I got out and noticed the fluid was leaking from where the shuttle box bolts to the bellhousing. I also noticed someone siliconed the space to stop the leak to scam the new buyer (me).

But it doesn't like right away it only leaks after the machine warms up. Would that valve u speak of cause it to leak up front? Also my main concern is i was under the machine today and i looked for a hole in the bellhousing to drain the converter but there isn't any.

Could i pull on of the trans line feeding the radiator off while machine is running and drain the converter that way? Oh and i also noticed one of the lines going to radiator is somewhat pinched around the pipe joing hydraulic tanks together. Rubber hose is too short. I'm wondering if shuttle is overheating. Does the box have a relief valve in case of overheating or excess pressure?? Thanks again AJ thanks. THanks Again!

I looked on ebay but can't find nothing for a 86 3cx. Thanks for the illustration. What number in the illustration is the valve you speak of that may need to be cleaned out??

Every cylinder on the excavator leaks down real fast,less than a minute or 2. Is there something it could be besides the cylinder? Because i don't see any external leaks on any of the excavator cylinder. Also the the swing control for the hoe swing to left by it self there is free play in the valve where the stick control connects? Did u say the return spring comes out from the bottom??