Crankshaft work, should it look like this.

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2013: Crankshaft work, should it look like this.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Adam Tauno Williams on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 07:49 am:

We have a driver Model-T [1919 Depot Hack]. The crankshaft broke. So I ordered the heavy-duty SCAT crank - pricey but everyone said it was the best solution and if installed correctly would be unbreakable. So I got the crankshaft, rods, pistons, etc... and took it to a local shop that works on antique cars and does babbit (the main journals would still be babbit). After a long time and a large sum of money I got the engine back ... and it was impossible to turn the shaft. So my mechanic loosened the journal bolts (oversized heavy duty bolts as recommended)... to discover that once turned to loosen they just spin - and cannot be tightened again. So we removed the journal caps and looked at the babbit. To us - not babbit experts - something appears to be horribly wrong. And the bore does not seem completely centered. The boring for the bolts seems to breach the bearing surface. I'd really appreciate feedback on the work I'm looking at; then I have to go talk to the guy who did it.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Adam Tauno Williams on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 07:53 am:




Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Musegh Kalon on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 08:08 am:

All I can say is what a shame! This job shows perfectly when someone doesn't know whatsoever how to do something properly, never mind professionally!
I'll let the experts explain all the problems with this job.
Good luck!
M


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kerry van Ekeren (Australia) on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 08:14 am:

Adam, I do my own pouring and boring and fellow club members for no more than the price of parts, if I produced an end product like that I would kick my self in the ass as well as expect others to do too.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jack Putnam, Bluffton, Ohio on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 08:30 am:

Get your money back!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 08:56 am:

Do I see dents in the crankshaft in that first pic? If it's damaged, your recourse may be small claims court. I wouldn't trust that guy to pick up my garbage.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 09:14 am:

Pretty cruddy looking job.
I will respond to a specific question you had though. To get good timing gear mesh the crank can end up being NOT centred between the bolts. Ford's locating of the cam bores and the crank saddles was not very precise. I use a "link" that is exactly 100 mm between the dummy cam and the line bore shaft. On some blocks the crank ends up being slightly off centre (noticeably) to the main bearing bolt holes. I'm OK with that as I always get perfect timing gear mesh and nice quiet and long running engines.
The job you got will probably work OK but it sure isn't pretty!!! The "pock" marks aren't the end of the world. It sounds like it is a little tight, but "time saver" would likely take care of that. I can understand your disappointment.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Walker, NW AR on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 10:10 am:

I don't think there's enough roundover on some of the ends. That could be causing them to bind up when tightened.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Adam Tauno Williams on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 10:43 am:

> I don't think there's enough roundover on some of
> the ends. That could be causing them to bind up
> when tightened.

Can you please clarify what this means [to a non-mecahnic]?

Of course, even if the above will work, not being able to tighten the journal bolts is a serious problem.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Charlie B actually in Toms River N.J. on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 11:10 am:

Adam my advice is two fold: 1 photograph everything and 2 try to find someone who is knowledgeable on the T engine who's willing to testify as to the problems and poor workmanship because if those s***bags let it go locked up and in that condition their not going to back off easily. They have to expect to be hearing from you again as the engine was shot when they let it go. Sorry for your present predicament.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 11:34 am:

Main bearing bolts require 2 wrenches for the front and centre main. Squaring off in litigation is usually not worth it


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Stan Howe Helena, Montana on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 11:39 am:

I agree with what is said above, however, I question why the bolts will not tighten up again. Are the threads stripped? There have to be nuts on those bolts, I can't imagine the threads being stripped on all of them. The nuts are at the top of the hole the bolts go through for the front and center main and at the bottom of the cap on the rear main.

Actually the surface looks pretty good, there just appear to be lots of other problems. If it were done in a home shop for a cheap "driver" rebuild I wouldn't worry a lot about it -- but a $1500 Scat and "a large sum of money" you need to be worrying about this.

It's always easy to second guess deals like this but you should have sent it to Jack Putnam or Mike Bender or Ron Miller or Herman or one of the other guys who do this for a living. I dunno if they all install Scat cranks but Mike Bender has done a bunch of them. Doesn't cost much more to ship a short block to Tulsa.

Good luck, the reality is that they may be so inept they don't even know they did bad work.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jerry VanOoteghem on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 01:40 pm:

Adam,

I'm sorry to say, that looks like a very crappy job. Personally, I would put no faith in that workmanship. I don't like that the caps have been milled. The thrust face on what looks like the rear main is just hand filed, not machined. It also appears that some of the babbitt has adhesion problems. What Mike calls "round over" is at the ends of the babbitt, where it is supposed to be nicely rounded over, to match the rounded corners between the crankshaft bearing journals and their throws. Actually, these rounded edges don't have to "match" the radius in the crankshaft. They can be larger so that there is no interference by essentially forcing a square, or insufficiently rounded, edge into the radiused corners of the crank journals. The simple 45 degree chamfers on your caps are sloppy and appear too small to give the needed clearance. They may be why the crank was locked to begin with.

As to tight motors after rebuild. Sometimes a motor can be quite snug after being rebuilt. There's basically two schools of thought exercised by most rebuilders. Some set them up tight to let the bearings "make" their own clearance, others build in the clearance to begin with. There are arguments for both ways. All this is to say that a snug motor is not, in itself, a problem. A totally locked-up motor however is. As is the terrible workmanship you got. Once you see the lack of quality in what has been done, you have no clue how screwed up anything else is. Sorry.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 03:03 pm:

It is possible to have a very fine finish on Babbitt bearings. Jerry's right, all the surfaces should be finely machined. Decades ago I had a model A engine rebabbitted by a good friend who was/is most particular. The bearings were set so fine that, if the crank was not moved for a while, it took a screwdriver across the flywheel buttons on the rear flange to start it turning--then you could turn it with one finger on a flange button. He told me he wouldn't set it that fine for anyone else, but he know I would break in the engine properly. It's still a great runner.
I hate to say it Adam, but those look terrible! It even appears that the babbitt is loose from the caps already. I would not put such an expensive crank in use on those bearings.
T'
David D.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 03:52 pm:

1.--- I don't think that is a dent in the crank, but I think it is the grease the guy used and light refelection. Same picture, the babbitt has not been peened in the block, and if that is where the crank would be running, the crank would be off center in that, what looks like the center main.

What Mike was trying to say, and he is right the round over meaning the Radius of the bearings are to small and are locking the bearings up. That was a good thing in this case, as now you know you have problems.

2.---The holes in the babbitt in this case is from water, as the bearing cap were poured cold and should have been tinned, and the babbitt stuck to the tinning. But the way it is now, the babbitt in the caps isn't stuck either.

To get good timing gear mesh the crank can end up being NOT centred between the bolts. Ford's locating of the cam bores and the crank saddles was not very precise. "END QUOTE"

As normal, Les's information is Not factual, but only to the point of his opinion. Fords Center to center distance for the "gears they used" was 3.936-07, to 3.937-8. Where people like Les draw there wrong conclusions on this subject is unless you are using N.O.S. Ford gears, this measurement won't do you any good.

Dan McEachern is the only place you can get a matched set of time gears, all others are not.

When I use a cast crank gear, and a fiber gear, I have a set center distance, all others I set by lash.

Of all the align bores made Wilson had the center distance set, but again for Ford gears, if you use any other gears, they have to be adjusted to get what ever lash you want.

I use a "link" that is exactly 100 mm between the dummy cam and the line bore shaft. On some blocks the crank ends up being slightly off centre (noticeably) to the main bearing bolt holes. I'm OK with that as I always get perfect timing gear mesh and nice quiet and long running engines."END QUOTE"

Les says there is a "noticeably" difference in the center line bore being off, and to one side, that is because he dosn't understand how to set a line bore up the correct way. The first thing you have to do is get rid of a 100mm or any other set distance tooling. You can use it to get close, but after that it will do you no good.

The other draw back to not setting the crank in the center of the block is what ever the crank is off to the mains side ways, or at an angle, also, the tail shaft moves over in the ball cap hole to go off center as well as the front crank seal area.


If you set a Model A Ford crank center line over like Les does, the rear main Aluminum Slinger would leak nonstop, and not counting other engines of that time. The shims would have to be trimmed, and there would be a misalignment of the Main drive Gear in the transmission.

If Les thinks you can save this babbitt job with something like the (MAGIC OF) "TIME SAVER" LOL, that would be like using a hole tube of CREST on the last half rotted tooth in your head.

1.---The first thing you have to do is center the align boring bar in your block. When that is done it has to stay in that position while you set the gear lash, and that measurement has to be exactly the same front and rear bearing.

2. To set the gear lash, I use the cam its self with the gear I am going to use, DAN's, if possible. I lock the cam, and have one of Dan's gears with a brass bushing inside and honed to fit the boring bar.

3.--- Then set the back lash by moving the gear up and down to you get the .005 Dan's wants.

With fixed boring bars like Les uses, you can brass shin the bar on each end, before you lock it down.

4.-- When you get the gear mesh right, you pull the cam and put shafts in the front and rear cam holes and take an out side measurement of the front bearing, and make the back the same.

"Simple", Right Les?





If your babbitt comes out white, your Temp. is wrong.Peened Babbitt with an Air Gun.Round Plugs in the Main Bolt Holes to center the bar in the block.Showing a Bar in cam hole to get the correct measurement for center distanceSet in the Align Bore.Finish bearings.Same Block.The Model T cranks have to be measured out to find the placement of each crank, as every block, and every crank is different as to where the crank sets in  relationship to the front and center mains in the block, and also the time gears, and front timming cover. Look at the difference of babbitt thickness on the cap front, and rear. It can be all at the front, or all at the rear, or any where in between.Center Main spacingFront Main Spacing.Where the front Face of the gear should be, and that is even with the gasket surfaceThis is setting the gear lash on a 1935 Ford block, it is the same as a Model T, I just don't have pictures


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Musegh Kalon on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 04:27 pm:

Boy, what great Herm! WoW! Wish I was closer to you I would have you do all of my blocks!
How sad this poor fellow got taken this way.
I wish him the best in resolving this bad workmanship.
M


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Allan Richard Bennett on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 07:58 pm:

Herm, I love the pictures! You do beautiful work. Just a point of clarification. At your point three you say you move the gear up and down to get Dan's .005" lash. I presume this means lifting or lowering the boring bar with the small gear mounted to it.

Allan from down under.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 08:14 pm:

With a Tobin-Arp, the bar stays put, and as the block sets on adjustable parallels, the block is adjusted to the bar.

I looked at what I wrote and it give the wrong impression.

The gear goes up, and down, But that would be the Cam gear held by the block.

Sorry, Herm.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ted Dumas on Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - 08:14 pm:

You and your mechanic need to have a set down with the shop owner with your pictures and determine whether you want him to do it over or return your funds.

You should owe him for the new crank but no more.

Most people give it their best shot on the first go and unless he was on vacation and a new hand did the work, your chances of getting it done right there are pretty slim.

That's my 2 cents worth.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Thursday, August 15, 2013 - 11:50 pm:

I was away for 3 days.
I would like to correct a couple of items another poster has stated
The concept of a alignment link has been disparaged. The poster shows a Tobin Arp line boring machine (identical to what I own. It would appear that he does not own all the tooling for this machine.
Here is a picture of the correct Tobin Arp fixture for doing A engines

And here is a picture of the correct fixture for the Ford V8

I am surprised that he has had difficulties utilizing the commercially available T cam drive gears. I have never had any problems achieving very satisfactory gear mesh, good front packing service, and good fit of the 4 th main. It seems unfortunate that he has not had the same success.

Now to the use of "Time Saver". While it is not a product that I have needed, I have seen it used with very excellent results.
The workmanship that this person has received is extremely poor, it would seem that the probability of him receiving satisfaction from the provider would be extremely small.
Further I have seen bearings with more of the bearing material removed for oil grooves. So the loss of bearing surface is not fatal of itself.
So it would seem that his options are a follows;
1. Get involved in litigation which could be protracted, expensive with no assurance of satisfaction.
2. Take his lumps and pay to have the work done again by another establishment (hopefully with better results).
3. Rescue the job using a proven method (Time Saver). While the surface is not 100%, there is no apparent evidence that the babbit is not well bonded. If I was in his position, this would be my course of action. Of course I, like the other posters are not in his position.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Garrison_Rice Minnesota on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 01:34 am:

If I was in his position I'd go directly into litigation. I'd not pass go and would not expect to collect $200.00 While in litigation I'd ship the engine to Herm and have him straighten things out. You da man Herm, you da man.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Garrison_Rice Minnesota on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 01:38 am:

Actually, I just took my engine in to Dave Gross in St Cloud (Sorry Herm, he's only 10 miles away and does as good a job as the best of any of them (you)) and fully expect as good a job as can be done.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 02:17 am:

Ya, Dave is a nice guy. I met him when him and 3 other guys stopped in to look the shop over on there way to the spring prewar swap meet in OK.

Herm.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 03:30 am:

The concept of a alignment link has been disparaged. The poster shows a Tobin Arp line boring machine (identical to what I own. It would appear that he does not own all the tooling for this machine."END QUOTE"

I think it is because the "Poster", who, by the way is a very handsome devil, because his Mom said, knows that any fixed center distance Jig is never consistent, because all blocks are different in castings, and wear, and time gears, except by luck, and more times then not will ever give an equal, dead center bar distance. I have used every make of boring bar that I know of except one, and NONE are consistent, and that includes Tobin-Arp Jigs.


I use a "link" that is exactly 100 mm between the dummy cam and the line bore shaft. On some blocks the crank ends up being slightly off centre (noticeably) to the main bearing bolt holes. I'm OK with that as I always get perfect timing gear mesh and nice quiet and long running engines."END QUOTE"

I also think the Poster has read some where that, oh ya, there it is right above this paragraph, that some people are fine with cranks off center in blocks. I guess you have to know your limitations.

The concept of a alignment link has been disparaged. The poster shows a Tobin Arp line boring machine (identical to what I own. It would appear that he does not own all the tooling for this machine. "END QUOTE"


Well I guess that this Poster's machine didn't come with that fancy tooling a Tobin-Arp would come with.If the Poster would have gotten the tooling, I wonder if it would look something like this.

Oh, by the way, if one wouldn't have gotten all there tooling that comes with a Tobin-Arp the top set of Jigs would be for Fordson.

They will get you close, but I don't get paid for close.

By the way, these are what they look like if not run over by a truck.

Mr. Poster.







Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 09:34 am:

And so we now see that he does not own the model A link fixture that TA supplied, nor the model T fixture that was also available.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ed in California on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 09:57 am:

I have never seen an argument develop between two obviously skilled and competent machinists concerning rebuilding Model T engines. It is one of the more interesting and informative threads as of late. Continue gentlemen, continue.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 02:30 pm:

And so we now see that he does not own the model A link fixture that TA supplied, nor the model T fixture that was also available."End Quote"

Mr. Schubert, you obviously missed the Joke about the Alignment Fixtures as where do you think I got the pictures from???????????

I had no idea that one would go over your head. I think you were concentrating to hard on (He does not own!)
nor the model T fixture that was also available."END QUOTE"

Mr. Schubert, you are wrong again as Tobin_Arp never made a Fixture for a Model T., with good reason, and I know you don't know why, so I will tell you.

A Tobin-Arp Align bore uses a 1-1/8th boring bar, on your machine, which is to big for a Model T. All Model T Boring bars were made in inch O.D. to make room for babbitt shavings so it didn't plug the bar.

The only bar that I know of that was over the 1 inch is the earlier Wilson Boring Frame, with adjustable cutters made for standard size shafts as they used a reamer to finish up. Then they went to fixed, and ground cutters so the lesser type machinests could do a good job.

I do model t blocks because I set up my align bore to do them.

But when I pick a center distance, such as .005, that is what I get every time, as a fixed alignment Jig will not center, or will set a set of gears to what they need to be, because they are all different sizes.




Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 02:30 pm:

And so we now see that he does not own the model A link fixture that TA supplied, nor the model T fixture that was also available."End Quote"

Mr. Schubert, you obviously missed the Joke about the Alignment Fixtures as where do you think I got the pictures from???????????

I had no idea that one would go over your head. I think you were concentrating to hard on (He does not own!)
nor the model T fixture that was also available."END QUOTE"

Mr. Schubert, you are wrong again as Tobin_Arp never made a Fixture for a Model T., with good reason, and I know you don't know why, so I will tell you.

A Tobin-Arp Align bore uses a 1-1/8th boring bar, on your machine, which is to big for a Model T. All Model T Boring bars were made in inch O.D. to make room for babbitt shavings so it didn't plug the bar.

The only bar that I know of that was over the 1 inch is the earlier Wilson Boring Frame, with adjustable cutters made for standard size shafts as they used a reamer to finish up. Then they went to fixed, and ground cutters so the lesser type machinests could do a good job.

I do model t blocks because I set up my align bore to do them.

But when I pick a center distance, such as .005, that is what I get every time, as a fixed alignment Jig will not center, or will set a set of gears to what they need to be, because they are all different sizes.



1935 Ford V-8 Bearing Rebuild 029.jpg 1935 Ford V-8 Bearing Rebuild 032.jpg 1935 Ford V-8 Bearing Rebuild 037.jpg Ken's Model T 241.jpg Ken's Model T 246.jpg Ken's Model T 249.jpg Ken's Model T 254.jpg Ken's Model T 255.jpg Ken's Model T 259.jpg Ken's Model T 266.jpg Ken's Model T 268.jpg Ken's Model T 268.jpg


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 02:30 pm:

And so we now see that he does not own the model A link fixture that TA supplied, nor the model T fixture that was also available."End Quote"

Mr. Schubert, you obviously missed the Joke about the Alignment Fixtures as where do you think I got the pictures from???????????

I had no idea that one would go over your head. I think you were concentrating to hard on (He does not own!)
nor the model T fixture that was also available."END QUOTE"

Mr. Schubert, you are wrong again as Tobin_Arp never made a Fixture for a Model T., with good reason, and I know you don't know why, so I will tell you.

A Tobin-Arp Align bore uses a 1-1/8th boring bar, on your machine, which is to big for a Model T. All Model T Boring bars were made in inch O.D. to make room for babbitt shavings so it didn't plug the bar.

The only bar that I know of that was over the 1 inch is the earlier Wilson Boring Frame, with adjustable cutters made for standard size shafts as they used a reamer to finish up. Then they went to fixed, and ground cutters so the lesser type machinests could do a good job.

I do model t blocks because I set up my align bore to do them.

But when I pick a center distance, such as .005, that is what I get every time, as a fixed alignment Jig will not center, or will set a set of gears to what they need to be, because they are all different sizes.




Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 02:32 pm:

And so we now see that he does not own the model A link fixture that TA supplied, nor the model T fixture that was also available."End Quote"

Mr. Schubert, you obviously missed the Joke about the Alignment Fixtures as where do you think I got the pictures from???????????

I had no idea that one would go over your head. I think you were concentrating to hard on (He does not own!)
nor the model T fixture that was also available."END QUOTE"

Mr. Schubert, you are wrong again as Tobin_Arp never made a Fixture for a Model T., with good reason, and I know you don't know why, so I will tell you.

A Tobin-Arp Align bore uses a 1-1/8th boring bar, on your machine, which is to big for a Model T. All Model T Boring bars were made in inch O.D. to make room for babbitt shavings so it didn't plug the bar.

The only bar that I know of that was over the 1 inch is the earlier Wilson Boring Frame, with adjustable cutters made for standard size shafts as they used a reamer to finish up. Then they went to fixed, and ground cutters so the lesser type machinists could do a good job.

I do model t blocks because I set up my align bore to do them.

But when I pick a center distance, such as .005, that is what I get every time, as a fixed alignment Jig will not center, or will set a set of gears to what they need to be, because they are all different sizes.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 02:54 pm:

I have no idea what happened to the pictures, or why so many posts.

Chris, can you clean this up a little, I will try the pictures again.

Herm.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 07:30 pm:

Herm is absolutely right that the fact that the TA bar is 1 1/8" could be a problem. The solution is simple and obvious of course. I simply made a special "roughing" bar that is reduced to 1" for 6" of length in the middle of it. I set the tool in this bar to cut to 1.2" diameter. I then rough cut the bearing saddle. Then I install the cap with shims and rough cut it. Two quick rough cut passes with lots of chip room is extremely easy.
These cuts are made with the bar centred between the bolt holes.
Once I have the rough cuts made I switch back to the TA 1 1/8" bar. As I am now only taking a much smaller finish cut there is plenty of chip room to be vacuumed (or blown) out.
I now use my line up links which conceptually resemble the links TA supplied for use with the Model A and other engines.

The big advantages to me of going to the TA bar are;
1. The TA tool setting features are really great. The tool is held in the bar by a spring loaded feature for the setting operation. The TA "bar mike" is incredibly easy and accurate and repeatable and quick to use. If the bar mike is properly calibrated and you have some skill the tool is set in a few seconds.
2. The other huge advantage is using the TA thrust facing tool. This tool allows the cutter to be moved radially by the operator as it spins. So you get a fine facing cut using a sharp tool. The TA micrometer lengthwise bar feeding feature allows for the achievement of accurate thrust facing. All again with ease, accuracy and in little time.

Using all these features I can quite easily do a T block that is ready to go (cleaned up after babbitting) in 2 hours. I set the main clearances at between .00125-.0015. Oiled up the crank spins comfortably by hand. My standard charge is $120.00 as I feel guilty charging more than $60.00 per hour to fellow T people!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 08:15 pm:

Well, what I did was buy two used arms, and put in one inch bushings, and had a wore out 1-1/8 bar that Vern ground down to an inch, in his crank grinder, all done. I went through my one inch bar Mic's and it was good to go.


Using all these features I can quite easily do a T block that is ready to go (cleaned up after babbitting) in 2 hours. I set the main clearances at between .00125-.0015. Oiled up the crank spins comfortably by hand. My standard charge is $120.00 as I feel guilty charging more than $60.00 per hour to fellow T people!"END QUOTE"

The only thing I can say is that it takes me about 12 hours, from block Prep, to setting the crank on the motor stand.

Of coarse if you don't care where the center line is being bored off, and have a one size fits all gear mesh, and don't put in x grooves, and oil wells, and don't peen the babbitt as I think you said one time as not being necessary.


Maybe your right, It kind of makes me think also that 120.00 is some what of an over charge!

I think you should take a 100 pictures so we all could see how you do that so cheap!!!!!!!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 08:48 pm:

Herm
I have clearly explained how I accomplish it AND use the commercially available gears. The crankshaft is installed square to the cylinders and camshaft and pan rail. I do not believe in wasting the money of other model T people. The oil holes I do are what Ford did. The engines I do LAST a long time. T engines I have built have powered T's to over 100 mph.
Your allegation of the crankshaft being bored off centre line presupposes that the main bearing bolt holes are true to the cylinder bores. Having extensively measured several T blocks to reverse engineer for the machining of my 5 main T blocks I can tell you that is a real stretch to claim. Ford's machining tolerances from one face of the block to the next was extremely loose

Peening; If babbit was a material that work hardened like a copper alloy it might accomplish something. If the goal is to cover up a low grade pouring job, I can also see some benefit to compress air pockets and blow holes. With proper prep, cleanliness and block and babbit temperatures I have observed no benefit.
I have tried peening and then ultrasonic examined, harness tested and then excised the babbit to examine grain structure. I could find no benefit compared to non peened.


My goal in life is to constantly gain knowledge and freely pass it on. It is a good day when I learn something and I find that most days I do and so I am pretty darn happy with my life


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 08:50 pm:

Herm
I suppose potentially I work faster than you, only being 64!!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting on Friday, August 16, 2013 - 10:32 pm:

Les, there just isn't any thing I can do with thinking like that.

I can say you and K.R.Wilson have nothing in common on Babbitt.


Peening; If babbit was a material that work hardened like a copper alloy it might accomplish something. If the goal is to cover up a low grade pouring job, I can also see some benefit to compress air pockets and blow holes. With proper prep, cleanliness and block and babbit temperatures I have observed no benefit.
I have tried peening and then ultrasonic examined, harness tested and then excised the babbit to examine grain structure. I could find no benefit compared to non peened. "END QUOTE"

With a statement like that, I see you don't even understand any thing about pouring except you have to put a laddle full in the hole. That whole statement is a waste of the printed word, and has nothing to do with peening, because you don't even know what its for!



Your allegation of the crankshaft being bored off centre line presupposes that the main bearing bolt holes are true to the cylinder bores."END QUOTE"

That statement has nothing to do with any thing, and has no meaning.

I can also see some benefit to compress air pockets and blow holes."END QUOTE"

It may for you, but I don't get air pockets, Blow holes, wrinkles, and slag in my bearings, ever.

Your allegation of the crankshaft being bored off centre line presupposes that the main bearing bolt holes are true to the cylinder bores. Having extensively measured several T blocks to reverse engineer for the machining of my 5 main T blocks I can tell you that is a real stretch to claim."END QUOTE"

You should try to engineer one forward some time, it works a lot better! I have never put a crank in any engine that the crank was not centered between the bolt holes, good grief!



On some blocks the crank ends up being slightly off centre (noticeably) to the main bearing bolt holes. I'm OK with that as I always get perfect timing gear mesh and nice quiet and long running engines."End QUOTE"

Ya, I don't think your customers would mind!


My goal in life is to constantly gain knowledge and freely pass it on. It is a good day when I learn something and I find that most days I do and so I am pretty darn happy with my life. "END QUOTE"

To bad you have that ear wax condition.


Peening; If babbit was a material that work hardened like a copper alloy it might accomplish something. If the goal is to cover up a low grade pouring job, I can also see some benefit to compress air pockets and blow holes. With proper prep, cleanliness and block and babbit temperatures I have observed no benefit.
I have tried peening and then ultrasonic examined, harness tested and then excised the babbit to examine grain structure. I could find no benefit compared to non peened.


I have helped people with babbitt, " But Man You Got To Have Something to Work With"!!!!!!!!


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration