Not sure if this would be better posted in "Member's projects", but I just posted some photos of my 8/1's internals. I would have taken more, but the camera's batteries died!
http://picasaweb.google.com/rcedward/ListeroidInternals?authkey=Gv1sRgCOqhpKjhivOP5gE#
How many hours on that engine?
What are you planing to do?
Awesome picture. Is this a Chinese made Listeroid? ;D
Quote from: WGB on November 15, 2009, 10:57:48 AM
How many hours on that engine?
What are you planing to do?
No idea how many hours -- I took delivery on it last week and it's obviously been test-fired, but I've no idea how long it was run before being crated & shipped.
I'm going to completely disassemble, clean, and blueprint before I reassemble it & fire it. After that, it'll get a genhead and be emergency/auxiliary power....
Cheers!
Quote from: rcavictim on November 15, 2009, 11:05:22 AM
Awesome picture. Is this a Chinese made Listeroid? ;D
Be nice... ;-)
I was not trying to be not nice. You cannot make stuff like that up. Like I said. Awesome picture. I was in no way trying to offend anyone who is Chinese. Their own art depicts such characteristic face features. The reason this works for me is because most of us Lister fans have been not so secretly wishing that the Chinese would start making a copy of the CS. The quality would blow the Indian crappola engines into the sand dust that is now in their crankcases.
I had a look at the closeup pics of the crank journal finish and the bearing shell. Both look to be in extremely poor and rough condition to me. There is evidence of a lot of fine debris going through there. With that and the wear showing on the cylinder walls I would have to say there are some hours on this engine, much more than an hour test run IMO.
Thorough cleaning out appears in order and a sealing treatment on the inside of the crankcase. Don't know what to recommend on the crank journal. If this was a modern hi-speed engine I'd be recommending a regrind and undersized bearing shells. Those surfaces are rough. Right now this is like sliding two pieces of sandpaper across each other with oil as lubricant.
One can polish the crank in house but I would recomend take the crank with the rod and new bearing to a engine machine shop get the crank polished and have the rod and bearing checked for proper clearance. ........
Quote from: rcavictim on November 15, 2009, 11:22:17 AM
I was not trying to be not nice.
I know -- that's why the winking smilie at the end of my post. Just ynking your chain a little! ;-)
Quote
You cannot make stuff like that up. Like I said. Awesome picture. I was in no way trying to offend anyone who is Chinese. Their own art depicts such characteristic face features. The reason this works for me is because most of us Lister fans have been not so secretly wishing that the Chinese would start making a copy of the CS. The quality would blow the Indian crappola engines into the sand dust that is now in their crankcases.
It says something when typical Chinese quality is an improvement! ;-)
Quote
I had a look at the closeup pics of the crank journal finish and the bearing shell. Both look to be in extremely poor and rough condition to me. There is evidence of a lot of fine debris going through there. With that and the wear showing on the cylinder walls I would have to say there are some hours on this engine, much more than an hour test run IMO.
Thorough cleaning out appears in order and a sealing treatment on the inside of the crankcase. Don't know what to recommend on the crank journal. If this was a modern hi-speed engine I'd be recommending a regrind and undersized bearing shells. Those surfaces are rough. Right now this is like sliding two pieces of sandpaper across each other with oil as lubricant.
I think the pictures make it look worse than it is. The crank journal is actually quite smooth. It will polish out nicely. I don't plan on reusing the bearings. The bore shows more vertical scratches than I'd like, but I don't think it's anything that won't hone out. I think I got the wrong end of the test-fire chain and I probably had well-used oil when it was tested. I can say that the crate it was in appeared not to have been opened since it was nailed shut in Rajkot....
Cheers!
cgwymp.
Thanks for posting your progress so far...
Referring to your posted pictures:
That engine does not have a sleeve. That's why you can't see it.
Some of the Listeroid makers no longer use a replaceable sleeve design.
If the bore wears, you have to re-bore the cylinder or replace the cylinder.
In many cases, it's cheaper to replace the cylinder.
Veggie
Quote from: veggie on November 15, 2009, 05:52:43 PM
cgwymp.
Thanks for posting your progress so far...
Referring to your posted pictures:
That engine does not have a sleeve. That's why you can't see it.
Some of the Listeroid makers no longer use a replaceable sleeve design.
If the bore wears, you have to re-bore the cylinder or replace the cylinder.
In many cases, it's cheaper to replace the cylinder.
Veggie
Hi Veggie,
You can see the bottom of the sleeve in this photo:
i don't quite understand the hesitancy to pressurize the cooling system
one oring might be a bit sketchy, but two will certainly hold 7-10psi
detroit 53 and 92 series used only two orings and the block was cut for 3
the idea was you use the upper two grooves until the upper groove became too
corroded to hold an oring then you moved down to the lower 2 grooves. (the orings
btw were only 1/8" in diameter. fwiw, the old detroits all ran 7 or 10lb rad caps, and i have
no doubt they could have held 14lb caps either.)
i never saw one that needed to be moved, to the lower grooves, but then again i only worked on non marine
engines that didn't use fresh water for cooling, or maybe saltwater in some aweful arrangement.
i am running a 7 lb cap on my changfa and it only has two orings and under very heavy load it can get up
to ~220 degree's F and has shown no signs of seapage into the crankcase.
the OP cylinder may have a dry sleeve fitted anyway, pressed into a bored dry hole and then flycut flush
with the cylinder jacket casting, if this is the case it is very hard to see the parting line without a good light
and maybe some solvent to make the parting line standout. even then it might be so good you would need
a magnaflux to find the line.
My JD175A has a wet sleeve and I run the system with thermosiphon and small automobile radiator with a 7 psi rad cap. My system has broken the wires to the fan blower twice now, puking coolant in an overheat and I have not seen any evidence of an o-ring or head gasket failure yet.
Because of this I no longer trust to leave the plant running unattended and have plans to change the source of cooling air through the radiator that vibration and a broken wire cannot kill.
I'm not shure it it wet or dry from the pictures, but if it is a wet type there is no protrusion of the liner at the top of the cylinder....strange.....also I see it has a 7 cylinder head stud arrangement. Not common!?
What brand of engine is it cgywmp?
I did see a sleeve either.
There appears to be a faint parting line in the deck about 1/8"-ish inch from the bore that I took to be the join between a sleeve and the cylinder block, but perhaps that's just an artifact of the head gasket. I looked down in the water jacket and there's no machined surface in there, so I guess I stand corrected about it being sleeved.
I don't know what brand it is. The data plates and indeed the sump cover are no help. I'm going to decline to say whom I bought it from because there's one concern I have about it, and if it turns out to be a genuine problem I want to work it out with the vendor before I talk about it in an open forum. I don't like it when people slag vendors in public without giving the vendor a chance to address a problem.
That said, the crate had "M.K. Engineers" on it -- does that mean anything to anyone?
So I have an unusual head stud arrangement? That worries me a little from a replacement parts standpoint....
Quote from: cgwymp on November 16, 2009, 05:44:18 AM
There appears to be a faint parting line in the deck about 1/8"-ish inch from the bore that I took to be the join between a sleeve and the cylinder block, but perhaps that's just an artifact of the head gasket. I looked down in the water jacket and there's no machined surface in there, so I guess I stand corrected about it being sleeved.
I don't know what brand it is. The data plates and indeed the sump cover are no help. I'm going to decline to say whom I bought it from because there's one concern I have about it, and if it turns out to be a genuine problem I want to work it out with the vendor before I talk about it in an open forum. I don't like it when people slag vendors in public without giving the vendor a chance to address a problem.
That said, the crate had "M.K. Engineers" on it -- does that mean anything to anyone?
So I have an unusual head stud arrangement? That worries me a little from a replacement parts standpoint....
That is a stand up position with the vendor, you're a good man!
Hope all works out for you.
Quote from: cgwymp on November 16, 2009, 05:44:18 AM
So I have an unusual head stud arrangement? That worries me a little from a replacement parts standpoint....
I believe the originals had 7 studs. I have seen some also with covers or plates bolted on the side of the cylinder for the water passage that can be removed. I need to look at one of my "listeroid" head gaskest because I believe all of the newer gaskets for the 5 stud will work on the 7 stud(no they don't)(the pics at central main are 5 only). Just get some spare gaskets!
Quote from: XYZER on November 16, 2009, 07:30:54 AM
I believe the originals had 7 studs. I have seen some also with covers or plates bolted on the side of the cylinder for the water passage that can be removed. I need to look at one of my "listeroid" head gaskest because I believe all of the newer gaskets for the 5 stud will work on the 7 stud(no they don't)(the pics at central main are 5 only). Just get some spare gaskets!
The vendor said that they had these engines made as close to Dursley specs as they could manage, so I guess he was telling me the truth! :-)
I figure once I get it apart and inspected, I'll order up some spares -- several of each for some things.
Cheers!
That's right. The British engines had 7 studs. The Indians for some reason settled on 5 studs, and only in the past couple of years have I seen a few manufacturers offering 7-stud cylinders and heads. Torque specs will be different for the two. When it comes time to reassemble, make sure you know which configuration the torque specs you have are for. The 5-stud head is about 160 ft-lbs, the 7 stud is around 120 or 130 ft-lbs.
Quinn
. . . and of the 7-stud cylinders, none I've seen so far has been sleeved.
Quinn
Cgwymp,
Thanks for sharing.
Certainly no worse than others that I've seen.
Since it's new, I'm curious what you paid for it?
Did you have it shipped direct from India, and if so, what did it end up costing to do so? Also, where are you located?
If the vendor is here in the US, does he have additional stock?
Please let us know.
Thanks,
Steve
Quote from: cgwymp on November 16, 2009, 05:44:18 AM
There appears to be a faint parting line in the deck about 1/8"-ish inch from the bore that I took to be the join between a sleeve and the cylinder block, but perhaps that's just an artifact of the head gasket. I looked down in the water jacket and there's no machined surface in there, so I guess I stand corrected about it being sleeved.
I don't know what brand it is. The data plates and indeed the sump cover are no help. I'm going to decline to say whom I bought it from because there's one concern I have about it, and if it turns out to be a genuine problem I want to work it out with the vendor before I talk about it in an open forum. I don't like it when people slag vendors in public without giving the vendor a chance to address a problem.
That said, the crate had "M.K. Engineers" on it -- does that mean anything to anyone?
So I have an unusual head stud arrangement? That worries me a little from a replacement parts standpoint....
I have never heard of anyone machining the deck and the sleeve after the sleeve has been installed.
With these engines, the head clearance is adjusted by adding gaskets at the base of the cylinder.
Veggie
Quote from: Jens on November 15, 2009, 09:33:04 PM
I think what you are seeing there is a boss on the bottom of the cylinder that mates with the hole in the crankcase. I don't think it's a sleeve.
I am curious about it possibly being cheaper to replace the entire cylinder ..... why would that be ? I specifically wanted a sleeved engine because it seemed more economical to service.
On the bright side, you can probably run a pressurized cooling system as you don't have the lower o ring between coolant passages and cylinder wall.
Jens
Jens,
Note that I was comparing the cost of re-boring a non-sleeved cylinder vs. the price of replacing it.
- Re-Bore an existing worn cylinder (If you can find an oversized piston) estim. $125
- New cylinder c/w liner $129 (I assume a non-sleeved cylinder may be even cheaper)
- New Liner $79
So if cgwymp wears out his cylinder, it's probably cheaper to throw it away than to re-bore it.
Example prices here....
http://www.generatorsales.com/order/lister-parts.asp (http://www.generatorsales.com/order/lister-parts.asp)
I think most users would prefer a replaceable liner, but the manufacturing cost is probably lower for the non sleeve design. Hence recent change in offerings from the various Indian mfrs.
Veggie
dry sleeves such as those used to repair a cracked, damaged or thin bore are very thin
something on the order of an eighth inch or so, you overbore the cylinder, freeze the dry liner
and shove it home, the excess is cut off with the boreing bar either just prior to boreing the newly sleeved
bore to size or immediately afterwards.
the advantage of a dry liner insert over just a plain cast block is you can spec whatever allow you want the dry
sleeve to be made out of and in doing so get a superior wear characteristic over the questionable indian cast iron
that may well have inclusions or voids that do not machine out cleanly.
a dry fit liner that is put in by a qualified machinist is almost impossible to see after he has finished the top and bored
the thing to size, most machinist overbore for the liner and leave a small step and the bottom of the cylinder for the
liner to register against, so you cannot tell from the bottom whether it has a liner or not.
i have no idea if this particular engine has such a dry liner, but if it did, i would expect far better wear characteristics from
it than a plan indian cast cyliner bore.
bob g