Ford 5000, 6600 and 6610 Cavitation Problems?

Late model Ford 5000, all 6600 and 6610 tractors - how bad was the engine cavitation issue on these tractors. Seems
like I read somewhere the 5000 was less a problem? Are the engines on these long in the tooth tractors a roll of the
dice if one buys one today or is the engine the least of concerns?

Cavitation erosion was more of an issue with the turbocharged engines. Because they work harder, there is more internal vibration, which is the root cause of the issue.

That said, of the 3 models you listed, my odds would be on the 6610 to be the first to pinhole. I sincerely do believe that there's something about the quality of the iron that Ford used in the 80's that makes them more susceptible to it. Stated another way, I think a 5000 would rust out the cylinder jacket before pinholing. And yes, I've seen a 5000 (or similar vintage) rust through the bottom of the water jacket.

We've never had a issue with pin holing on our Ford tractors, but reading on this forum I've noticed others in different parts of the country have a consistent issue with pin holing.
I believe it has more to do with the waters acidity per location than in the actual design of the engine.
If one adds conditioner to the water and keeps a check on ph levels, future pin holing would pretty much be a non issue.

From the 60's to today, dad, brother, myself and FIL have owned 19 Ford tractors, 13 have been -000, -600, 0610 series, 8 are still being used today, none have ever pin holed, one 5000 rusted a hole in the bottom of the water jacket and was repaired.

Dad. 850, Dexta, both have been sold
FIL. 600 traded, 3000 gas, 5600, MIL still has the 3000, 5600
Brother. 4000 traded, 5000 sold, 7600 sold, 5200 traded, 5200 sold, 671D, 3500 gas. Brother likes to buy, trade and sell.
Myself. 871D traded, 881D, 4000SU,4000, 4500, 5000, 6610

Desroked450 is correct about the water. Many farms would've had acidic water because it would have come from bottom land groundwater. These tractors worked most of their productive lives before SCAs were invented too.

I beg to differ on your theory about the water. I took a look at your list of tractors, and only one of them was turbocharged (and later sold), which might very well be why you haven't seen any cavitation erosion. As I stated in my prior post, cavitation erosion is more of an issue with turboed tractors. Also, I don't think I've ever seen or heard of a pre-'65 engine cavitate.

I used to joke that a mid 80's 401 engine would pinhole just looking at them cross eyed. One year at the dealership I sleeved no less than 4 TW blocks, and that doesn't include all the other years, that was just the record. I bet I've done at least a dozen 401 engines, not counting a handful of 256/268 engines on top of that. As far as I'm concerned, any 401 built after the late 70's is living on borrowed time if it hasn't pinholed already.

One more thing...if pinholing (due to vibration) wasn't such a big deal, Ford would not have gone to such great lengths to correct the problem with the Genesis series of engines. They made some pretty radical changes to those blocks to combat the issue. It was a BIG problem for Ford on the pre-Genesis Basildon blocks; they just never admitted it publicly.

(quoted from post at 11:25:47 01/26/18) I beg to differ on your theory about the water. I took a look at your list of tractors, and only one of them was turbocharged (and later sold), which might very well be why you haven't seen any cavitation erosion. As I stated in my prior post, cavitation erosion is more of an issue with turboed tractors. Also, I don't think I've ever seen or heard of a pre-'65 engine cavitate.

I used to joke that a mid 80's 401 engine would pinhole just looking at them cross eyed. One year at the dealership I sleeved no less than 4 TW blocks, and that doesn't include all the other years, that was just the record. I bet I've done at least a dozen 401 engines, not counting a handful of 256/268 engines on top of that. As far as I'm concerned, any 401 built after the late 70's is living on borrowed time if it hasn't pinholed already.

One more thing...if pinholing (due to vibration) wasn't such a big deal, Ford would not have gone to such great lengths to correct the problem with the Genesis series of engines. They made some pretty radical changes to those blocks to combat the issue. It was a BIG problem for Ford on the pre-Genesis Basildon blocks; they just never admitted it publicly.

Click to expand...

If water is not a significant factor why are all of the manufacturers after the owners to monitor their coolant. I understand that for the last 6-8 years that pretty much all diesels have filters that feed additives as needed, but for many years before that the owners were responsible for maintaining coolant quality.

Because the proper "water" (coolant) contains, among other thing, nitrates that make the cylinder wall less susceptible to that little Woody Woodpecker inside the cylinder liner knocking away.

There are many chemical factors that make up a proper coolant, but I maintain that the type of water (H2O) is not a factor when it comes to pinholing, a.k.a. cavitation erosion.

Most pinholing is caused electrolysis rather than cavitation.
Water acidity or alkalinity aka PH can promote or reduce the amount of electrolysis that takes place in the engine. That's why we use PH test strips to check the condition of the engines coolant.

Electrolysis aka static electricity is caused by friction from the piston moving up and down in the cylinder. The majority of pitting accrues at the top 1/3 of the cylinder, most likely because of the increased compression and combustion pressures taking place near the top of the cylinders, which in turn increases the friction pressure on the pistons and rings in that same area.

I have not doubt this condition can be magnified in a turbo charged engine due to the added boost creating additional compression and combustion pressures against the pistons and rings.
Add to the fact that most turbo charged engines also have a tapered (Keystone style) top ring that by design increases the friction pressure against the cylinder wall.

Because of the increased amount of electrolysis taking place in a turbo charged engine pitting can become an issue sooner than on a natural aspirated engine.

Because pitting accrues in both turbo and non turbo engines and appears to be more pronounced in some parts of the country than in others, with the only variable being the acidity or alkalinity of the water in those areas I can't see why one would say the water isn't a factor.

Part of my reasoning is based on members from different areas advising others to sleeve Ford tractor engines rather than boring them and installing oversized pistons, because of pitting issues they or someone else in that area experienced. Most times this advice was being given to one rebuilding 2,3,4 and 5000 engines, all non turbo.

If turbos are the main cause of pinholing my turbo charged diesel pickup is doomed and I'm about to ruin my 6610.
I recently acquired everything I need to add a turbo to the tractor which I plan to have installed before hay season begins.
I'll add some conditioner and hope for the best.

First you say pinholing is caused by acidic water, and now it's static electricity? Seriously? And you've never had this happen to any of
your Fords? How does this make you any kind of an expert?

I've re-sleeved more pinholed Fords than I care to recall, and each and every one of them was leaking very near the mid-way point of the
cylinder wall, and 90 degrees to the crank centerline. NONE of them ventilated near the top 1/3 as you contend. This is classic cavitation
erosion caused by imploding vapor bubbles, and nothing more.

Never said acidic water caused the problem but it can help amplify the problem.
There's been plenty of 7000, 7600, 7700, 7610, 7710 turbo Fords in this are, still are, some of the larger row crop farms south of here have had a number of the larger 9000 and TW series.
Yes there have been a few cases of pinholing but not to the extent that it's considered a common problem like it is in other areas.
Maybe the 401 is more prone to this issue than than smaller 3 and 4 cylinder engines IDK.

The original question was about the non turbo models of which we've had minimum issues with pinholing (in this area).

This is turning into a argument, I'm done!
Hope everyone has a good day.


John

Bern, when one uses the term 'electrolysis', would that be considered a form of corrosion resulting in rust? I just sleeved my 9700 in no.6 hole. We bought that tractor new and it never had dirty water in it. When I took it apart, the interior of the water jacket looks like the day it was cast. The 4500, on the other hand, must have the coolant changed every two years, or else by the third year you won't be able to see the balls in the Freez-D-Tector. Is electrolysis what is happening in my 4500?

I frankly don?t believe in electrolysis when it comes to ventilated cylinder walls. It?s purely caused by vibration in my mind, and it?s called cavitation erosion.

(quoted from post at 03:04:40 01/28/18) I frankly don?t believe in electrolysis when it comes to ventilated cylinder walls. It?s purely caused by vibration in my mind, and it?s called cavitation erosion.

Click to expand...

t could be in the harmonics working the metal. I used to have a VW diesel pickup that had about a 3 lb weight bolted to about a 10 inch long piece of metal that was bolted to the inside of the aluminum front bumper at one end. I believe it soaked up the vibration to keep the bumper from putting out harmonics.

[u:f6da99bae7]Cavitation in cooling systems
[/u:f6da99bae7]
Noah W

Won't let me edit...meant to add this link also:

[u:dae7750221]More on Cavitation][/u:dae7750221]

Noah W[/u]

Sorry to break this news to all of you arguing with Bern, but he's CORRECT. I don't know if the turbo engines were more prone to pinholing or not... it may simply be a reflection of what he was dealing with in the area. The only one I've seen pinhole was actually a 3 cylinder 201 from a 445.
That said... 'cavitation erosion' was the title that Ford put on the problem. It was recognized as a problem in the early 1980's. It is the reason why every Ford Basildon block you see made after 1983 has cross hatching on it and the earlier ones do not. It's why they installed coolant conditioner packages on some models after 1983 as well. THe 'conditioner' packages were designed to reduce the surface tension of the coolant and prevent the formation of the bubbles that caused the cavitation.
'Cavitation' was a well know phenomenon in these engines. It resulted from the ultrasonic vibration of the cylinder walls... where the walls moved outwards into the water jacket... then moved back. The resultant motion created a vacuum bubble which then collapsed against the cylinder wall causing the erosion. It was a mechanical erosion, NOT a chemical reaction. The phenomenon was so well known to Ford that in 1988 they did a complete redesign of the Basildon engine which resulted in the Genesis engine... which specifically had a shortened water jacket and tie bars running between between the cylinders to stiffen the block walls and reduce the vibration.
There is no shortage of anecdotal evidence in Ford historical information to support those statements. It should be noted that it is an entirely different problem than is experienced in wet liner engines where the liners erode, due largely to the problems several of you have mentioned. This was a 'Ford centric' problem.

Rod

I bought a 6700 several yrs back that had a new crate engine installed due to electrolysis/cavitation. Back in the 70's-80's IHC tractors were known for engine cooling system pinhole problems. Today many brands have this problem.

Thanks Rod for backing me up on this.

Your comments about the external ribbing were interesting to me - I never considered the fact that this was done to combat cavitation erosion - I figured the Genesis engine was the sole answer to that. That said, the external cross hatching never made it to the 401 engine, and they were the worst of them all as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, IH DT's were known for liner erosion as well... but again, I would reiterate, they ARE a wet liner engine... and the problem is slightly
different in nature than what Ford was dealing with in a parent bore design.

Rod

That's interesting about the 401. There are so few of them around here that I hadn't realized they never got hatched... At any rate, most of the info I have comes from Stuart Gibbard's 'The Ford Tractor Story: From Basildon to NewHolland'. He interviewed several key Ford people from Basildon as well as having access to a significant part of Ford's archives so that he could research the book. There's a lot of little tidbits of information in there if you read it closely.

Rod

Thanks for the info on the book - I'll have to hunt that one down.

As for the external ribbing, I've been thinking about that some more. After looking at a cross section of the block, I fail to see how ribbing the outside of the block would prevent the cylinder wall from vibrating. It obviously wasn't effective because Ford did major surgery by coming out with the Genesis blocks.

First pic is of an old school block, second pic is a Genesis block. Huge difference between the two.

Actually, today many brands do NOT have this problem. Most manufacturers have licked the problem with either radical design changes (e.g. Cummins mid-stop liners or FNH Genesis blocks) or proper coolant chemistry.

I'm not sure what the cross hatching theory was, other than that's what I read. Perhaps they were hoping to keep the outer wall more rigid and prevent some vibration there? Possibly the extent of the problem was not fully understood at that point. Your Genesis cutaway clearly shows the tie-bar tho, so ultimately that must have been a big part of the fix.

Rod