Yesterday's Tractor Co. Shop Now
   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver
Classified Ads
Photo Ads
Tractor Parts

Discussion Forums
Project Journals
Tractor Town
Your Stories
Show & Pull Guide
Events Calendar
Hauling Schedule

Tractor Photos
Implement Photos
Vintage Photos
Help Identify
Parts & Pieces
Stuck & Troubled
Vintage Ads
Community Album
Photo Ad Archives

Research & Info
Tractor Registry
Tip of the Day
Safety Cartoons
Tractor Values
Serial Numbers
Tune-Up Guide
Paint Codes
List Prices
Production Nbrs
Tune-Up Specs
Torque Values
3-Point Specs

Tractor Games
Just For Kids
Virtual Show
Museum Guide
Memorial Page
Feedback Form

Yesterday's Tractors Facebook Page

Related Sites
Tractor Shed
Ford 8N/9N Club
Today's Tractors
Garden Tractors
Classic Trucks
Kountry Life
Tractor Talk Discussion Forum

Re: Caterpillar Part No.7F5225 Break-in Powder

[Show Entire Topic]  

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author  [Modern View]

03-04-2013 07:43:15

Report to Moderator

Why is that silly? The work involved to remove and rebuild the engine in a large piece of earthmoving equipment is far greater than the labor to do the same in the average farm tractor. Too, back then if a part wasn't worn out the idea was to reuse what parts you could and only replace the parts that were worn beyond factory specs. CAT, for one, has always had a guide showing what was acceptable and what wasn't, along with the standard 'out of service' limits on their pieces. That said if you tore an engine down, say in an old D9, and the liners weren't worn beyond specs, why replace them? In a case like that what you do is hone the liners to get them ready for a new set of rings, clean the pistons (if they aren't damaged), install new rings, and put it all back together.

Regardless of the engine size, what it sll comes down to is exactly what I said before, why replace parts that aren't worn out. Unfortunately, nowdays alot of the thought on reuse vs replace has to do with the cost of labor. In other words the new part is cheaper than the cost of the labor involved to clean and reuse the old ones. In a case like that, then yes, new parts will always be used. Thing is when it comes to the large engines that isn't always the case and the reuse of 6 $500 liners, that only take $120 each in time and labor to reinstall with new seal rings and hone, actually makes good sense.

In the end I'm all for using new parts in a rebuild when necessary, but when the old parts aren't damaged and are well within spec, why waste a customers money when youm don't need to? In fact I'm currently having to do this on a 6 BT Cummins because a customer decided not to go with a reman engine, against my recommendation, and instead went for a repair. They had gotten someone else involved in the 'repair' and I got called in a month later to complete the deal. Now I've got to 'repair' the repair, which has already cost them close to $4000 and do it within their budget. One cylinder has already been bored and sleeved to standard and has a new piston, but to get them back and running now means pulling the other 5 pistons (that had been allowed to set with water on top of them for several days), replacing one of the pistons that has pieces of debris imbedded in the crown, honing the cylinder walls, and reringing the remaining 4 pistons and reinstalling them. While this line of "repair" grates against every bone in my body, but it is the only way to get this engine running again short of throwing the money already spent away and starting over. True it's still got old bearings, seals, etc, but what will be done is as close to doing an 'inframe' rebuild as I can get them, and at this time, unfortunately, it's about their only choice. However with the 'used' cylinder walls properly honed, the old, undamaged pistons, and a new set of rings it's really no different than the conditions you'd find in new/reman engine.

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
Billy NY

03-04-2013 08:10:20

Report to Moderator
 Re: Caterpillar Part No.7F5225 Break-in Powder in reply to NCWayne, 03-04-2013 07:43:15  
I would agree with what you stated about rebuilding and not having to replace a liner if it checks out to be within tolerance, but the word, "worn", to me would mean out of tolerance, or at least a noticeable degree of wear, "worn out" would be an obvious typo, so maybe its just the language/choice of word, what they really meant was along what you said, however a worn liner and new rings, even with a honing, if the liner is beyond or very close to the specification for acceptable tolerance, I don't believe it would perform, could be problematic, ( you would know more than I about it) but say they meant what you said, lack of means to hone or etch the liner, new rings, liner is within tolerance, but has appreciable wear, and is difficult to get oil control, only then did this method become viable or was one employed for the stubborn to seat rings overhauls.

Its kind of interesting to consider how they arrived at doing this.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Show Entire Topic]     [Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:

Fast Shipping!  Most of our stocked parts ship within 24 hours (M-Th). Expedited shipping available, just call! Most prices for parts and manuals are below our competitors. Compare our super low shipping rates! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor. We are a company you can trust and have generous return policies. Shop Online Today or call our friendly sales staff toll free (800) 853-2651. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums

Copyright © 1997-2018 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters