Welcome! Please use the navigational links on your left to explore our website.

Company Logo 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
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
Kountry Life
Ford Tractors Discussion Forum

Ford Commander

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

11-29-2019 13:32:37

Report to Moderator

I have the cylinder head off the 242 diesel, looks like the some of the valves are too deep in the head. I have the 6000 original service book, but not one for the Commander series. My book does not say anything where the valves should be in relation to the head surface, exhausts are .015-.030 below now, and intakes are .080-.090 below. Head has been apart before as I found two valve springs on wrong, close wound coils next to the retainers instead of head. Planning on having valve seats installed to bring valves back closer to flush, but would like to know what the new spec was. Old head gasket checked .035 thick, and pistons have valve reliefs .070 deep. Thanks in advance.

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]

12-01-2019 15:36:07

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to Dieseltech, 11-29-2019 13:32:37  
I just looked up the specs in PROSIS. They call for .059 - .084" recession for the 6000 engine, and .005 above - .010" below for the 172 head. My machinist had them all sitting at about flush after I got it back, and it works just fine. Clearly the first spec is wrong (it's actually the correct spec for a 5000 head).

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]

12-01-2019 18:01:36

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to Bern, 12-01-2019 15:36:07  
Thanks, Bern! Another question, the 6000 diesel crankshaft I have out shows enough wear it needs turned which Ford says not to on the 172 and 242 diesel cranks. The local engine shop has re-ground some 172 diesel cranks .010-.010 pre customer request in the past understanding the shop would not cover any failure, and so far none have failed. If I understand correctly, Nitrided cranks have deeper heat treated journals than Tuffrided cranks do. Would you know which treatment was used by Ford? And do you know if any 242 cranks have been ground and used anyway? I have two other engines to take down and see if the cranks are better first before I decide which way to go. The crank I have out now would clean up fine at .010-.010. Thanks again!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bob N.Y.

12-02-2019 05:19:44

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to Dieseltech, 12-01-2019 18:01:36  
I had a 6000 diesel years ago. I had 2 crankshafts in it that had been turned in the .020 to .040 range if I remember correctly. They both broke between the #3 main and #5 rod. The first one went while I was chopping and was a clean square break. The second one broke when I was moving an empty wagon with the engine barely above an idle. It was a messy twisted break. I got another crank that was turned .010, put it in and sold the tractor. I heard it was still running a year later.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]

11-30-2019 05:02:32

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to Dieseltech, 11-29-2019 13:32:37  
I have a 172 that had valves recessed badly enough that the shop sourced some Chevy valves to bring them back out so that I would have good compression.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]

11-30-2019 05:23:28

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to showcrop, 11-30-2019 05:02:32  
I did that same thing on the Standard 23C diesel head, they were sunk DEEP. I found some larger Deutz valves that were machined to fit, getting all valves flush with the head surface.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]

11-29-2019 14:24:52

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to Dieseltech, 11-29-2019 13:32:37  
There are no specs for what you're looking for in the factory repair manual. I looked in some PROSIS software (it's what machine shops use) and it said (I'm going off of memory here) something like .050 to .060" valve recession. I knew this couldn't be right because my valves were all less than .020" below, with most of them closer to zero.

I took the head down to my local trusted machinist, and he agreed with me that the PROSIS specs could not be correct. He then looked up specs for a 172" diesel, which is the 4-cylinder equivalent of the 242 diesel engine. Again, I don't recall the exact number, but it was much closer to flush. He used the 172" specs (he had to replace some seats) and everything worked out great.

I can look up the exact numbers for you the next time I'm at the shop, but any good machinist can look them up in PROSIS as well.

By the way, FWIW, there is no "Commander" repair manual that I am aware of. The differences between Commander tractors and the older ones are primarily cosmetic. Many of the pages in my manual date back to 1961 and 1963.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]

11-29-2019 14:35:53

Report to Moderator
 Re: Ford Commander in reply to Bern, 11-29-2019 14:24:52  
Thanks, Bern. I'll have the intake seats installed at least. Looks like both the intake valves and seats were ground plenty to get them that low, compared to where the exhausts are now.

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

Hop to:

We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums

Today's Featured Article - Restoration Story: 1964 JD 2010 Dsl - Part 2 - by Jim Nielsen. Despite having to disassemble the majority of my John Deere 2010's diesel engine, I was still hopeful I could leave the engine-complete with crankshaft and camshaft-in the tractor. This would make the whole engine rebuild job much easier-and much less expensive! I soon found however, that the #4 conrod bearing had disintegrated, taking with it chunks of the crankshaft journal. As a resul ... [Read Article]

Latest Ad: need 3 point arms (with the ball) especially need the [More Ads]

Copyright © 1997-2021 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

Website Accessibility Policy