Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Last week
  3. Monty...As a guess, the "KT88" bearing is likely a Timken T88. The "K" could be for "Koenig" parts inventory replacement purposes. Below is an illustration of the T88 Timken bearing. Does this look like a match? If this is it, the number is current, and retail price has it at $10-$15 from a variety of sources. I've added two part numbers that Timken still uses. The links are live and go to Motion Industries. If you can confirm the bearing fit (see sizes), the bearing is available from any Timken source. There is a small image below the larger one that may be helpful. Moses Timken T88W-904A3 Tapered Roller Thrust Bearing - 0.885 in Bore, 1.8906 in OD, 0.594 in Width Timken T88-904A1 Tapered Roller Thrust Bearing - 0.885 in Bore, 1.8906 in OD, 0.594 in Width
  4. Ok I found this, https://www.oldwillysforum.com/forum/index.php?threads/koenig-pto-winch.624/#lg=_xfUid-6-1575495324&slide=0 . Looking at the diagram, the part numbers for the bearings are different. I have T88 bearings the diagram say KT88 bearings. Right off I'm unable to find a supplier for the KT88 bearing. Timken makes the T88 bearing. I've got to verify the size. https://cad.timken.com/keyword/thrust-tapered-roller-bearings/thrust-osciliating-tapered-roller-bearings-type-tt?keyword=t88&key=product&SchType=2&filter=1#
  5. It's a Koenig winch. I believe its a ??100 model, I added a pic of outer case
  6. Earlier
  7. Hi, Monty...What is your winch type, make and model? I'll check for a parts schematic that shows the orientation of these parts. The shown pieces appear to be in good shape! Vintage quality...Compare this to contemporary winches. Season's Best! Moses
  8. Wow, Stuart, the long and winding road! Years ago, Arizona required a simple tailpipe reading for emissions and never opened the hood. That changed, as you hint, to match California and other states where a visual inspection of emissions equipment is a mandatory part of emissions tests. Maybe there is a model year cutoff for the full inspection test, and if old enough, a vehicle reverts to the older tailpipe reading only method? Or does this have to do with your zip code? Pleased that you're on the road. This must be gratifying. The high HC/CO readings with your original carburetor could have reflected a unit with the wrong jetting. You were meticulous in your approach to rebuilding the carburetor, it should have performed to OEM standards. (The old carburetor may not have been in original form.) In any case, the El Monte shop's build must have the right jet and metering rod. Keep us posted on the performance and your driving impressions. Yes, the CJ-7 is a great improvement over the vintage Jeep CJ3B chassis, worlds apart. You have a longer wheelbase (94" versus 80") to smooth out the washboard roads plus longer springs to improve ride quality and control. I like an aftermarket front spring/shackle reverse on any of the Jeep models through the YJ Wrangler. Vehicle control and steering improve, and there's less frame impact when climbing over rocks or limbs. The front axle trails instead of being pushed forward from the anchor (rear) end of the front springs. Something to consider, not a must. Where will you be driving off-road at Arizona? You have a wealth of open country to explore! Season's Best, Moses
  9. Good morning, it's been awhile since I posted anything. Moses I've been cleaning up and checking the winch. I'm not sure it I've got the thrust bearing in correct. You can see in the last pic, there are the caps , the bearing then the gear. When I turn the shaft the ".outside" part of the bearing(next to the cap)starts to turn. The left beaning does the same but not as quick. I've also put up picks of the bearings for reference. Now my thoughts are the "out side" part of the bearing should not be turning. Did I install them backwards? The bearing against the cap, turning, that's NOT good. The bearings are in excellent shape, especially considering the oil that came out.
  10. Well its been a long and difficult road to being street legal but I finally made it. Arizona Emissions testing took 4 tries but It is running just like it rolled off the assembly line in 1977. The first thing that surprised me is the inspectors totally ignored all my OEM correct emissions gear and just marked n/a or not tested for everything including my evap canister. They only were concerned with the levels coming out of the tail pipe at idle and loaded which is a dyno run at about 35mph. Gasses tested were HC Hydrocarbons and CO Carbon Monoxide. NOX was not tested. I assume because my jeep is a non-catalyst model with air injection and EGR only. I passed HC every time with no trouble which told me at least I was getting ignition on all cylinders. CO carbon Monoxide was my problem which is the result of incomplete combustion. My limits I had to beat were 1.5 percent for loaded and 2.0 percent for idle. I failed bad the first try with 3.8 loaded and 6.0 idle. I began to worry I the standard was too high for my carburated jeep. I installed a beautifully rebuild carb with new bushings from Carburetor Exchange in El monte, CA. I also verified my EGR and air injection were working. This improved my CO numbers a little but I still failed and in fact the HC number got worse but still passed. At this point I was wondering if Howell fuel injection was in my future. Back to the books I went for more study. I read in a trade article that platinum or iridium plugs can give a slight advantage when trying to pass the CO carbon monoxide test. Out came my nice Denso copper plugs and in went a platinum set. Then I adjusted the idle mixture per my shop manual.Next I backed the timing off even more than the OEM specified 3 degrees. Acceleration is pretty bad like this but I passed idle with almost no reading at all and just missed loaded by a small fraction of a percent. Since this was still failing I took it to the professional emissions guy down the street who was able to tune the final little bit out and get her to pass. I know he bumped the advance back up because my power is back but he did not divulge his secrets. I hind sight it may have been smart to start with the Pro shop who can check his tuning with his gear and then go for a guaranteed pass. I was just happy to know that this carburated engine can meet the standard. It has been rewarding to take this engine from a basket case back to original running condition. I also avoided all the wives tale advice I got from people about pouring alcohol or moth balls in my fuel tank. I'm ready to take her out to the trail and see how she does. It sure rides better then my CJ-3b. I also found some rust free doors at F/N jeep in Colorado springs. I now need to adjust my steering gear to take the scare factor out of driving this thing.
  11. The Clark slipping out of 5th does sound like worn bearings, most likely at the nose end of the main/output shaft. This is the pilot bore bearing (not to be confused with the crankshaft/input shaft pilot bearing) that keeps the main shaft aligned. End bearings are likely worn, too. (A worn crankshaft pilot can cause jumping out of the other gears.) Bearings are not that expensive if you want to tackle this rebuild yourself. The bearing set, seals and making gaskets for a Clark would be less costly than a core/used SM465...As for noise, much if it is harmonic and inherent to spur gear transmissions.
  12. That's what I thought...I serviced a period I-H RD406 powered dump truck in the late 'sixties that had your box. It was a double-clutch, straight cut gear (non-synchromesh) Clark. These units are bulletproof but do require a savvy driver, of which there are few in this era. Yes, it would make the ultimate transmission for some applications but would weigh too much and require a divorced transfer case in a 4x4. There is no room for such a transmission and divorced transfer case on a shorter wheelbase 4x4. Doubt that's the market for an iron Clark 5-speed. Why don't you want to run the Clark? It's a somewhat rare bird in vintage Advance Design GMC trucks, the SM420 4-speed was common.
  13. The Clark is a heavier gearbox than a 465,and is completely non-synchro. The MAIN attraction I have for a 465 is it's QUIET,and having some synchronized gears is also a good thing. I feel like the powertrain through the 465 is probably more efficient than the Clark,so less power is lost and better gas mileage is likely. I'm okay with no synchros,but the gear noise of a Clark (I'm pretty sure it's straight-cut gears,which are inherently noisy.) is pretty deafening at road speed,especially when it's singing in harmony with a 3 speed Brownie,which I WON'T give up. (I suspect there are some tired bearings in the Clark too,as it seems inclined to drop out of 5th under light compression braking. The main BENEFIT of the Clark is the strength of it and how unlikely it is that I could overload it. I also kinda like the weird shift pattern. I hope this shows up as I drew it. 2 5 1 3 4 R Speed
  14. So, the Clark has synchromesh on 2-3-4-5 (overdrive)? Compound first gear is the only gear without synchros? I would think this would be desirable, although the overdrive is light at 16%. Synchro changeout seems cheaper than a good used SM465, which might also need synchronizer rings and and bearings. Your motive for the SM465?
  15. What's the market looking like for a Clark 5 speed w/Overdrive? Maybe there's a full sized rock crawler out there that can use a break-proof box with a built-in "higher gear".I'm REALLY not sure it's worth the expense to convert it just for a set of synchro's... Speed.
  16. Speed...Glad you're aware of the PSI limit for the Weber. It's even lower than I thought, good that you have the specification of 3.5 PSI maximum. If the stock fuel pump puts out too much pressure, there are inline pressure regulators that can be manually adjusted to the desired pressure. This has been the time-honored way to damp down pressure on these Weber installations. On Jeep CJ/YJ 4.2L engines, the AMC inline six fuel pump is in the 6-7 PSI range, which can wreak havoc on a Weber float and needle. If pressure is too high, a Weber will over-fuel the engine. Sounds like you have a vacuum leak, maybe a good one. When backing the throttle stop screw out completely, if the engine continues to run fast, that's a sign of air entering the A/F stream from somewhere. If not a vacuum leak, you may be pushing too much fuel due to excessive fuel pump pressure as we've discussed. Check the fuel pump pressure. Check for a vacuum/air leak. A simple approach is a can of WD-40 or a similar low volatility petroleum base spray cleaner. (Avoid hot areas like the exhaust manifold!) Spray a light mist around the carburetor base, the intake manifold junction with the head and the vacuum hoses. Engine speed changes indicate a leak...Cap off or plug vacuum lines if you suspect a vacuum hose or device leak. See whether that helps identify the leak(s)...Even the brake booster can create a vacuum leak, often a big one if the diaphragm or check valve bleed off. Moses
  17. Yeah,the instructions for the carb conversion say SEVERAL times to try to keep the fuel pressure below 3.5 psi,and I figured the stock fuel pump wasn't likely to run significantly more than that. Saturday I had a guy at the Garage (working on his own truck,off the clock) make some adjustments, and while I don't think it runs BETTER,it certainly runs differently. I KNOW I need to re-adjust the choke,he messed with it a lot,and he found a couple of adjusters (?) that don't show on any pictures/diagrams I've seen. I'll set the low speed mixture screw back to specs and try to get the idle screw adjusted again. It WAS idling a little fast,even with the adjustment screw backed all the way off,which indicates an issue according to the instructions. I was going to try another couple of degrees of advance and see where THAT leaves it. Running it as it was delivered,it initially ran right up to 70 mph,but then developed a miss;I kept backing out of the throttle,but it didn't improve much,so I stopped. it idled okay so I drove on over to Carlin,trying different speeds,but was marginal at best. Coming back to Elko,I discovered it'd run pretty good at about 60 in 4th. I upshifted to 5th and EASED it up to 70,which it ran fine at,but any more throttle and it'd start to act up again. Even with all that,it gor 20.7 mpg. This carb seems pretty touchy,but I hope it'll tune in without re-jetting it. So it'll be: re-set the choke blades re-set the fast idle set the low speed mix within specs, set the idle speed to around 750 rpm if possible-if it won't idle down enough,advance the ignition timing a couple of degrees. THEORETICALLY,that'll make it run well again,right? Speed
  18. I'm told the 700R4 was GM's first 4 speed OD automatic,meant to replace the old T350,and eventually replaced the T400 too,then came the 4L60 and the Heavy Duty 4L80 series. Since it's a '90 Heavy Half,it was,I think,the first year of the 700R4 replacing the T400 in the heavy duty half ton models. I agree,the mechanics of the conversion,while likely expensive ,won't be that hard,but the electrics will be a nightmare. Speed
  19. An Allison transmission? The 4L80E four-speed (OD) was typically used in the '90s unless his truck is either heavy duty or has a transmission swap. Wiring will be his bigger challenge, overlaying the chassis wiring schematics to compare the differences then splicing or swapping harnesses.
  20. About right on the custom driveline construction cost. Joints are also spendy for medium duty trucks. $125-$150 for shaft work like this was a norm for years. Shop labor is floating around $100-$125 per hour at Reno. $250 is 2-2.5 hours.
  21. Innovative approaches...The Weber is altitude sensitive and generally needs jetting for the altitude/locale. Another issue is float/seat pressure. Keep fuel pump pressure within the limits for the Weber, usually 4 to 4.5 psi or so. Look up the specs for your particular Weber series. Flooding will result otherwise.
  22. As it stands,I've installed a Weber carb on the engine,which seems to have improved the running markedly,though it still has the "tugboat" sounding idle,to a lesser degree. I'm looking at checking the compression next (I can't believe I haven't checked it yet-maybe I DID and it was okay....)followed by adjusting the valves. I ALSO changed both 22R engines over to 10si one wire alternators that make 105 amps,though the kits I used require mods to the adjustment brackets. The one on the '82 truck I'll be eventually swapping my axles into required offsetting the "J-bracket" outward an inch away from the alternator to clear the cooling fan,but works fine otherwise,and the one on the '81,which I'm driving now,would have the adjuster running into the power steering pump,so I engineered an a spring loaded arrangement that connects to the fenderwell. Both alternators/mounts work fine. Next project is installing new 100W. H-4 headlights,as I'm getting tired of driving by feel at night. Speed
  23. It sounds like his main concern is what he'll need to save out of the wiring to make the gas engine work in a Diesel truck. He also says the Diesel is a 5 speeder,but the gas engine is mated to a 700R4,so is there a way to keep the stick and link it to the 5.7L gas motor? If not,I guess he can use the auto. and whatever wiring goes to it,and change to the gas ECM. I don't think I'd get much enjoyment from doing this kinda conversion on something with all this electric junk to figure out and cross-match. Speed
  24. Since finding the transmission I want won't be so tough,the next issue is the driveline. There's a guy here in Elko who builds/rebuilds 'em,and he usually gets about $250.00 each plus parts to rebuild one or re-tube one. Is that about typical,or do you have a favorite shop for driveline work? I already know I'll need to lengthen the rear section about 4 inches,and I wouldn't mind using a little longer slip yoke,to prevent wobble,since,as heavy as it'll be,it'll be spinning pretty fast at 3780 RPM on the highway. What do you think? I haven't checked transmission length between the Clark and the SM465,but in addition to getting the right tube length,I'll have to find a yoke and new U-joint to fit the 465 I'm also in need of a speedometer cable adapter to convert my standard GM square drive cable to the military/big truck style end,with a dowel pin style with a "blade" on one side. I found one on ebay once,but it was gone before I could work up the $9.00 for it. Speed
  25. He's not losing much by getting rid of the 6.2L/6.5L GM diesel. The turbo 6.5L version was okay, naturally aspirated they were not impressive. We had a mid-'90s Suburban 2500 test vehicle with this engine; the 6.5L had a stronger lower block assembly and turbocharging, it ran quite well, made enough noise and got marginal fuel economy. The gas engine is probably a match for fuel efficiency.
  26. I like the SM465 for its tough torque capacity and robust iron case. The compound gear is very low (almost like the SM420). This unit was a natural behind a 383 SB Chevy stroker conversion in a Landcruiser. Major gear reduction! A wise choice for the '54 GMC and not a difficult fitup...
  27. I mentioned,in the 90 GMC Forum,that I sold that truck;it made me laugh that the buyer of the '90 was REALLY interested in the '54. Apparently the owner of the place where it's stored has been asked about the '54 several times already. As he tells them, "Everything here is for sale. THAT truck (the '54 GMC)-you don't wanna know the price. If you're SERIOUS though,make an offer and I'll pass it on to the owner." Not sure if I'd sell it or not. I don't use it often,but when I do it's to do stuff nothing else I have can do. Besides-I REALLY LIKE IT! I decided if I DO change the transmission I'll probably go with an SM465,mostly because I know where to find a few of 'em. Speed
  28. I'd been trying to get the previous owner to work with me in getting a Title on this truck,but it sounds like there's a second name on it that belongs to an ex-girlfriend/drinking buddy he REALLY doesn't wanna talk to,so it looked like an alternate method was the only option. I decided to cut my losses and sell it as is,as a parts truck,so I advertised it online. A local rancher bought it for $750.00;he has a Diesel powered one a couple of years newer with an exploded engine and wants to use this one for the Engine/Trans./T/C to swap in,as I understand it. I told him to get logged onto this Forum for advice and information. Don't know how soon he plans to start his project,but hopefully you'll be hearing from him by Spring. Speed
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...