60+ year old army mechanic wrong AGAIN

News, events, issues/items of the day. Does not need to be MV specific.

60+ year old army mechanic wrong AGAIN

Postby pfarber » Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:05 am

Over on the G503 web site for people who have not rebuilt an MV for a few years our favorite Army Trained mechanic posted about how he was involved with Victor seal company in trying to find out why the victor seals were failing in L-134 jeep engines. Evidently he thought he was the go to guy.

He bashed Victor for poor seal quality, and that he had tried to save the world yadda yadda,

How surprised are you gonna be when I tell you that he's as wrong as a chick with a dick?

The *REAL* reason the Victor rear main seals were failing? The Military crank specs are larger than the civvy CJ crank specs.

Please refer to AERA tech bulletin # TB2025. Well, unless you are an a member of the Engine Rebuilders Association you can't.. but here's the skinny:

the seal surface diameter on the crankshaft must be 2.302 - 2.312 to use the lip seals now available.

Unless your jeep crank is ground specifically or worn down to that size you will burn up the lip seals (*ANY* lip seal made before 2008-2009).

So for us jeep owners, USE THE ROPE SEALS UNLESS YOU HAVE HAD THE CRANK REAR SEAL JOURNAL GROUND TO 2.30 in.

Oh, and post count != knowledge... but you knew that.
I got a Mountain Cur and a ~~pitbull~~ big loveable cuddle puppy
RIP Kimber 5/26/2022
RIP Yeager 1/3/2019
RIP TJ 3/25/2014
RIP Sugar Bear 8/29/2014
RIP Shilo 4/10/2015
RIP Yuki 2/19/2017
User avatar
pfarber
Motor Sergeant
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:45 am
Location: The Internet

Re: 60+ year old army mechanic wrong AGAIN

Postby pfarber » Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:13 am

Oh, and for the PERFECT failure, our trusty 60+ year mechanic says you should soak the rope seal as per the TM.

Seems that both are wrong WHEN TALKING ABOUT NEW ASBESTOS FREE ROPE SEALS.

Read this:

http://www.chevytrucks.org/tech/bobadler-1.htm
I got a Mountain Cur and a ~~pitbull~~ big loveable cuddle puppy
RIP Kimber 5/26/2022
RIP Yeager 1/3/2019
RIP TJ 3/25/2014
RIP Sugar Bear 8/29/2014
RIP Shilo 4/10/2015
RIP Yuki 2/19/2017
User avatar
pfarber
Motor Sergeant
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:45 am
Location: The Internet

Re: 60+ year old army mechanic wrong AGAIN

Postby pfarber » Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:14 am

I honestly have nothing against our mechanic buddy. I just wish he would stop giving bad advice.
I got a Mountain Cur and a ~~pitbull~~ big loveable cuddle puppy
RIP Kimber 5/26/2022
RIP Yeager 1/3/2019
RIP TJ 3/25/2014
RIP Sugar Bear 8/29/2014
RIP Shilo 4/10/2015
RIP Yuki 2/19/2017
User avatar
pfarber
Motor Sergeant
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:45 am
Location: The Internet

Re: 60+ year old army mechanic wrong AGAIN

Postby deadline » Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:23 am

For cryng out loud... some ninny e-mails me and says that the article is only for Civvy Chevy 216's.

I swear to god I'm gonna pimp slap the lot of you. Just kidding... group hug! :lol:

The article is right, the seal info is correct (even for the L-134). If you look at the rear main seal pocket its not a precision milled part. Ropes don't need it.

I just put a new (aka asbestos free) rope seal in my GPW engine. I threw away the neoprene that came with the kit (ALL REBUILD KITS ARE BASED ON THE L-134 AS BUILT FOR THE CJ-2 L/F engines), put some moly break in lube on it and put it together. I don't have enough miles on it yet to see a leak... but the new bearings and crank regrind get me 40PSI at idle and nothing is leaking. :)
deadline
Site Admin
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:16 am


Return to Off-Topic