Engine work on my 1952

Farmall Cub Forum -- Questions and answers to all of your Cub related issues.

Moderator: Team Cub

Forum rules
Notice: For sale and wanted posts are not allowed in this forum. Please use our free classifieds or one of our site sponsors for your tractor and parts needs.

Re: Engine work on my 1952

Postby Eugene » Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:43 pm

CharlieB wrote:A question---The rings were really worn thin. Could someone have put in some low quality rings that would have worn like that? I was amazed that the new rings from NAPA were so much stiffer and strong feeling than the old rings.
Most probable answer is metal composition differences between the newly purchased rings and the previously installed rings.
I have an excuse. CRS.
Eugene
Team Cub Mentor
Team Cub Mentor
 
Posts: 12131
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: Mo. Linn
Zip Code: 65051
Circle of Safety Award
Circle of Safety: Y

Re: Engine work on my 1952

Postby ntrenn » Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:15 pm

The rings in my loboy had a lot of side face wear to go with the OD wear. Yours may have been reringed some time ago. Pretty sure mine was not as the mechanic that worked on it was family (who just happens to work at Jacobi's).
Did you check your wrist pins? You probably won't want to touch them at $20 a pin, but if they are less than 0.003 clearance, they'll be fine for a mowing machine.
I put in the cheapo 5098X ring set and had almost exactly the same ring end gap as you measured, so we'll see how yours works out. The loboy was pretty strong right out of the box with only a rering and valve job.

They tell me that they still use them a lot in your area cultivating tobacco - got me to thinking - check the breather cup - no breather action will really impact liner and ring wear....
ntrenn
Cub Star!!
Cub Star!!
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:55 pm
Location: Indiana
Zip Code: 47119
Skype Name: ntrenn
Tractors Owned: 63 Cub 221833 in family since '69
65 Lo-boy 19648 with an un-stuck #4 - it lives!!!
144 Cultivators with disc hillers
193 Plow
42C mower
59L mower mounted on the Fcub
23A Disc - lost possession

Re: Engine work on my 1952

Postby ricky racer » Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:18 pm

Eugene wrote:
CharlieB wrote:A question---The rings were really worn thin. Could someone have put in some low quality rings that would have worn like that? I was amazed that the new rings from NAPA were so much stiffer and strong feeling than the old rings.
Most probable answer is metal composition differences between the newly purchased rings and the previously installed rings.


Due to the wear on the worn rings, the cross section of each ring is greater on the new ring which will make the new rings stiffer too.
Last edited by ricky racer on Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
1929 Farmall Regular
1935 John Deere B
1937 John Deere A
1941 John Deere H
1952 John Deere B
1953 Farmall Cub
User avatar
ricky racer
501 Club
501 Club
 
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:40 pm
Location: Niles / Buchanan, Michigan
Zip Code: 49120
Circle of Safety Award
Circle of Safety: Y

Re: Engine work on my 1952

Postby JackF » Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:41 am

I misread the post. I read the post as the cylinder walls were measured along with everything as standard. I know you’re trying to get by without doing all the extra work, but check the piston ring gap like everyone is saying.

Make sure you don’t have a cylinder wall ridge at the top of the cylinder wall and about ¾ to a 1” down from the top of the cylinder on the thrust side try check for excessive cylinder wall wear.

I hope it works out.
I’m really good at doing nothing…With that said…I’m really, really good at doing nothing
JackF
501 Club
501 Club
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2003 7:20 am
Zip Code: 00000

Previous

Return to Farmall Cub

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests