Engine Work - Update

[Stanton]

Doing a little engine work on my ‘47. Head bolts came out easy enough with an impact on lowest setting. A coating of copper-based anti-seize applied in 2009 did its job.

Head bolts all loosed.

Before I separate the head from the block, is there any advantage to pouring some concoction into the coolant opening to help clean up those passages? Or some off-the-shelf cleaner to reduce scale, etc.?

Thanks.

[Eugene]

Since engine is out of tractor and on an engine stand. Once head removed, coolant manifold (lower right front of block) removed, power flush the cooling system. Top down and from the coolant manifold around and behind the cylinders.

Head also.

You could let dry out then flush again.

[tst]

aside from hot tank or acid you will never get all the rust scale out

[Glen]

Hi,
Cub head bolts need non hardening sealer put on the threads, not anti seize.

People on here have had problems with the head bolts leaking coolant after using anti seize on the head bolts.
I would recommend you use non hardening sealer when putting the engine together.

[Stanton]

Thanks for the advice. I agree with you, Glen, but the anti-seize looks good for being 12 years old.

Looks like there’s a leak in between cylinders 1 & 2 and 2 & 3. Plenty of carbon to clean up and bores to measure.

[NJ Farmer]

Use pipe dope on the threads (non-hardening) the one with the brush in the lid. Works great on sealant and will not seize the bolts… just the first couple of threads don’t goop it up…


NJ Farmer

[Glen]

Hi,
It looks like you should check the head for warping, if the gasket has leaks between cylinders.

Below is a post I made with info about replacing a Cub head gasket, and sealing the bolts.
The automotive industry uses the 2 products shown.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=102173&p=807849#p807849

[Stanton]

Hi,
It looks like you should check the head for warping, if the gasket has leaks between cylinders.

Below is a post I made with info about replacing a Cub head gasket, and sealing the bolts.
The automotive industry uses the 2 products shown.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=102173&p=807849#p807849

Thanks. The head gasket had Permatex Copper gasket spray on it from 2009. I'll need to have the head checked and decked, if need be.

[k hutchins]

If the head checks ok, your leakage may be from loose head bolts. After l reinstalled mine to the correct ftlbs (45). I ran it for a few hours then pulled the hood and dbl checked them. 4 or 5 had to be retightened. Just an fyi.

[Stanton]

If the head checks ok, your leakage may be from loose head bolts. After l reinstalled mine to the correct ftlbs (45). I ran it for a few hours then pulled the hood and dbl checked them. 4 or 5 had to be retightened. Just an fyi.

Your and Glen’s comment had me thinking the same thing. By using anti-seize instead of thread sealant, the bolts may not have stayed torqued to spec. They all seems to release a lot easier than I expected them to when removing.

[Nelson 634]

I don't think a "properly torqued" head bolt will be affected by anti-seize compound.
I believe that bolts torqued to their proper torque for the engineered threads and bolt size stretch the threads and therefore don't loosen, don't need lock washers and shouldn't be used again. That's in a perfect world.

[Stanton]

Got the valves removed today. Valve stems and guides all felt good with no wobble. Upper part of the exhaust valves had a heavy coat of carbon.

Need to check diameters on the valve stems against specs, then on to connecting rod bearings and journals.

[Stanton]

Finished measuring a few things. I plastigaged all the connecting rod bearing to crankshaft journals and here's how they came out (Spec is 0.001" - 0.003") :

• Cylinder #1: 0.0015"
• Cylinder #2: 0.0015"
• Cylinder #3: 0.0015"
• Cylinder #4: 0.0010"

Each connecting rod bearing had "0.10 Over" stamped on it. Here's an example of what they looked like:

All smooth, no burrs, ridges or gouges. Just a little discoloration.
------

Measured the crankshaft journals at the connecting rods, they came out this way:

• Cylinder #1: 1.4931"
• Cylinder #2: 1.4917"
• Cylinder #3: 1.4896"
• Cylinder #4: 1.4963"

They appear to be between STD (1.498" - 1.499") and 0.10 under (1.488" - 1.489").
-----

Measured the bores, both front-to-back and side-to-side at just below top, mid-point, and just above bottom.

Looks like the bores are slightly tapered from larger tops to (almost) STD spec bottoms.
-----

Probably need to measure the valve stems and pistons next. So, all you experienced engine overhaulers out there, let me know your opinion on my next course of action.

[tst]

cylinders are worn enough to give you blowby and compression lost, crank sounds like maybe a journal or two was turned just make a repair in the past, does not make sence that all the rods had .010 bearing if the journal was standard on two of them if I am reading this right

[Eugene]

Been thinking about your measurements most of the afternoon. Not wanting to spend Stanton's money.

Suggest taking the engine to a machine shop. Have cylinders and crank measured and block boiled.

My guess. Block bored to .010 over. Crank turned. Can't tell much about the valves and seats other than a lot of carbon.