184 rebuild completed

[Bob McCarty]

Rick, PM sent.

[mastercraft]

''well in July while mowing my supposive "upgraded Phil Lenke seal" sprung a huge leak due to his inability to properly machine the retainer = could push the seal in by hand'' and '' I reworked the not so super Lenke seal retainer with better sealer to retain rear main in place from rotating.''

I'd sure like to know more about the retainer, like when you got it reworked and where you sent your bad retainer to have it machined. In all the years I've known Mr Lenke, you'll never find anyone more particular about the quality of his work. If my memory serves me right, he finished machining retainers back in 2011 or maybe 2012. I'd put his work 2 steps above mine any day, mainly because I did all mine one at a time, while he did all his on a CNC machine, which usually bypasses a chance for human error.

Rick

Not sure about the OP and what he did to fix his issue , but I had a similar issue with one of his retainers, it spun in the retainer, what I did was "stake/peen" the retainer and used loctite sleeve retainer and so far so good...knock on wood

[outdoors4evr]

I did the same as mastercraft with my 184. My seal was walking its way out of the retainer as it spun. It had moved about 1/8" when I pulled it out, replaced the seal, and staked it in with an punch & locktite. Sometimes it just goes that way.

[mastercraft]

I did the same as mastercraft with my 184. My seal was walking its way out of the retainer as it spun. It had moved about 1/8" when I pulled it out, replaced the seal, and staked it in with an punch & locktite. Sometimes it just goes that way.

3 with issues......hrmmmmmmmmmmmm....anyway, so far after the fix I did it is going strong....just gotta fix my creeper seal leaking for the 3rd time..lol

[Landreo]

I did the same as mastercraft with my 184. My seal was walking its way out of the retainer as it spun. It had moved about 1/8" when I pulled it out, replaced the seal, and staked it in with an punch & locktite. Sometimes it just goes that way.

3 with issues......hrmmmmmmmmmmmm....anyway, so far after the fix I did it is going strong....just gotta fix my creeper seal leaking for the 3rd time..lol

For mastercraft and outdoors4evr:
What seal was placed in the reworked seal holder? Was it a metal cased or a rubber cased seal? I have no doubts why they failed but I thought I would verify the seal type first just in case I am wrong.

[mastercraft]

I did the same as mastercraft with my 184. My seal was walking its way out of the retainer as it spun. It had moved about 1/8" when I pulled it out, replaced the seal, and staked it in with an punch & locktite. Sometimes it just goes that way.

3 with issues......hrmmmmmmmmmmmm....anyway, so far after the fix I did it is going strong....just gotta fix my creeper seal leaking for the 3rd time..lol

For mastercraft and outdoors4evr:
What seal was placed in the reworked seal holder? Was it a metal cased or a rubber cased seal? I have no doubts why they failed but I thought I would verify the seal type first just in case I am wrong.

I believe it was metal.........if there is a equal partner to the metal but in the rubber version what is that part number that'll fit in the machined retainer in case I have an issue in the future?

[outdoors4evr]

My seal had a metal casing (Part #CR29952). The paint was rubbed off the contact points of the metal which was the primary indication that the seal was turning in the retainer. The outside edge of the seal showed the rub marks, the middle of the metal did not. I don't recall if I replaced the seal, just used locktite to glue it into place and then staked the seal with a punch so it wouldn't walk out of place.

I am satisfied with the work performed on the retainer. The seal to retainer fit was not loose, but for some reason mine needed a little more help with staying put. I highly recommend having the modification done by these guys. The attention to detail is fantastic and my retainer was machined in 2012 and staked in the next year. I haven't had an issue since.

[Dale Finch]

I replaced 2 seals back in 2012, both had been reworked by ?? and BOTH failed last year. I subsequently replaced 2 different seals with remachined ones from tst (Tim). At first I was worried that the failed ones had been done by tst, so I was reluctant to use his again. After talking with him, and double checking my records, I satisfied myself that NONE of his seals that I used had had any problems. In fact, one of my DSCF projects is to replace a leaking seal on my "newest" '56 cub, and I will be using one of tst's rear seals!! Thanks Tim!

(Tim, I'll be sending you the removed retainer after DSCF...I already have one of yours on my shelf, and want to keep a spare.....or if you will be at DSCF, perhaps I could just swap the old for a new right there and save shipping? )

[mastercraft]

My seal had a metal casing (Part #CR29952). The paint was rubbed off the contact points of the metal which was the primary indication that the seal was turning in the retainer. The outside edge of the seal showed the rub marks, the middle of the metal did not. I don't recall if I replaced the seal, just used locktite to glue it into place and then staked the seal with a punch so it wouldn't walk out of place.

I am satisfied with the work performed on the retainer. The seal to retainer fit was not loose, but for some reason mine needed a little more help with staying put. I highly recommend having the modification done by these guys. The attention to detail is fantastic and my retainer was machined in 2012 and staked in the next year. I haven't had an issue since.

The Lenke retainer I have was machined nicely as well.....However it is my opinion based on measurements I took that "he" didn't do his homework very well and machined the retainer clearence a tad to much, which is why the seal fit "loosely" eventually spinning.......while I still had to lightly tap them in with a tool, it didn't take as much effort in my opinion as it should of for a tighter fit. Anyway, this was my experience and it seems as others too are having the same issues. Nice to know I'm not the only one.

[Rick Prentice]

Keep in mind that all these factory retainers that have started to leak, well more than 1000's, maybe 10,000s total, is because of that same potmetal material as the IH carbs that warp badly. Heat must have something to do with the changing the shape of both the retainer and carbs. To my knowledge most of all the seals used, rubber coated or steel casing, whether from new or after being reworked call for a .005-.007 pressed fit, and after years of service most retainers expand to the point a new seal seems small and doesn't fit. I can predict with near 99.9 percent certainty that all retainers and carbs, if the cub is used as a working tractor getting hot and cooling off over and over again, these 'problem child' potmetal parts are changing shape as we speak. I'm pretty sure that all the retainers that I machined, well over 300, will eventually start to leak again, no way to stop it.

Maybe the answer is some space age polymer stretchy adhesive that's oil and heat resistant and sticks to potmetal and rubber or steel. All I know is a reworked retainer can be machined perfect right now and depending how hot the cub gets might determine how long the potmetal keeps its shape.

The one issue I have with a rubber coated seal is there's constant splashing of oil onto the back of the rubber coated seal. As soon as any type of change takes place with the retainer or seal, that oil wicks slowly between the two and before long the rubber doesn't have any gripping power against the retainer. It'd be nice to know the FIRST DOCUMENTED factory retainer that started to leak. Then we'd know if buying a new retainer is really worth the money.

So many questions. I'm looking for answers too, Rick

[Slim140]

Very well said Rick. It's hard to "fix" something that is bound to fail. If it wasn't a problem area it wouldn't need attention in the first place. You can repair it and hope for the best but in this situation that retainer is waiting for failure rather it's new or re-machined and it doesn't matter who machines it. It's a piece of cheap cast aluminum (pot metal) and aluminum draws heat to it anyway making it that much more prone to failure.

[Landreo]

From the Parker seal catalog Catalog EPS 5350/USA 2017:

Page 3-3
Rubber Covered
Case material can be partially or completely coated in rubber.
Generally, carbon steel cases are used in rubber molded
options. Rubber covered OD offers improved bore sealing.

page 2-11
Housing / Bore Considerations
Typical radial shaft seals are pressed into the
bore to assure proper OD sealing and seal
retention in the housing. The most commonly used
materials for seal housings are steel and cast iron.
Care must be taken when softer materials such as
aluminum, bronze or plastics are used for the
housing material. Aluminum has a thermal
expansion rate almost double that of steel. Steel
case designs can lose the required press fit in an
aluminum housing when they go through thermal
cycles.
A seal with an aluminum, composite or rubber
covered OD should be used for aluminum housings.
These materials help maintain the press fit in the
housing during thermal cycles and reduce the
possibility of galvanic corrosion. Plastic housings
can also expand at rates that can create problems
if a metal OD seal is used.
The following chart shows typical values of
thermal expansion for common metals in inch/
inch/°F.
Fiber reinforced and rubber OD seals are more
forgiving so their bore tolerance can be greater
than for metal OD seals. Aluminum bores are
typically smaller than steel bores for metal OD
seals to compensate for some of the difference in
thermal expansion. A finish range of 40 to 100 μin
Ra (1.0 to 2.5 μm Ra) is recommended for service
pressures up to 3 psi (0.20 bar). If the fluid is thick,
such as a grease, a 125 μin Ra (3.17 μm Ra) finish
would be acceptable with no system pressure.
The finish on aluminum bores is more sensitive
and must be maintained to keep seals from
spinning in the bore and should not be smoother
than 60 μin Ra (1.5 μm Ra).


I am a facts, data, theory person.

The IHC second designed seal and retainer lasted for a long time so something must have been correct with their second design. The original IHC retainer and seal were revised, the seal was changed from a steel cased seal to a rubber cased seal. The retainer boss was thickened. They did not make new dies and use more expensive seals for no good reason. I expect the reason was a high failure rate with the steel cased seals combined with a too thin retainer boss. The revised design apparently worked well. I expect the failure rate was low, I am guessing less than 1/10,000. So repeat what IHC did and there should be a similar success rate. What is the failure rate of the reworked seals and retainer? Alot greater than 1/10,000.

Taking a seal retainer, machine the boss thinner, and place a steel cased seal in that thin boss is a recipe for failure, IHC found that out, hence the high failure rate.

The retainer is ZAMAK, likely ZAMAK 3 , not aluminum or common pot metal. The thermal expansion rate for aluminum is twice that of steel and the ZAMAK retainer that IHC used has a expansion rate greater than aluminum. That is the reason for the rubber cased seal. It will allow for expansion and contraction of the seal retainer. A steel seal will not. Years ago I placed a steel seal of the correct size into a retainer and was not able to move the seal with any hand pressure. It felt tight. I then place the seal and retainer in hot water and was able to push the seal out with my fingers. It was lose from the expansion of the seal retainer. I did the same with a rubber cased seal and was not able to budge the seal when hot no matter how hard I pushed.

Simply put: the retainer expands a lot more than the steel seal does and the seal becomes lose. A rubber seal is that space age polymer that will flex and stay tight in the seal.

The tolerance for a rubber seal bore OD size is roughly TWICE the tolerance for steel seals. The rubber cased seals are much more forgiving both in cold fit and for expansion.

It is not my time or my money that is being spent but I would not machine a seal retainer, weaken it by thinning the boss, then place a steel cased seal into that boss. That is what IHC did originally, failure, and switched to a proven design. I also have to disagree that the retainers are going to fail. Just use a rubber cased seal in a thick boss retainer and it should be successful. Of course, the rubber cased seal will also fail but after 20-30 years, the rubber will not last forever. I put in two rubber cased seals years ago, 7 years?, and still no leaks. If the retainer bore is deeply scored then a new retainer may be needed for a new rubber seal. If the seal retainer is out of OD tolerance for a rubber seal then folks may be able to fit a larger rubber seal or a metric rubber cased seal.

No need to glue, pin, or stake the seal. Just use the correct rubber cased seal in a usable retainer.

[Slim140]

Good info Landreo, has anyone ever machined a retainer out of steel and tested it on a tractor? When I say tested I mean on a mowing tractor that gets ran for at least an hour + on a hot summer day working hard, our Cubs may get ran at the most for 20 minutes cultivating the garden at half throttle 6-12 times a year, I don’t consider that a test. If they were made out of steel could they be one thickness instead of stepped down like the originals or is there a clearance issue? Would regular 1018 steel work? I would think if steel would work they could be machined on a milling center for way less than the $184 price of a new cast one.

[mastercraft]

after staking mine and sealing it with Loctite I have mowed for 3 years no problem, no leak..........the original remachined "Lenke" didn't even last half the season.....simple fix would be machine it less for a tighter fit for a steel one or simply do as landreo suggests, use a rubber coated seal

[Dale Finch]

OK, Shane...I think you've found a good project for another intriguing episode of "What Happened at Work Today"!