@@waynemartin7574 Depends on what cylinder you're trying to repack, I've done the boom cylinder, I had to get the parts individually from my local hydraulics shop, if I remember right it was in the neighborhood of $40, give or take, and the crowd cylinder is identical to the boom, so it would take the same parts. The bucket and outrigger cylinders I believe are just smaller versions of the boom and crowd, so I would imagine that seals for those would be in the same price range or slightly less. If your swing motor is the problem, I unfortunately don't have any advice for you, the people I've talked to who ran those machines new have mentioned that the weak point is that swing motor, John Deere fought problems with them for years, before trying to forget that they ever made them, so parts through Deere are almost impossible to get, and they fail often, and I haven't dug into mine yet to see how bad they are to work on, although I will need to as soon as I can get the time to work on it.
@@waynemartin7574 You shouldn't be in too much trouble then, the piston seals have most likely failed. The cylinders John Deere used on those machines can be a bit of a bear to get apart, but they are doable with everyday tools. I believe I had to get the wiper seal from an auto parts store, but other than that, all the seals in there are fairly generic and easy to find, although you may have to custom drill the holes in the piston seals themselves, depending on where your hydraulics shop sources them from.
Fortunately, these aren't true 'Widowmaker' rims that explode for no particular reason, this type usually only explodes when someone assembles them wrong, and by my logic, the last time the truck had anyone touch the tires was in the mid to late sixties, so if they've lasted this long without exploding, they probably aren't going to unprovoked. The fun part will be putting new tires on the rims, I'll probably wind up doing that by clamping the air hose onto the tire, and hiding on the other side of a building while they fill, so if something decides to explode, I'll be out of the direct blast radius.
Thanks, that was one of my main goals with this project, to actually get a record of what these larger trucks look like internally, and how they go together, since I wasn't able to find any information when I started working on this truck. Good luck with your 1.5 ton, hopefully it isn't in to bad of a shape.
I got it! I towed it home several weeks ago and I’ll post a video soon. It seems to be in pretty good shape I don’t know yet if engine is stuck. It’s been way too hot and humid to work on it. I found the serial number on the frame, but I am not finding a data plate anywhere. Does yours still have it?
@@gregande Try on the inside of the glove box door for the data plate, I've heard that they're sometimes there- of course, mine doesn't have one there, or any sign it ever did- but there should also be one on the firewall, although it won't tell you much other than what patents the truck falls under, I believe, although mine also has 'KC' stamped into it, which my best guess means that the cab was possibly built in Kansas City, although I could easily be wrong, so don't quote me on that. The two best sources of info off the truck are the serial on the frame, and, if you're lucky, the same number, stamped onto the top of the bellhousing casting, on the little bridge of metal above the clutch inspection plate on the top. Those should tell you what the truck was built as (bare chassis, dump truck, fire truck, etc.,). The important part of it is the prefix, that should be able to tell you most of the information that the truck can give in that manner. Unfortunately, if you're looking for options that the truck had from new, what paint color it was, the best option is archeology on the truck itself, but for things like what plant it was built at, or what date it was built, there's no way that I'm aware of to determine that, potentially even with a data tag. Feel free to post the prefix of the serial number, I'll see what information I can get out of it for you. Best of luck with the truck, my fingers are crossed for your engine to not be stuck.
Thanks for posting. Earlier this week I discovered a similar truck in a farmer's shelterbelt. I've been thinking about it all weekend and your video has convinced me that I gotta have it!
Apparently in the caption at 12:07 my editing program decided to autocorrect 'detent' to 'detend', which I wasn't even aware was a word. Computers are wonderful, aren't they?
Apparently it's still used in aviation, which tells you something about how well it works. I'm quite honestly surprised that any of those wires were still there, most other places on the truck where they were originally, the wires were long gone from.
The loggers were well on their way to try and discover what happens when you can no longer either find or grind gears. Then again, they do call these big non-syncroed transmissions 'crashboxes' for a reason, so it wasn't all operator error
That was my reasoning as well, combined with the fact that it was going to get scrapped if I didn't take it, since no one else that was interested in it could move it. Also, I have found some hard proof that Speedy worked out of the town you live in from '47 up until '73, so you were correct in your comment on the last video.
@@gearsnstuff7330 I'm glad you are saving it from being scrapped. It's sad when cool old stuff gets crushed and sold as scrap metal. And that's cool! Maybe one day you'll have to bring Speedy up to visit its old home!
It definitely was quite a bit of work, I believe there's only a two or three of the internal components in that transmission that didn't need some kind of work done to them. And yes, I do believe that it worked on a lumber mill in your area hauling chips until the early-mid '70s, although I haven't been able to find any hard evidence of that.
The truck is still a numbers matching unit, which is incredible with how badly the loggers that owned the truck flogged it. If it weren't numbers matching, then yes, it would be easier and much, much cheaper to find another engine, unless I can't find any without freeze cracking in the water jackets, and I got lucky and the coolant was drained in this truck when they parked it.
That's pretty awesome man! 🔧🔩 I've got a 1929 Sterling in about the same shape. Would love to try to get mine running one day but I think the engine is junk.
Sadly the engine in the Mack is pretty rough too, I put PB blaster down the cylinders and it comes out of coolant ports. Would be an easy fix in 1923, just walk down to the Mack dealer and buy new cylinder jugs, but sadly in 2023 new cylinder jugs are made of unobtanium.
Sadly the engine is most likely shot ,when I dump PB blaster down the two open cylinders it immediately pours out what I believe to be coolant taps on the side of the cylinder jugs (They could also be ports for compression releases, hopefully), and new cylinder jugs for this are made from solid unobtanium.
It really is, and I hope it'll be accurate as well, the current plan for rebuilding the engine involves a couple of turbos and more carbs than it originally had
I've been around other trucks of the same vintage, and this is a surprising amount larger than them. And it's also not even the biggest truck Mack made in 1923, the AC 'Bulldog' was significantly larger than the AB.
Hydraulics systems actualy work best at full engine RPM, at slower speeds the system is jerky, and with this machine at slower speeds the hydraulics have quite a bit of 'dead space' in the control lever where it just bleeds off pressure in the cylinders before it gets to the point of actualy doing what I want it to, thus I have more finesse with the hydraulics at full throttle.
New subscriber. My first big truck was a 46 ford. Still have part of it. Those engines have full floating rod bearings . The rods spin on the outer part of the bearing and the bearing spins on the crankshaft. I happen to have a large box of those bearings. Brand new NOS Ford. Perhaps I will show them in a video in a few days.
I haven't heard of that design before, I had thought that they would be located to the rod caps, but at least it means you can't spin a rod bearing. The reason I had described that one as 'spun' is because there was about an eighth inch of slop between the rods on that bearing and the crankshaft.
