Jump to content

doubleclutchinweasel

Pedigreed Bulldog
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,612

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

 Content Type 

Everything posted by doubleclutchinweasel

  1. doubleclutchinweasel
    I found an Automann number 464.002 on a Euclid cross reference. This one is 60" long & is 2" in diameter like the original, not 1-1/2". Gonna dig more...
  2. doubleclutchinweasel
    I'll check it out. And thanks!
  3. doubleclutchinweasel
    Length confirmed: 64-3/8" c-to-c.
  4. doubleclutchinweasel
    Yes, as near as I can tell. I will double-check this afternoon. it was rainy and dark last night, and the corn liquor had started to affect my measuring ability! I was using the approximate 60" tube length (from memory), plus about 2-1/4" from the end of tube to the center of the stud for each end. Again, I'll try to get a direct measurement this afternoon. I found my stud dimension sketch last night. It does appear that the E-4607 and E-4608 are pretty close matches for the old Mack parts I measured when I had the tube out. The "large end" of the taper was the easiest measurement to get, so I am pretty confident in it (1.030-1.031"). The "taper length" is a bit more difficult to measure. Mine LOOKED like it was between 1.100-1.125" long, and theirs is listed as 1.070". Pretty close. Of course, given any difference in the taper length, the "small end" diameter would vary accordingly. But, mine appeared to be around 0.890", where theirs is listed as 0.896". Again, measurement errors could be more than these differences, as could a slightly shorter overall taper length.
  5. doubleclutchinweasel
    My tube looks like it's about 60" long. The one Mack spec'd is 60.06". So, I'd say we're pretty close there. The ends, as you probably already know, are 1-1/8" threads. And the mounting threads are 3/4-16. I have the stud taper dimensions around here somewhere. But the 10QH38 cross reference probably gives that info too. Actually, I believe your E4607 appears to be the same as the "industry standard" ES405R, which I believe is what I crossed the Mack part over to when I first looked into this. The overall length looks like about 64-1/2", center-to-center, give or take. The middle portion of the tube is about 2" in diameter, & steps down to a smaller diameter at each end. It uses standard "clamps" to lock the tube in position. If the ES405R and ES405L ends fit the knuckles, than all I really need is a tube which will fill in the gap between them. I don't really care if it is for a Mack, a GMC, a Ford, or a Peterbilt...as long as it'll hold my front wheels straight!
  6. doubleclutchinweasel
    I'd love to do that! What cross tube would I use to do that? I don't really have any junk yards around here to pick from. But, if anybody has a Mack part number for a suitable tube...
  7. doubleclutchinweasel
    Apparently, this was common on oler Macks (Bs, Rs). When the tube is turned one turn, you get the difference of the two threads (1 coarse & 1 fine), rather than the sum of the two. Makes for VERY fine adjustments!I didn't realize they had done this till I read it here. Lo & behold, mine was set up this way, too. See my other threads, & you can see the thread gages in the threads. If they were the same pitch, you would be correct. But, one being coarser than the other gives you the adjustment. This oddball thread on 1 end is what makes the tie rod end on that end not cross to anyone else's number.
  8. doubleclutchinweasel
    The 10QH38 crosses over to about anybody's part number. It's 12tpi right hand thread.The 10QH37 doesn't! It's 16tpi right hand thread, IF that's the number I actually have. Yep. That's right. Both right hand threads. But a different pitch. And, yes, it's an FA535 (9,000#).
  9. doubleclutchinweasel
    Can't really get a straight answer as to whether they used the vin or the axle series (FA535). I did give them the vin. But, all the parts counter folks said they could not access the individual parts breakdown for the axle assembly, only the assembly itself.They had to contact Mack to get the tube number. That's where my confidence started to fade! I was hoping this number might ring a bell with some of the old-timers. I'd feel great if I could find that number on the old tube! By the way, the ends they spec'd were 10QH37 & 10QH38.
  10. doubleclutchinweasel
    Mack thinks my tie rod cross tube is a 7QH243. I even have a length from them (60.06") of the tube, which matches mine. I still can't find a number on mine. Any of you old parts guys know if that sounds right for my 1970 R611ST? Old parts are non-returnable!
  11. doubleclutchinweasel
    Ha! That's what I did with the cut-off anti-freeze jug I was using before I changed the pipe. But, it usually landed between the drive wheels.
  12. doubleclutchinweasel
    The D8K (model 77V) was my fav-o-rite tractor. Faster than the D8H, higher ground clearance, more power, & quicker hydraulics. We did, however, bypass the built-in brakes on the steering clutch levers. Otherwise, you would occasionally get a quicker turn than you expected! They were "on" or "off"...no "feathering".Sometimes hauled one of these behind an R611ST on a 3-axle Hyster fixed-neck lowboy. With attachments, about 111, 000 gross. Ahhhhh....memories!
  13. doubleclutchinweasel
    When I was a young'un, I worked construction. Ran Cat D6C, D6D, D8H, & D8K. Cleared right of way for roads, power lines & reservoirs. Pushed Rome K/G cutters & various types of rakes. Anybody familiar with those implements??? Here is a picture of a military version of a Rome K/G Cutter-equipped Caterpillar tractor. The referred the the tractor/implement as a Rome Plow... And, here's one with a rake (or "root rake", according to some).
  14. doubleclutchinweasel
    Some time back, somebody posted a question regarding the differrent models produced. While this page does not detail all the model numbers, it does LIST the model numbers. I tried to post on that topic, but it must have been too old... http://www.macktrucks.com/assets/mack/ModelProduction1.rtf
  15. doubleclutchinweasel
    Good deal, Vinny.
  16. doubleclutchinweasel
    We used to cut the pipe off when it rusted out at the top & put rain caps on. Once it rusted out below the caps, we would replace the pipe. Can't tell you how many flappers I saw stuck! They are cool when done right, though. Oh, and the "big" curve on the original B-model pipes are awesome. What about the multi-curved ones on some dump trucks, that snake out from under the bed?
  17. doubleclutchinweasel
    Thanks. And, by the way, the local Mack dealer shows the 14QK2100 in stock at a warehouse. He looked up the 14QK2100P1, and it was "superceded by" the 14QK2100. That would tend to support the "they are the same" theory, as an older number would typically not supercede a later number...unless they were the same part.
  18. doubleclutchinweasel
    So, if I understand you perfectly... A 14QK2100 shock would have been the "original" version of that part. It would have no "P" on it. But, as soon as there was a different version, the new part would become a 14QK2100P2, and the "no P" part would become the 14QK2100P1. Is that the gist of it? The reason I ask is that I can get a 14QK2100 for $68 apiece, and a 14QK2100P1 for $38 apiece. Pretty significant difference! So, as long as it truly is the same part... Ya' see? On a side note, and in defense of some of the guys who have used non-Mack parts, I have had the Mack parts folks (on occasion) give me the vendor (TRW, Moog, etc...) part number for the Mack part. Remember, Mack doesn't make EVERYTHING they use. They make some. They have some made to spec. And, on occasion, they buy an already-existing part.
  19. doubleclutchinweasel
    Ha-ha!!!! That's why I'm here: to entertain!
  20. doubleclutchinweasel
    Information about revisions and such very much appreciated. Yet, you mention the "P1" part. The build sheet calls for "no P" (see original post). I agree with your assessment of the "will fit" parts. They may fit, but the damping rates may not be thecsame as the originals! Thanks again for the info.
  21. doubleclutchinweasel
    I presume you mean the Monroes? And how did you like them?
  22. doubleclutchinweasel
    Thanks, guys. The Monroe 66878 is what I found, as well. And, the Gabriel seems to be an 83221. Anybody used either of those?
  23. doubleclutchinweasel
    Need part number help! Front shocks listed on build sheet as 14QK2100. Found several variations on that (14QK2100P1, or P3, etc...). Trying to cross over to a correct Monroe or Gabriel number. Sometimes the P1 or whatever seems to matter...other times not. Findit parts lists several Mack versions, including the plain 2100 number. Prices vary considerably. Wonder if the P1 or P3 is a revision, or an actual different part. They don't necessarily cross over exactly the same, depending on whose chart you use. Anybody have direct, personal knowledge about this?
  24. doubleclutchinweasel
    Mmmmm....curvy!
  25. doubleclutchinweasel
    I heard it a bit different today. "Chrome won't get you home, but it might get you to HER place." Of course, they might have been talking about motorcycles...

BigMackTrucks.com

BigMackTrucks.com is a support forum for antique, classic and modern Mack Trucks! The forum is owned and maintained by Watt's Truck Center, Inc. an independent, full service Mack dealer. The forums are not affiliated with Mack Trucks, Inc.

Our Vendors and Advertisers

Thank you for your support!

Mack Related Links

Popular links

BMT Forum Logo

HTML tutorial
×
×
  • Create New...