Engine rebuild on a '53 B-61T: END673

[Joey Mack]

Buddy,,,  it's moving too fast...  engine designs are changing frequently and with more complicated ideas..  I have been away from the dealership for 5 years and I feel like I know absolutely nothing about Diesel engines..  I'm just glad I can come here and chat about the older ones and learn, even if it's by my mistaken postings..  I say 'To Hell 'with Ceramic parts..  yeah I know that ceramic rollers on OHC diesels has been around a long time,  but I dont care..  I'm an in-line 6 pushrod guy..  Jojo

[mechohaulic]

don't remember specifics; yet remember lifter faces separating ; cam removal  (with finger tip scalping). rare occasion of cam bushing replacement. clothes pins holding new lifters in place while cam reinstalled. ceramics never a part of process. but also never dreamed of oil velocity being 0-5.  times change.

[terry]

13 hours ago, Keith S said:

All the stud are 9/16-18 x 6.75". A few are little rust-pitted, and a few more show minor marks from using vise-grips.

I was able to easily remove the nuts on all but one of the eight studs that unscrewed from the block. I'm confident the studs will torque up.

Just be sure to run a die on each end of studs and run a bottom tap and blow out stud holes on block.   Terry

[Keith S]

21 hours ago, Vladislav said:

I may be wrong (never dealt with END673 by my hands) but what I figured out from the forum Mack made a major step redoing 673 into Maxidyne family. Those were called ETAZ-675 or so and further on and I belive started calling E6 and EM6 at a certain time. The matter I mention that is Maxidyne engines got newer more massive crank shaft and rods with reinforcements in the block too. Those parts differ from END-673, 711 and other older engines. E6/EM6 have removable liners you can purchase from PAI or other suppliers and they have an edge circle over the top to press into steel firerings to seal against the heads. Heads have recesses corresponding the edges at each cylinder. What is important all those parts are avalible and if older 673 have different liners, bearings, gaskets etc the overhaul may be found troubleful.

What I have on my mind is checking out on purchasing some old EM6 and use it as a basis for overhaul. Those engines look very similar to 673 at the outside and the most mating spots are similar. I mean the oil pan, front cover, etc. Sure every spot should be checked out for that but in general both engines have plenty of similarities.

I don't declare it as the way to go. But a possible option. First it worth to check out possibility of purchasing parts for 673 and having the value you may look for alternatives. My guess is buying a complete engine for parts wouldn't be a big offset in cost from the cost of all new parts. And as long as your engine is already not original to the truck you don't loose truck's originality much.

I'm considering buying something newer. I'll look at E6/EM6.

[Joey Mack]

Since you have these pictures, you may be able to sell it with full disclosure.  Someone out there has the head gaskets and other parts to fix it, or use yours for parts to fix theirs..  just sayin'

[mechohaulic]

1 hour ago, terry said:

Just be sure to run a die on each end of studs and run a bottom tap and blow out stud holes on block.   Terry

old school rules must be obsolete by todays standards  ;;; but cleaning studs and block holes a major importance. also threads were lubricated on install making sure NOT to over lube studs to where oil went into holes. studs threaded in till tight THEN backed off 1/4-1/2 ? turn. one reason a retorque was  always needed. oil in bottom of stud hole with studs tighten reportedly build excessive pressure when engine up to temp. backing off allowed for expansion.

[Licensed to kill]

50 minutes ago, Joey Mack said:

Since you have these pictures, you may be able to sell it with full disclosure.  Someone out there has the head gaskets and other parts to fix it, or use yours for parts to fix theirs..  just sayin'

There is no question (in my mind) that there is someone out there that would want it. The problem is always transport with things like this. I have an engine (673E IIRC) that was reported to be a fresh rebuild (from a LONG time ago) with few miles on it that I don't need out if one of my B-61's. I have yet to start it (but will some day) but even if it starts and runs perfect, I still have no use for it and, while it may be just what someone needs, to ship it anywhere would probably cost more than its worth, not unlike to couple B-61 diffs I have. Hopefully someone can be found within "come and get it" range that can use it should the decision be finalized to go a different route. Big, heavy parts are like real-estate, location, location, location. 

[Keith S]

 Pulled the engine yesterday. An d yes, that counter-weight is a fifth wheel plate - the round plate was for the lifting airbag.

Transmission appears original - dated August 12 1953

 

[Licensed to kill]

That looks like the aforementioned  673E that I took out of one of my B-61's as it has the starter high on the drivers side (like an E-6) as opposed to low on the drinkers side like the 673 in the other B-61's that I have. 

[mechohaulic]

to  quote the phrase ;"a pictures worth a thousand words "::: You sure said a lot of words in those EXCELLENT pictures.  a person can read some lines , go ok  that's cool. but to see in pictures  the process ,it becomes = OH I remember doing that or oh yea  . another fine example (NOT LIMITING TO JUST ONE persons post -too many on here ) of pictures saying a million plus words; watching the amazing build from start to finish of a B-73

[mechohaulic]

one fine looking shop also.

[Vladislav]

My guess (again a guess) END-673 had dry liners of tighter fit than Maxidynes so you need a strong puller to remove them. Not like E6/EM6 OEM or PAI you have sometimes them off the block just turning the crank a little bit. And put back in new ones by hand (after keeping in a fridge overnight). END's didn't have separate firerings, just integrated in the gasket ones, like in car. That same (as it looks now) for head studs. They were thinner in pre-Maxidyne engines. 

Again, I have no experience with END-673 but I rebuilt my ED-519 Lanova which also had similar overall design to all END/E -series. Actually the very predicessor to them all. The crank and rods were much lighter than in E6 along with lesser OD journals etc. Dry liners I used a 20 ton press to get off the block, no firerings. If the memory serves good my ED-519 had even lesser journals than 673 but I didn't have need to check that out.

There was a big thread on here about Maxidyne engines a couple or so years back. Unfortunately I don't remember its title. Glenn Ackers put the most of points in it. I asked question on how those new engines being basically the old 673 could provide much higher torque and even at low revs. His answer was the basic design was seriousely reworked with more massive crank/rods, reinforcement plates over main bearing bolts and other mods. Glenn looked knowing that matter like a palm of his hand. But too unfortunately he's no longer with us anymore.

[Keith S]

21 hours ago, Licensed to kill said:

There is no question (in my mind) that there is someone out there that would want it. The problem is always transport with things like this. I have an engine (673E IIRC) that was reported to be a fresh rebuild (from a LONG time ago) with few miles on it that I don't need out if one of my B-61's. I have yet to start it (but will some day) but even if it starts and runs perfect, I still have no use for it and, while it may be just what someone needs, to ship it anywhere would probably cost more than its worth, not unlike to couple B-61 diffs I have. Hopefully someone can be found within "come and get it" range that can use it should the decision be finalized to go a different route. Big, heavy parts are like real-estate, location, location, location. 

Cost of shipping heavy stuff can kill the deal. I had a B46 shipped from Maine to Florida. Cost wasn't too bad - around $1 per mile. It wasn't the only thing being hauled. The hauler liked the attention and said he could have sold it several times.

[Joey Mack]

As far as pulling the dry liners out of the 673..  I ran beads of weld inside the liners, and when they cooled, i was able to pull them with my liner puller..

[JoeH]

Joey is right, you just weld a bead vertically along the inside of the sleeve and they pop right out when they cool.

[Keith S]

Here's what I found:

• 283hp E6 out of a 1981 Mack RD600
• 2,800lbs
• It runs but should be rebuilt
  • Intake valve springs broken
  • Cylinder wear
• $750
• $900 shipping

My only concern is installing it in my B61. Mating it to the transmission and front crossmember?

Fuel injection lines were removed but...

[D-Day]

There was a thread on here from a couple of years ago titled engine size in 65 Mack B53 and he posted some nice pictures proof that the tip turbine will fit under the hood, I do know the front crossmember/engine mount is different also another issue is if you have a single plate clutch with the short bell housing you would want to change to a two plate clutch with a little stronger transmission to handle the higher torque rating and you would have to redrill the rear mounts through the frame relocating them farther to the rear

[terry]

2 hours ago, D-Day said:

There was a thread on here from a couple of years ago titled engine size in 65 Mack B53 and he posted some nice pictures proof that the tip turbine will fit under the hood, I do know the front crossmember/engine mount is different also another issue is if you have a single plate clutch with the short bell housing you would want to change to a two plate clutch with a little stronger transmission to handle the higher torque rating and you would have to redrill the rear mounts through the frame relocating them farther to the rear

You also have to use a shorter nosed water pump, and shorter crank hub.    terry

[h67st]

Freight Train put a 675 in his B model, maybe he can tell you where to find the thread--he put lots of important details in his posts.

[Keith S]

2 hours ago, D-Day said:

There was a thread on here from a couple of years ago titled engine size in 65 Mack B53 and he posted some nice pictures proof that the tip turbine will fit under the hood, I do know the front crossmember/engine mount is different also another issue is if you have a single plate clutch with the short bell housing you would want to change to a two plate clutch with a little stronger transmission to handle the higher torque rating and you would have to redrill the rear mounts through the frame relocating them farther to the rear

So Mack-to-Mack engine to transmission bolt pattern is fairly consistent? Transmission input shaft length is generally not an issue with Mack-to-Mack swaps?

Just pulled the transmission drain plug - no oil, but gallons of water! Not sure what the plan was!

Replaced the water with mineral spirits and with lots of scrubbing got everything moving. I guess I didn't take a before picture of the transmission (just the duplex).

[mechohaulic]

9 hours ago, Joey Mack said:

As far as pulling the dry liners out of the 673..  I ran beads of weld inside the liners, and when they cooled, i was able to pull them with my liner puller..

the "beads of weld" were a common practice back then; personally I've never done it . possibly due to Mack having a super HD sleeve puller . off site I have resorted to a 20 ton bottle jack under the engine with custom made plate having exact dia of sleeve and pressed liner up and  out from bottom. the "skill was the honing of block to fit new sleeves. don't tell anyone but yes I did over hone and need a P2 sleeve on  (rare)occasion. then the challenge of new installs; clean cloth with clean 2x4, if the fit was correct =standing on the 2x4 body weight sent the liner in ;;;NOT forgetting the shims under the liner for proper ridge height. new liners were called dry = still sprayed them on install for lube. after all was said and done the sound of the new rebuilt on start up was = yep the old dog got a bone(r). proud to be part of all the sick puppies here .LMAO close call on hearing the engine start or having "helper take down Christmas tree -" other post. hear that engine = I built it.

[mechohaulic]

39 minutes ago, Keith S said:

So Mack-to-Mack engine to transmission bolt pattern is fairly consistent? Transmission input shaft length is generally not an issue with Mack-to-Mack swaps?

Just pulled the transmission drain plug - no oil, but gallons of water! Not sure what the plan was!

Replaced the water with mineral spirits and with lots of scrubbing got everything moving. I guess I didn't take a before picture of the transmission (just the duplex).

not hearing it spin(by hand)  my main concern would be the lower shaft bearings. the gears are Mack tough=a little/lot of cleaning they will run a long time providing no pieces missing. the bearings and races being in water may be a different story. transmission on the ground and open  would be the opportune time for covers off ; bearings/ races inspected or replaced. wining going down the road not good. you want wining then take my wife with you.

[Licensed to kill]

14 hours ago, Keith S said:

Here's what I found:

• 283hp E6 out of a 1981 Mack RD600
• 2,800lbs
• It runs but should be rebuilt
  • Intake valve springs broken
  • Cylinder wear
• $750
• $900 shipping

My only concern is installing it in my B61. Mating it to the transmission and front crossmember?

 

 

 

 

Having just put an E-6 350 (1980 production) in a B-61, this is what I have found out in my case. Engine bolted right up to the triplex. The flywheel/clutch assembly from the 673 bolted right up to the E-6. This is what you want as the B-61 uses a push clutch and the Maxitorque that would have been behind that 283 would have a pull clutch. Unless you intend to pull super B's, IMO it is not worth the hassle making/modifying the clutch linkage to work to gain the duel disk pull clutch (I did that also) but, if you do intend to pull heavy loads and ant the dual disk, it can be done with a bell crank assembly I should have all the parts that I made for one before switching back the the triplex and single disk clutch if you are interested. Front engine mount that came with the truck on the 673 goes right on the E-6 front cover soothing to worry about/do there. As someone mentioned, You need the short shaft water pump and balancer of the 673, they both bolt right on the E-6. IOW, it is about as bolt in as you will ever see when switching series'.

edit - P.S. just went back and looked at your pics again and remembered that the fuel filter will have to be moved, it will not fit between the frame rail. Also, if that engine has the long shaft water pump (which is likely) you will have to do something to move the alternator back an inch (or so) as well. In my case, I can't use the mount from the original engine as it is for a generator, not an alternator so I am going to just make a new mount, copy the one that came on the E-6 just move the tabs back to where they need to be. .

Edited December 30, 2023 by Licensed to kill

[Licensed to kill]

7 hours ago, Keith S said:

So Mack-to-Mack engine to transmission bolt pattern is fairly consistent? Transmission input shaft length is generally not an issue with Mack-to-Mack swaps?

Just pulled the transmission drain plug - no oil, but gallons of water! Not sure what the plan was!

Replaced the water with mineral spirits and with lots of scrubbing got everything moving. I guess I didn't take a before picture of the transmission (just the duplex).

Personally, I would never consider running that trans without pulling completely apart and, at the VERY least inspecting if not just outright changing all the bearings. The comment was made that those tranny's are not made for the HP that the E-6 produces and that is correct. However, unless you intend to pull HEAVY loads or maybe race it in the 1/4 mile, it shouldn't matter. I would think that a good, serviceable duplex should be easy to find and cheaper to buy than rebuilding what you have. If you DO Intend to pull relatively heavy loads, heavy enough that you want a dual disk clutch, being a 283, that engine should be a Maxidyne (EM-283) and if so, a 6 speed Maxitorque was designed for the torque curve generated by that engine and should also be relatively easy and inexpensive to find. I have all that stuff, twin stick 6 speed, dual disk clutch assembly and bell crank setup for converting the linkage BUT, the shipping would probably be pretty steep and then there is crossing the boarder from Canada which may, or may not create issues (it SHOULDN'T but we are taking about Govt so). Kinda too bad, if you WERE interested, I just came back from Oklahoma and could have taken it with me and shipped it from there. BTW, I also have a duplex to sell but again, shipping would be prohibitive and I don't think you would have any trouble finding either a duplex OR a 6spd Maxitorque either locally or at least relatively close. They are fairly plentiful. Also, I]the reason I am suggesting a duplex rather than a triplex or quadplex should you search out a replacement is that, with the Maxitorque engine you don't NEED 15 speeds of the triplex, you don't really NEED the 10 speeds of the duplex, the engine was designed to run with 6 speeds (5 actually). Well, that is all that I think I know but I am a neophyte when to come to these Marks so I am not guaranteeing anything I had said to be "gospel", just what I have gathered in my recent and ongoing B-61 engine swap journey. All just opinions and worth exactly what you paid for it (maybe less) LOL. 

[mrsmackpaul]

20 hours ago, Joey Mack said:

As far as pulling the dry liners out of the 673..  I ran beads of weld inside the liners, and when they cooled, i was able to pull them with my liner puller..

I'm very late to the party here 

Only thing to be careful of with running beads of weld to pull liners is the crank

If the crank is still in the block and a booger from the welding gets stuck on the crank it can become costly 

This is normal only a issue on a inframe build 

Cut some thin tin the same width as the journal and wrap it around and a hose clamp

You can then hook in pretty confident it will all be good 

I remember looking at Vlads photos some years ago with the from a Lanova motor in a normal workshop press, block was nearly as big as the press and I  seam to recall took all press effort to push the liners home

Some maybe dry ice for dry liners and the electric blanket off the spare bed on the block for a day or so might make the job much easier putting the new sleeves back in

Anyways,  this is not gunna be a in frame rebuild as the motors well and truly out of the frame now

 

Paul