doubleclutchinweasel

Welcome to the world of purebred mutts!  Awesome R model. 

38 minutes ago, Licensed to kill said:

The engine that I pulled out of one of my B-61's is a 673E. The most obvious difference between it and the two "END 673" stamped blocks is the "E" has the started high on the drivers side and the "END 673" has the started low on the drinkers side. Starter location would narrow down the field of possibilities. 

That's pretty interesting.

Yep.  The Ford and the Mack had a different sound than, say, a 903 Cummins.  Even the Cat 3408 didn't sound quite the same.

1 hour ago, Licensed to kill said:

Just did. Will try to get the pages I need printed. Thanks. 

Incidentally, the Triplex section might be of some use to you too, since it shows only a "married" box without the break in the picture for the 5-speed.  I'd say the only difference between the Duplex and Triplex would be the rear box.  The front mainshaft would likely look the same.

Best of luck to you, LTK!

Weasel out...

I guess it looks kinda like this with the 5-speed section removed!

The instructions are not clear on setting the mainshaft end play at the 2 indicated points.  Maybe it would be obvious if you were in there.  Almost looks like the main box and the aux box are set separately.  But, it looks like the countershafts are all set from the same point on the aux box.

Were you able to access the PDF file from the link I sent you?  I can always post some individual pages on here if I need to.

Yeah, this PDF file is a little rough!  My physical manual is far easier to read.  If you have any specific sections you would like to enhance, let me know.  Maybe I can take a picture of them and send it to you.

I guess end play on the mainshaft makes sense.  After all, there are several shafts in the center of that box (main input shaft, main mainshaft, aux input shaft, aux mainshaft).  Might want  little clearance between the ends of each one!

Technically, I guess the front mainshaft is the rear input shaft.  Sorry about that!

I tried to upload that manual to the WIKI section, but it is too big.

When I looked at the drawing this morning, it looks like it actually has an "END PLAY" spec on the MAINSHAFT and a "PRE-LOAD" spec on the COUNTERSHAFT.

But, I have no personal experience with this transmission.  So, don't take my word alone for it.

But, here's a teaser...

I sent you a PM.  Contact me when you get it.

45 minutes ago, other dog said:

OK, if there's 2 boobies for every 1 rear end, let me think, that would make 42 truck pictures scattered amongst them too. 

Uhhhhh....yeah.

I meant to look in one of my manuals, but forgot.

Wait, I may have something here at work.  Let me look and get back to you.

2 hours ago, 67RModel said:

 

A 6.7 Cummins rated at 350 HP? 😂. The B10 Life for that engine is 250,000 miles. I seriously doubt a 6.7 Cummins under the hood of Mack CH tractor would make one complete trip across the country at 80,000 pounds GVW all else being equal. The power density of the light duty diesels way too high for the type of longevity class 8 engines are expected to get.

 

Exactly!  They are meant to pull much lighter loads.  Imagine a 400-500HP gas-burning High Performance Hemi V8 trying to pull 100,000 pounds?  At 75mph?  Not for long!

The class 8 diesels are meant to last.  Turning them up to max output can only shorten their life expectancy.

11 hours ago, JoeH said:

They're incredible engines for their size, and Mack maxed them out at the perfect power vs durability ratio. If you tip more towards the power then you'll lose durability.

That kinda sounds like what I was saying on Jo-Jo's thread!  Well put, Joe!

My '17 Ram 3500 had the 950 ft-lb version of the 6.7L Cummins.  Plenty of power for pulling anything I'll ever hook to it.

But, it does NOT have to move 80K+.  It does NOT have to move that 80K+ for 600+ miles every day.  It does NOT have to stop that 80K+ a dozen times an hour.

I've had this discussion with some of the die-hard Ram guys a dozen times.  It's not all about power, it's about longevity.  I love my 6.7, bit even the old 250 horse 673 I drove would outlast it in a heavy truck!

Jo-Jo, this is an interesting discussion.  Like everybody, I seem to always want MORE POWER (argh, argh, argh).  But, I also remember all too well the 180 horse Thermodynes slooooowly dragging those heavy weights up the hills.  The 237 and 250 motors were noticeably better.  A 300 or 350 was incredible.  The 400 HP stuff just seemed like showing off!  I guess it is just progress that newer stuff is stouter.  I guess the comfort levels of the newer stuff are supposed to reduce driver fatigue.  But, to me, a truck is SUPPOSED to be a little bit rough.  But, that's probably just because that's how they were "back then".  I'm sure my back would appreciate the improvements in the newer stuff.

In any engine, turning up the power can reduce longevity.  Everything in life is a bit of a trade-off.  But, there is also usually an optimum point...where the lines cross.  I mean, straining the guts out of a weaker engine can shorten its longevity, too.  Just like putting too much power on it can.  I guess, if we knew what that magic number was, we could just tune everything to that point and get the best compromise of power and longevity.

Then we would go buy lottery tickets, because we would apparently have gifted insight into the netherworld!

I am going to keep reading this one because EVERYBODY'S opinion on this is valid.  They vary by experience and requirement.

It is, indeed, NASCAR hall of famer Bobby Labonte. 

Hippy wins a cookie!

17 hours ago, Big R said:

I will check it out thanks

Here is the link.  Upload your picture there.  Then copy the link they give you and paste it here.  Seems like they offer a variety of links, depending on what you are going to do with the picture.  So, you may have to experiment with the links to see which one works best on here.  I THINK one of them says "for use on forums."

https://postimages.org/

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Looking at E7 tags found on used engines online I've seen 7-18.

Clever approach!

The SMART tour (Southern Modified Auto Racing Teams) had a race at nearby Tri-County Speedway last weekend.  I took one of the twin grandsons to Richard Childress Racing (RCR) museum earlier that day, and then spent the evening watching the locals and finally the Modifieds run.

Here is a picture of the 13-year-old grandson posing with the eventual winner of the Modified race.  Anybody recognize the driver?  Hint:  the driver is the little one!

I see a lot of folks who have been members for a long time, but who have never posted anything (or only a couple of posts).

If you are one of those folks, even if you don't think you have anything to talk about, just tell us a good story!  Or post a picture of something.  You know we all love pictures!

If nothing else, tell us who you are and what you are into.  We don't care what it is.  These guys can talk about almost any topic you can bring up.  Tell us about your pets or your grandkids if you don't have anything else to talk about!  LOL!

My '70 had the parking brake switch beside the parking brake valve and the service brake switch at the treadle valve.

1 hour ago, Geoff Weeks said:

More or less comes down to: do you slide the reverse idler gear (separate fork) or do you slide the main shaft gear one way for lo, the other to engage with the reverse idler (same fork).  Two way to get the same result.

 

You nailed it right there!  As usual!

Incidentally (and WAY off topic!), isn't it interesting that the newer high-performance racing transmissions are dual-countershaft...ala RoadRanger?  This one is a Liberty.

1 hour ago, Geoff Weeks said:

To make thing less clear, some transmissions use sliding mesh on the lowest gear and constant mesh on the rest. Makes it easy to use 1st gear on the mainshaft for reverse as well, most often straight cut gear.

The main advantage other than wear (you are going to get wear somewhere, constant mesh just move the wear to the dog clutch) is it makes the trans easier to shift, you are moving less mass.

Good point, Geoff.  The old "granny gear" boxes in pickups, buses, and medium-duty trucks often had an unsynchronized (sliding mesh) "LO" gear.  Many were, as you mentioned, on the "reverse" fork.  I drove quite a few of those.  Our school buses all had "3-speed plus granny" boxes, but the reverse gear was on a different fork in those.  Still probably driven off the 1st gear, though.