Vladislav

Try checking out this guy: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mack-B-model-dump-truck-peterbilt-international-Kenworth-Studebaker-antique/264005462119

He's in your neck of the woods and seems parting out a Cruise.

They look excellent for ever used tanks!

On 1/17/2021 at 6:45 AM, Rob said:

 Getting ready to bring my B-61 back out and it needs the 10.00R-22 radial tires replaced citing age. They are actually new and have never been out of the shop having just about 24 feet on them, but right at 20 years old now.

If the tyres were never exposed to the sun and don't have cracks which could conduct water and sand to the cord I see no worry driving them. Just might worth to refresh steers for cheer up and comfort.

Here are some pics of 17QJ480 as promised.

Just needed time to upload them from phone to mail box and than download to 'puter, resize and put on here.

Measuring the shoe trace it seemed to me as 120mm of the flat spot but the trace itself was nearly 100mm (4") indeed. I just didn't focuse on the actual trace expecting anything installed on the truck during long service in Russia. No matter, in fact it seemed like 5" wide shoes could work with those drums or 20mm (3/4") cut could be done over the edge.

Forgot to mention I measured the width of the track the shoes traced on the inside and it was nearly 120 mm.

On 2/15/2021 at 1:51 AM, mattb73lt said:

No problem, I was just curious.

Got lucky today getting to the drums. Also could scratch away some rust with a wire brush and find Mack part#. It's 17QJ480. Also there was a script of something like 27V 176 but difficult to judge for sure and MAX DIA 15120. I will upload a few photos I made a bit later.

6 hours ago, mattb73lt said:

It should. I'm not too worried about the excess brake surface area, it'll only be about an 1". If you still have that drum/hub, could you see if there's a part number on the drum?

Hmm... I will try to check it out tomorrow. The issue is the drums were rusty I suppose they're original to 1988 truck and the hubs were not separated.

There are actually 3 relays. One below the dash. One somewhere under the hood or a cab depending the truck is conventional or cabover and the last (and the largest) is the starter solenoid which carries a double function being both a solenoid to put the gear into the flywheel and a relay to connect starter's power contacts.

What I would do is jumpering each one of them. The 2nd one is what to start from since usually it's accessable (mounted on the firewall on R's and CH's) and operates reasonable currents so jumperng it with a screwdriver wouldn't make much fireworks. If the crank starts spinning you look for anything wrong in the cab. If not your way is to investigate the starter.

5 hours ago, Rob said:

However, it is possible being the FA-53X series was designed more for the balance between manual, and hydraulic power steering where the FA-512 really was geared more towards the manual types in use then. I don't know.

Usually power steering equipped vehicles have larger caster angle since it's easier to "fight" the tendency to go straight and manual steering rigs have just light caster. On the other hand it could be the way FA-512 were bored with a light lean but had no caster wedges and once FA-53X were used with them the reason to add the angle to the bores disappeared.

5 hours ago, Rob said:

I have rebored and installed sleeves into the FA-512, and FA-522 series in early R, and B series in the past and these borings are not perpendicular to the horizontal plane and it does seem they have a slight positive, (top more towards the rear) bored hole.

Sounds interesting. Originally I met an issue with my original truck's beam having one king pine boring wore out. Looked for a fix, figured that Stemco tube could be used and even found a machine shop with a mill large enough to work the axle out. But having an extra axle but of heavier rating I resolved using it if it's suitable. That way I played a couple of hours with both of them putting both horizontly and on a side and checking by laser level. Also checked the angles the king pin holes bored to the side (or better to say off the side) and found both beams were similar. Also I remember I put a bar or so into the bores centering it some way to measure the angle by the long portion of length and pretty sure there was no evidence of leaning to rear or front. It also makes sence having caster plates (all my R's and 2 MH's have them and they look stock) there's no hard reason to do machining of an axle beam more complicated. Much easier to add a grade or two to the wedge and it's done.

As said above. And from the pics it looks like quite a solid truck.

On 2/10/2021 at 4:06 AM, Rob said:

Although the axle will physically bolt in backwards, I'll wager it would really be an adventure to drive. You have steering angles which would all be incorrect.

Rob,

I have removed FAW537 axle from my R-model and also had FAW538 off another R-model as a spare. I had to use that spare one for the truck so investigated both of them relating king pin hole angle, straightness and even the weight. And now I can state both of those were almost similar and absolutely symmetric face to back. King pin holes were bored straight from the top of the beam having zero angle to the drive direction. Castor angle establishes by the springs hanged to the chassis rails at a certain angle and also by wedged pads put between the axle beam and springs. So I bet no difference in steering or handling the road if you put the beam backwards. That's for a R-model. A few years back I had similar experience with my military Mack model NR. Also had two similar beams and chose one of to use. I well remember I found no difference face to back excepting that marking at the front of the left spring pad and even put my own mark for the drive direction of the truck just for any reason.

On 2/11/2021 at 1:56 AM, mackone said:

 if anyone would know what the model number is , or which compressor I would need?  

The look could tell alot.

On 2/7/2021 at 4:24 PM, Bigdogtrucker said:

looked around on the front of the axle couldn't find it could it be in the back possibly?

Easily. My R-model axle beam had its stamping at the front. I type "had" because I removed it from the truck at a certain time. I investigated it through very well before sandblasting and paint and found no reason I couldn't put it backwards installing back on the truck. So you know where to look at. My understanding you will find the stamping or a ground off spot where it was.

On 2/1/2021 at 10:28 PM, mattb73lt said:

Well, I think I found what I need.  Webb Wheel 64468F.

https://www.webbwheel.com/tcpdf/examples/drum_detail_pdf.php?dn=64468F

Are you sure they're a correct fit? The table tells they're 16.5" ID with 6.25 shoe width. Look like a rear drums to me. Hope I'm wrong.

Looks like I'm late with my input but I would toss it into the basked since it possibly could be of help. The hub style on the red B model in the picture looks very close or even the same as my R-model has. Also alu hub with back side mounted narrow drum. The truck was built in 1988 and the shoe width was 4" as the memory serves. The point of difference is the berings size. I don't know what you have inside the hub but the spindle that fits my hubs is thicker being 2-5/8 for the inner bearing and 1-3/4 for the outer one.

1 hour ago, h67st said:

It is a very greenish color, the blue is just because of the camera.

What years and what engines did Mack paint in that color? I really like how it looks.

17 hours ago, yarnall said:

Would you post a before picture please?

I add my vote to the request

Never knew the original truck belonged to Smith. Interesting.

My bet is not too many people on here has an idea on the meaning of those 3 red letters on the title page of the video. In fact it's Persian script of the name our forum is all about

Great to see the progress!

I like the engine look painted that color. Strange thing (nothing strange but an optic illusion) the engine looks greeny in the first pictures but much more to blue where it's already in the chassis.

On 1/15/2021 at 4:18 AM, Jamaican Bulldog said:

Thanks, does that mean that the older heavier RD 6 series kept the old hood for a while but the sloped hood was on the lighter R models?

No. Regular (lighter) series R discontinued in 89 (or even in the late 88?). RD being a heavier mod of an R started from 78 or so and kept the classic round hood with round lights up to 1990 or 1991. Than it (RD not R) purchased new (slopped) hood and stayed in production until 2004.

RB is another story.

Seems like you haven't got all the air off the system. Even worn out plungers would build up pressure enough to get the fuel off the realeased nuts on the injector lines. I'd put an electric fuel pump in the line between the tank and the prime pump. Switch it on for half a minute to make good fuel flow in the lines and injection pump body than try cranking with it still on. Usually takes all air away in a matter of seconds and the engine fires up if the rack is in the correct position and the mecanical parts are solid. Vlad

Looks in a really great shape. Besides restored interior and non-rusted rear wall of the cab the frame represents very good condition. Still can't figure the type of the engine it has. Something like a non-intercooled EM6 of 225 or so HP?

Nice looking raw of old Macks.

Although they're kept outside it seems like someone have fun owning them.

Thanks for sharing.

23 hours ago, james j neiweem said:

Interesting find  in Mr. Warth's Mack B models volume 2. Go to page  112 and see a picture of a B733 LS  and Look at the cab. It  almost looks like a for runner of the R model cab. The B733 LS on the next page has the L model cab. Anybody know the story of the cab on page 112.😗

Looks like some experimental cab indeed. But doesn't show any countours of the series R-model cab. Interesting.