letourneau D Pull Scraper in action. Detroit Diesel powered
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 11. 2019
- Another vintage peice construction equipment in action, filmed at the Historical Construction Equipment Association "Last Blast" show held at the Simcoe County Museum, just outside Barrie Ontario in mid-October. This machine is powered by a 4 cylindar Detroit Diesel (I counted the exhaust ports) to my eyes it it looked a bit small to be a 4-71, so I assume it is a 4-53, besides it sounds suspisiously like the Orion busses from the 80's that had the 53 series engines,
- Auta a dopravní prostředky
This was my dad’s machine, I built the hood and grill to look like the newer model, but it originally had the old rounded front end and I also built the custom ladder on the side, which was modeled after a Hough 65 pay loader ladder. It looks exactly the same as when we sold it in an equipment auction in 1996 after my dad died, other than It used to say Sheren Bros. Excavating on the side electrical covers. It had old air plane tires on the back when we sold it.
This earthmover/pan was located in Grand Ledge MI. Glad to see it still running❤️
If You do not mind changing an Electric Motor out every once in a while,
and You keep the RPM's up they would move a lot of dirt.
They are not any more scary than the average Steam locomotive.
Who doesn't looooove old school machinery!! 😍😎👍🏻👌🏻👏🏻
My dad, he laughs at the fact that I love the way detroits sound "there in efficient"
Fuel wise yes they are but job wise in some cases there better than new machines
Lol
I can tell by the sound that it's a 4-71 straight away. This engine was used many times to replace petrol engines in trucks in Australia. Single drive prime movers R-190s, Bonneted Whites, buses etc.Cheers from Australia
i, for one, had faith in the little red dozer the whole time.
this looks like so much fun!
I did a lot of hours on a D Pull back in the 70's. They always got the job done and if you knew how to keep the electrics in good order then there were no problems hardly at all. We had electric elevators on ours.
instablaster
Nice video, sir! Definitely a 71 series; it has airbox covers on the side opposite the blower, quieter blower, and overall sounds 'stronger' than a 53 if you get my meaning. Thanks for sharing!
Cool. Love the sound of a Detroit diesel. Thanks for sharing Dan
Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for watching!
I like the sound of a Detroit.....a ways away! A Long ways away.
Wild ride. Electrical steering. Hard to get used to, for some of us back in the day. They made a lot of double ended paddle scrapers too. Nice work. Thanks.
The original Tournapulls were even wilder. You had only brakes for steering, and if the yoke failed you'd get squashed against the gooseneck which was right behind you,
Check out the steering wheel…. You have to look VERY close to see it! Just a little toggle switch. My dad had one when I was little. A certified operator was driving it down the road between job sires and it got away from him and ended up down a deep ditch. He was very lucky it did not roll.
Had a model D Wabco paddle scraper, 671Detroit, used no oil, leaked no oil, out worked and out run 613 cats I worked with.
For the love of god Tourna- Pulls are UGLY but they sure built a lot of what we take for granted today. I had the opportunity to run a C-Pull back some years ago. If you ran one of those for a living, my hats off to you. I'll take a Cat or a 431 International any day!
The HCEA's 36th annual International Convention & Old Equipment Exposition is September 23-25, 2022, at our National Construction Equipment Museum, 16623 Liberty Hi Road, Bowling Green, Ohio!
It has its own big ol’ happy face
Hi 👋 Sir WOW 😲 what a nice 👍 old Girl Scraper 🤠
Wish they made engines that sounded like that now days . ...
How much oil could one of these burn or slobber in a 12 hour shift?
I cannot afford this 1:1-scale kit! 😨
Even if I could, I would need you to drive it--what? 600 km? --to the south, to bring it to Columbus, Ohio, USA. Then build me a suitable storehouse.
Now, if you could find a 1:25th- scale kit of this squat beast, sure! And something like a steam shovel (now called an excavator), a road grader, a construction crane.
Nice old machines 👍👍👍
Can you experts explain why a scraper is important in road construction as opposed to a motor grader or bulldozer? Thanks
Because, they can "Move" vast amounts of earth, from one location to another Much faster than either of the other two you mentioned. Every machine is designed and developed to serve a particular purpose.... even though, sometimes you need to "cross-purpose" them if you're in a "jam" and don't have the the correct equipment for the job (on "smaller" projects).
In the case of road / highway building where gradients and "valley fills" etc, come into play.... you definitely Need the right equipment on hand for the job and "earth movers / scrapers / "buggies" are the "only way to fly" when it comes to moving vast amounts of soil over distances in the quickest amount of time.... and "time is money" as they say.... can't afford to be wasting time using equipment that are Not designed to do, whatever you're trying to accomplish... especially in highway construction.
@@Romans--bo7br ...ok thanks for that kind of explanation.. I have certainly learnt. Keep up the excellent 👍 work.🇬🇾
@@tickedoffsheikh8587.... thank you for your reply, and you're welcome. If you have any other questions about equipment or diesel engines... just ask, and hopefully I will be able to give you an honest answer.... if not, am sure someone else can... truthfully.
The operator seems to be familiar with it.
Wasn't able see a clear & close-up view of the engine... other than that tinny sounding "center outlet" exhaust manifold, but it definitely sounds like a 2 valve headed 4-71 with N50 or N55 injectors. As far as I remember, Rob't LeTourneau never installed any Series 53 engines in any of his equipment... they were all Series 71 except for a brief "flirtation" with JT Series Cummins (late 1940's / very early 1950's) in a few of his smaller "buggy's" similar to this one. The 4 cycles were just not responsive enough to work well with the electric drives of his machines.
The 4-71 had impressive power for such a compact engine and had more torque than a C-160 Cummins.
@@andrewking9761.... Hi, Andrew... thanks for your reply & comment. Yes, they sure did and I have always said that GM "heads" made a Huge mistake in dropping the Series 110 platform in favor of going with more cylinders in the V version of the Series 71 platform... as much as I "love" the V12 version.
They could have retained both, at least, but seriously made the wrong move with the 110.
I don't know if you've ever ran any equipment that was 110 powered, but that 6-110 had "brutal" torque output and they should have continued experimenting with it for use in semis... they completely "misread" the trucking industries need for more torque, which the 6-110 had Lots of, even though it was not nearly at the hp levels that it was capable in terms of the design and strength of the block, especially the lower end which was massively "over-built" for the power levels they were setting them up at.
Building Detroits are like "building" small block Chevy engines... there is tons of power potential for cheap, because the factory designed all the "right stuff" into the block (& heads - in Chevy's case) in the first place.
I was very fortunate to have studied (mid-1960s) for three, out of four years, directly under one of the lead designers of the very first proto-type GM Diesel (officially re-badged to Detroit Diesel in 1965).... which, contray to popular Myths... was Not a 6-71, but was in fact a 4-71.... the 6-71 was the first to go into production though, under contract with the US Navy, which were then sent to Grey Marine which was contracted by the Navy to set them up for marine use in all kinds of applications.
Conservatively, a series 71 engine is very capable of producing 100+ hp - Per Cylinder!!..... and I can tell you from personal experience in building (re; modifying) them, that 200+ hp per cylinder is definitely doable.
Look at the old video's of "The Lady Butterfly" pulling truck (sleds) on the NTPA & East Coast pulling Associations circuit in the Pro Semis divisions.
It's a 1974 KW (extended hood model) with the Original engine, that had just over a Million, 600,000 road miles on it... Before it was retired to full time sled pulling.
The engine was developing between 2300 & 2500+hp (depending on track altitude, air density, ambient air temps, etc, etc.) when finished building it and we were spinning it to 4,000+ rpms.... Never blew it up, except for spinning a main bearing in 2006.
A 4-71 (non marine) is easily capable of over 400hp, with great reliability.
@@Romans--bo7br Thankyou for the information. The GM heads you were referring to meant the"number Crunchers" people in business that make decisions to cut costs. In their minds the 6-110 was a tad heavy or something. I think they suffered the same fate of the 8V53 as they were almost identical in cubic inches compared to a 6-71 but from what I've read some drivers preferred the 8V with some extra power and another 500RPM. There was a company called Clae in Australia that sold Detroit engines and parts. Anyway there were 2 trucks that were repowered by them using the 8V53. One truck went like a rocket as it was only single drive hauling 2 citrus crates on a flat bed bogie trailer a GCM around the 28 ton or 56000 pounds.. That was an English truck called a "Leyland" they came with their own engine a straight 6 400 cubic and a whopping 125hp.
The other truck was bonneted and tandem drive an air cooled V8 Deutz about 230 HP . That got turfed it was pulling a tri-axle fuel tanker of maximum capacity it was around 7500 gallons as most back then we're around the 6000 mark and spread bogie which were banned later as they damaged roads. Anyway those 8V53s did a great job and the first one I mentioned took hours off the time of the original Leyland engine crossing 2 states. Recently I looked on Gumtree a bit like "E-bay" I saw a 6-71T for sale in a shop in Chicago in good condition only $2500 greenbacks which would be a good project engine for a glider kit semi. I don't drive trucks myself but my father was a truck driver and I've been around them for most of my life. I did an apprenticeship in power steering and I've worked on hundreds of trucks and trailers. Changing trailer axles, Oil changes servicing, brake relines, bearings, fabrication etc. I'm no expert but I'm proud of what I can do. Text you later. Cheers
@@andrewking9761... Hello again, Andrew... are you from "down under" (?)... I love AU. and folks that I know there. I was only 2 days from moving there (Qsld) when my "wife to be" sent me an email saying Not to bother to come.... no reason why or anything... after taking me over a year to liquidate just about everything I owned, including two vehicles, getting all my police check records (clean) from Everywhere that I lived in my previous 59 years, etc, etc, etc.... even had a job lined up with a Heavy Haul trucking co. over there (as I had years of experience with that, here in the US, Canada & Alaska). Last I heard from a neighbor of hers, was that she was back with her "ex" after being divorced from him for over 14 years. Ohhh Well.... such is life. : )
Anyway, yeah... the 8v53 was only 2ci smaller than the 6-71(either version), but the 6-110T was, of course.. 660 ci with a B&S of 5" x 5.6" and produced more torque than the 8V71T, and only a little less than an 8V92T. Numbers Crunchers may be good at what they do.... but are Clueless in terms of reality and what is needed outside of their office.
Yes, the 6-110 had a lot of iron in it... with a "dry weight" of right at about 4,000 lbs... in between a 3406 "A" model Cat, or V12 Detroit... and the Cat 3408 and Cummins KT/A of the early to late 1970s and Still, not much heavier than today's QSX Cummins.
In total, they only built somewhere between 5 & 600,000 of the 110's in the 20 years they had them (1945 - 1965).... of course the early 110's with the centrifugal blower was a failure until they put a Roots blower on it.... problem was not the engine, but the centrifugal blower which was over-driven Ten times the crank speed, and could stand ANY rpm past 2100 engine speed which resulted in the compressor turbine exploding and sending shrapnel into the engine though the ports.
@UCqRgzYsqYjRWmDjozHBMXYg.... hello again, Andrew.... my "ex future wife" is a "land owner" (as they say there) about two hours drive from Brisbane... northwest of there, close to Blackbutt, Qsld. Are you, yourself... trucking over there? What time is it, there now? It's 4:25 AM now... here.
Tail-dragger!
That is so cool that they made a. Garden scrapper 4 the housewives!!!!!!!!!!