I had another of my "Duhhh" moments. Ask the folks at the machine shop where you had the motor work done what they recommend for your steamin' stud. They do this for a living instead of offering shade tree advice.
Printable View
I had another of my "Duhhh" moments. Ask the folks at the machine shop where you had the motor work done what they recommend for your steamin' stud. They do this for a living instead of offering shade tree advice.
Wow what a stellar suggestion! I rant and rave about how I love my shop, and forget about them when the bullets fly. The "DUH" is on me.
I agree with LarrBeard. Magic mud isn't intended for a permanent solution. My high temp story may have been misleading. High temp RTV would be alright to get you home, but not for a permanent fix.
Get ready for some controversy...
Called a couple of shops. The one I use and, one I used when building engines in Arizona. These are both high end machine shops. Consulting with a few of the builders the response:
"Use black silicone on all studs entering the water jacket!"
I can tell you that while working for Dana, they owned Victor Gasket. The tech guys there swore by it and, Dana used and uses it without any gasket on many things (All Spicer axles since the 1980's). The proper application was stressed. Not to much as excess could enter and cure in lubricant and water. Cleanliness if adhesion was required, was equally important. Used correctly it is good stuff. I have seen the results of careless silicone usage. I saw what happens when it enters the oil pump and, gets into the rollers of a racing engine's lifters.
Apparently this method guaranties a no leak fire up. I am going to let it go for a few more cycles. If it dries up, I'll leave it alone. The front one dried up nicely. If it steams even a little after a break in run, it gets silicone. I'll give a "sit rep" in a few weeks on it, if I remember.
The most interesting conversations are on the "Jalopy" old car web site. The fellows there are so used to it they all say the same thing. Put in some bars leak or, just leave it alone it will stop.
While the truck was hibernating in the barn for 35 years, I got greasy and busted a lot of knuckles piddling around with this beast that lives about six miles east of me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X66Bu1IppWI
Those guys taught me not to be in too big a hurry to try to fix minor leaks (at 310 PSI, a lot of things leak at first fit-up). Time and a little corrosion tighten things up in a lot of cases.
(By the way, 765 is pulling about 20 80-foot steel passenger coaches, an auxiliary tender full of water, a tool car and TWO totally redundant diesel-electric locomotives through the Horseshoe Curve at track speed and not even breathing hard).
Nuff said LarrBeard! Nice Locomotive! Now that is a toy.
I will be patient.
I am a bit baffled by the water temp gauge capillary tube. It is so long I could hook up a gauge in the rear tailgate. I am beginning to think someone may have replaced the capillary tube and, did not know how to shorten it? I am unsure if you can do such a thing. This is my first mechanical temp gauge. The gauge appears to be the original. The capillary tube looks different than some pictures I have seen. It is a solid heavy black line. It has no covering. It is fairly ridged. It is a mile long.
I am reading out there on the WWW, that they are all long and you "coil them" under the dash. Someone wrote "if you look under the dash of a WWII Willys you will see coiled tubes".
They are all long, and they do get coiled up. The gage you have is a fairly modern gage, where the ones Willys used would go in a circle, with a center needle.
" ...I am unsure if you can do such a thing.. ".
Well, like most everything, you can do it if you really, really want to - but it's a lot of trouble and usually not worth it.
Google "Shorten capillary gauge tubes" and you'll find a lot of info, much of it conflicting.
The mechanical temperature gauge is really a pressure gauge! The capillary tube is filled with either a low boiling point liquid (like a Freon or ether) or a gas that expands when the tip (bulb) of the capillary heats up. As pressure builds in the tube, it uncoils a Bourdon-tube like spiral in the gauge that moves the pointer. (Actual mechanisms may vary a bit - they could be diaphragm gauges ...).
If you cut the tube to shorten it, all the magic stuff in it goes "pfffttt" and escapes, kind of like the magic smoke coming out of electrical parts.
Coil it up, stash it away and carry on!
Good stuff guy's. Thanks, I am clear now. I was confident that the gauge was original, now I am sure it is not. By "modern" gmwillys I am thinking you might mean like maybe 60's 70's? It looks old. In any event Googling the original gauge leads me to believe the repro's are cheap and, effective. I am going to swap it out. This info was imperative in my decision. Thanks again!
Modern is a relative term around here.
I am getting ready to set the hood on. I think there should be something for the rear of the hood to set on against the cowl. I have the felt down at the grill but, what about the back? I think there is supposed to be a "Gutter" there also. All I have right now is the hinge. It seems the hood would bang against the cowl in the back.
bmorgil,
I went to Menards and picked up a roll of weatherseal tape that has adhesive on one side and it worked great on the grill, I'm sure it would work good on the cowl under the hood.
The only reason I considered it was to keep the hood from rattling on the grill, I probably will do the same on the back along the cowl as well.
Just a suggestion.
I traveled around the WWW, and I discovered this complaint is another normal. A few things had to be done to get the windshield frame to fit.
A recap:
The repro windshield frame did not fit the repro tub cowl. The arms had to be cut and aligned, then welded.
The repro tub had a CJ2A dash (wrong ignition switch location, no high beam indicator hole) that had to be corrected.
The repro tub came with the wrong windshield frame mounts. (M38 slotted low profile style)
The new windshield glass from KW had to be ground to fit the repro frame. I had the glass professionally installed. I could not get it to go in. The glass shop had to grind it a bunch to fit. The corners had to be radius differently to match the frame and, it was slightly wide side to side. Never seen that done before! Diamond belt sander. Nice! The glass guy had the capability to make the windshield in his shop! Money well spent. Fits like custom glass.
With all these issues I was not to shocked when the cowl seal fit like crap. Word on the WWW points to cheap. A few fellas said prepare to pay $50 or more for a "good" one. OK, I just paid $50 for a "good" one. I will let you all know how this turns out! I think all in all, I am still not complaining too much about the repro tub.
My windshield to cowl fit was about the same, I left the rubber seal out and put the weather seal I was talking about under the windshield frame instead of the rubber seal.
I did so much bending, cutting and rewelding on the arms the rubber seal didn’t even come close to fitting right so I put it back in the seal box.
The good news is that those are some of the best pictures we've seen of that deep green paint job. Really a nice color!
Thanks LarrBeard! The paint supply did a great job of matching the original Emerald Green. I am trying to preserve the "original" look. I had to keep the reins on the body shop pro's. They wanted to smooth out all the welds and make it like glass inside and out. With the paint match on the original color, and the body prep normal for the day, I think it should look and run like it did back in the day.
I must have a procedure or, an adjustment wrong. I have the project just about done. Moved the jeep under its own power today. Tweaking and adjusting everything. I am having trouble with the stater. Sometimes when I push the starter pedal it just makes an awful crashing grinding sound, no L134 motor rotation. So I have to hit it a few times, it grinds and crashes, and then it will engage and start right up. If I touch the starter pedal gently, it seems to be better than if I jump on the pedal hard. It sounds like it is grinding the ring gar right off the flywheel! Sometimes it is perfect. Hit the pedal, it cranks and fires right up. Sometimes It sounds like a cat being dragged across a screen door. No engagement and an awful grinding sound. It is a "new" rebuilt starter from KW. The ring gear was perfect.
What the heck?
"What the heck?"
Yeah. Owhhhh ..
I hate to ask this comment, but there are different tooth counts on ring gears and on starter drives (I think). If there is a tooth pitch mismatch .....
Is there any adjustment in the engagement throw on the starter linkage?
It works flawlessly sometimes, and sometimes it crashes into the ring gear and does not engage. When it works its great. When it doesn't it is an awful crash of gears.
I know very little about the starter. I sent the original off to KW. They rebuilt it and returned it. If there are any adjustments, I didn't make any. I guess it time to do a "deep dive" into how the starter works! I have read there appears to be an adjustment on the switch. I don't know anything about it yet.
There isn't a lot in there to go wrong. In what shape is that little bronze/brass bushing that supports the end of the shaft out past the gear. If that was wallowed out, the end of the shaft might be wiggling a bit...
I do know there are some pretty stiff springs in that Bendix and a lot of warnings about taking one apart.
Here is probably a lot more than you thought you wanted to know ...
https://www.cj3b.info/Tech/Starter.html
http://www.cj3apage.com/cgi-bin/3Aya...num=1459210810
https://www.thecj2apage.com/forums/d...opic38252.html
https://www.thecj2apage.com/forums/s...topic9241.html
LarrBeard, there are 2 post there I missed some how. You definitely have a strong search capability! The first link is a great read.
I think the answer was in the service manual. The CJ3A's use a starter contact that is adjustable. The button that contacts the starter lever, can be increased or decreased in length. This effectively changes the amount of pinion gear engagement before the electrical contacts touch. I think mine is out to far. It is making electrical contact to early, letting the pinion spin up before it is engaged in the ring gear. If that's it, I hope I didn't ruin a nice original ring gear!
I will check it out after coffee tomorrow. I need to post some pics. Almost done. I pulled it out yesterday under it's own power! A big day at the house. The clutch was very finicky about adjustment. With the "book" 1 and 1/4 inch free-play at the pedal, it would not disengage fully. At 1/2 an inch of free-play, all is well. Between the starter issue and the clutch adjustment grinding of the gears no disengagement, I have a pound of gear dust for sale.
Good catch on the early spin-up.
That was mentioned in several of the places I looked. I've fooled around with these things for 50+ years and I never really sat down and realized that when the starter spins up, the first motion of the drive gear is axial, not rotational, as it slides down the spiral cut on the shaft to engage the ring gear teeth. Only when it hits those teeth does it start any real rotation. We understand so many things so late ...
"With the "book" 1 and 1/4 inch free-play at the pedal, it would not disengage fully. At 1/2 an inch of free-play, all is well"
Well, we know they will do what they want to do. I made a very nice road trip Saturday to a show that was about a 100-mile round trip. In preparation I made sure that the differential had just exactly the right amount of oil in it "according to the book". Well, it doesn't like that much oil and over the course of the trip it put the oil level back where it wanted it to be. (It throws out the vent on top of the axle - not a leaky seal...).
It was a fantastic show and I spent most of the day on my feet telling the legend about the truck over and over. It was a fancy show, with Lamborghini SUV's, the "Scoby-Doo" cartoon truck, a Batmobile from up at Auburn, ADAM-12 car and such. Corvettes were as common as elbows - but only one old Jeep.
Little kids "drove" it, as well as a couple of their Grannies. And, as you will find out when you start taking your Jeep out - everyone had one "just like that" when they were kids. You know the car show sign -"Don't touch me, I'm not that kind of car". The Truck says "Touch me, I'll probably giggle!"
I'm looking forward to Toledo.
If I were to have a sign at a car show, it would read only touch if your tetanus shot is up to date.
Great information on the starter adjustment! We all learn a little bit more every day.
OK time to put in some final pics. It was a fun project without question.
Some final thoughts on the MD Juan tub. All and all it is a good value. It is not a turn key kit. I still have a fender that needs adjustment that I can't get. It is just to far out. The biggest challenge by far has been the throttle. The hole position, the firewall behind the linkage on the engine, it was very bad. Even after a lot of modification it is not perfect. The holes for the windshield wiper motors are not centered in their mounts. I had to file a new paint job to oblong the holes. The windshield seal will never work. I have a list of things that occurred on the tub. I will post it in tech.
I have about 10 miles on it now, several short runs. It is running hotter than I like. I am convinced I received a wrong thermostat from KW. I ordered a 160 but, the L134 runs right up to 180 and seems to hold there, as long as I am moving along. A little running through the grass however and the temp runs right up to 200. When it shuts down it will go up over 210. It is not boiling over however, I am not sure I trust the new gauge. I have a few oil drips to find. As it builds cooling pressure, the dag nab manifold stud is still steaming water. It seems like no matter how hard I tried to prevent it, it still has a few small leaks. It tracks well and smooth. I am going to run a mock up parade route to make sure it doesn't get to hot.
Put it up in the air and started at the Gremlins.
An oil drip from the front motor plate lower stud. Pull it out, silicone, back in.
Rear Exhaust Manifold Stud!! Brutal little #$%@*. Drain the water, pulled it, cleaned it with a small engine brush while spraying with brake clean. Blew it out. Using the Machinists suggestion, black silicone sparingly on the threads. I will let it dry overnight.
Pulled the thermostat. It has to be wrong. I drove it 5 miles at 40 MPH. And it holds a steady 180. I bought a 160. I sat down with the local auto parts store, an old time store. We used a cross reference and size chart to determine a Made in USA Stant part number 13006, 2.125 diameter. So I drilled an air relief in it, and made a new gasket.
"... So I drilled an air relief in it,..."
Ok - what is this trick?
Well "back in the day"... This one comes from the 60's early 70's. Thermostats used to have a small "valve" or floating brass rivet that allowed air that might be trapped to pass through a closed thermostat. It was thought that air that was introduced to the block and heads, would get trapped on the back side of the valve. The small hole in the flange would allow the air to escape, preventing a steam trap that would keep the thermostat out of the water.
Sometime in the 60's or 70's that small hole was left out. At that time we stated putting them back in with a Black and Decker. I can tell you this whole theory depends on one heck of a good seal between the T-stat and the housing and the T-stat valve itself. I think it would be rare to find one that tight.
The air hole is a good practice with no bad side effect. On these L134's, the T-stat housing is sitting way up there. It is begging to trap air. The original bellows design T-stat sat right in the water in the head, where it should be. The L134 is a low pressure low volume system. The modern pellet T-stat needs the spacer and sits way up in the housing. It also is more for a higher volume higher pressure system. The water bypass itself in the new style wax pellet valve is 1" diameter, and opens to almost 3/8". The bellows units are 1 1/8" diameter, and open to almost 1/2", making for more water flow. A 1/8" hole drilled in the "modern pellet" T-stat should get the water up there quicker if the stat is sealing well against the top of the housing. It looks like it wouldn't hurt to put in several. The modern style T-stat is a significant flow restriction in the bellows designed system. I am going to look into a few things.
Getting the modern T-stat back into the head and increasing the flow capability of the modern T-stat.
That just might be the tip of the week! Next time out I'm gonna perforate mine too
After a lot of searching the web forums, unhappy with running temps or, erratic temp behavior on the L134 seems to be common. After watching mine behave badly, I think the "adaptation" of a modern pellet thermostat might need to be looked at a little harder. I was reading on another forum where someone is also seeing the same thing. He has actually calc'd out the flow between the two. There is a significant difference.
The thermostat sitting high in the housing and not in the head is also a big issue. I watched the temp move around on the gauge, while simultaneously taking readings with a good heat sensing gun. The temperature at the sensor fitting in the head reads right with the gauge. Hotter than the thermostat rating by 20 degrees or more at times. At times it is closer. The temperature at the top of the housing is right at the thermostat value. At idle the temperature change is pretty big. When the motor starts to heat up when you hold it at a very fast idle for an extended period, things get worse between the head and the top of the housing. The restriction seems to be holding hotter water behind the T-Stat in the head. I was able to get it to 200 on the head and 180 on the other side of the thermostat right at the hose connection. Here is where it gets unsettling. When you shut it off the water in the housing cools quickly shutting the thermostat down. The water in the head skyrockets. Easily getting to 210+. Pressure in the head gets extreme with no exit except that little hole we drilled (and leaky studs). Not a good situation.
I am going to call Stant and start with a Thermostat that opens a 1 3/8" port about 1/2". From there I will figure out a way to get it to fit under the housing and in the head like it was designed.
I picked up LarryBeard and we joined the Parade. We drove right by the entrance, drove back and in we went. "peeJ" the little Emerald Green CJ, ran warm all the way. Stuck in the parade it got to 220 on the gauge. No boil over but, hot. Idle was brutal. It would not idle under 1500 or so. The motor hated it. I stalled it at least twice. A little starter trouble (still working on that) but it was working! Well as LarrBeard put it "there are just some things ya gotta drive it around to find out". True story. All in all we limped it through. It was a blast!
It was sure acting like a clogged idle circuit or a very lean condition. Thinking vacuum leak, I started reading. It seems some gents have seen this before. A little googling led me to the fact that the carb to intake gaskets have "crush" sleeves in them. Ugh oh! I am very careful about carb attaching bolts. Over torquing these will warp the throttle body and cause huge problems.... on an aluminum carb body. The WO has a beefy iron body. It has to be tightened. I tightened it until I could feel the crushing bushings stop, and the nuts began to "draw" up tight.
It idles at 500. I bumped it to 600. Nice!
It runs up to 190 now and holds there. Still to hot for my liking. It should run closer to the 160 thermostat temperature. More to try here. The thermostat set up in general is suspect. A heat gun shows a cool radiator and a hot cylinder head. There is something here to find. An awful lot of posts about these baby's running 190 to 200 degrees. They should run much closer to the thermostat temp. It shouldn't take a "perfect sealed shroud" and a "huge radiator" to cool these little 4 cylinders. An aluminum radiator is light years better than what was in it. These little CJ's were used as tractor's! If I hooked a plow to a CJ that was running 10 to 20 degrees over the thermostat with no load, I can guarantee you it will be moments before it boils out under full low speed load. I will continue to try to improve this. Something about the way the modern thermostat is interacting does not seem right. There are to many CJ's running at 180 to 190 on the forums.
A quick note:
The Stant 13006 thermostat that fits the Willys L134, also fits all the early Big and Small block Chevrolet's from the beginning of time until the 90's.
The plot thickens! Just got off the phone with Rob at Stant. He is in agreement that a low pressure system may not work quite right with the more modern thermostat. We both do not like the T stat sitting way up in the housing away from the head. He said some may not agree but, neither of us are in favor of it. This is the most interesting part. He said the 160 deg thermostat SHOULD run at 180. If I want to run at 160 you need a 140 thermostat. This is different than what I am used to. In the old days my 160 thermostat in my 1965 Chevrolet ran about 165 on gauge. I guess things have changed.
His suggestion in the short term:
Run a premium Thermostat Stant part number 45356. It has more flow capability and is made from stainless steel.This is a 160 degree thermostat that should hold the motor at 180 running.
Use a Stant 14144 Thermostat. It is a 140 degree thermostat that should run the motor at 160.
I am going to send him pictures of what we have. He is going to look through the prints. We are going to try to find something we can put in the head with more flow capability. So all of us out there with NEW inventory 160 degree thermostat should expect 180 on the gauge. If you have an older thermostat it may be running considerably closer to 160. We will figure this out.
Now, the F-134 has much the same thermostat housing on top of the head, but with the valves in the head the head has a different profile. I've not had long term heat problems like you have, but it does get really hot before the thermostat opens up.
Since you're rapidly getting to be an authority on another specialized topic - would a different thermostat keep the F-134 a little more consistent in heat?
In the short term - I'd just throw out the 'stat. With no more than you're going to run "peeJ", you're not going to accumulate any crud and gunk from running cold.
Don't throw out the thermostat all together. If you so choose too, cut the center out, and install the remainder of the thermostat body. This will cause a restriction, therefore keeping the water in the radiator just a bit longer to help cool it. With no restriction, the coolant doesn't have enough time to transfer heat through the radiator.
I agree. This is similar to what we did with racing engines. We used different size restrictions instead of a thermostat. I think LarrBeard is referring to a test. I am enlightened after my conversation with Stant. I am at a loss for why "newer" thermostats operate at different parameters than I am used to. He was clear, the 160 degree thermostat is designed to operate the engine at 180. I just don't get that logic. However that being said, it still appears the restriction with a thermostat designed to run in a 16 lb system, Is not going to function properly in a 4 pound system. The impeller in the water pump is tiny and very "old School". No way it can build enough pressure to overcome the restriction in the modern thermostat. I believe when I install a higher flow thermostat we are going to see an improvement. I am going to figure out a way to get it set up to flow like it was designed. I have the two thermostats coming.
Sorry for the string of posts. More info on thermostats. This is an eye opener. Significant difference with a bellows style thermostat. The Robert Shaw is a vintage part. I have one coming. It is going straight in I will let you know. The other is a Racing Thermostat. Notice the comments about "True opening temperature" and "high flow not sensitive to variations in pressure". Also keep in mind, the original might even sit directly in the head, no spacer. (the spacer is used originally) I think the issue is solved. I hope the issue is solved.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Robertshaw-...72.m2749.l2649
https://www.ebay.com/itm/High-Flow-T....c100005.m1851
Great information on thermostats. If the 160 thermostat doesn't work to your satisfaction, an old friend that built our dirt track motors would recommend wetter water additive for the blocks that were punched a little thin. I used it in my derby cars when the plant was more than a one trick pony. The stuff would drop the temperature by 20 degrees on average. I'm not a big advocate for snake oils, but I never saw any adverse effects by using it.
I have used it also. It is the one "snake oil" that might be real. I think they call it a "wetting" agent". It supposedly increases the heat conductivity of the water. I will go there if the original bellows setup doesn't work.
I have thought long and hard about the bored motor. I still had plenty of wall after boring on the sonic testing. There was very little core shift in the block. Nice block. I have run thin wall 283 Chevy's. It wasn't so much they would overheat as they would heat up fast. Logic would say, the thermodynamics are such that the BTU output would not vary at any given load. Horsepower, efficiency, and the subsequent heat loss. However the water will get the heat much quicker as the wall thins. We never knew about the long run, because the problem for us was we needed to fire it up and run a quarter mile, with nothing for water. Thin walls definitely get hot faster.