ArboristSite.com Sponsors


"over-engineered"

greenskeeper

greenskeeper

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
339
Location
PA
Looking at both my 7.3 PSD trucks, I think about other engines/equipment that is so over-engineered that they will last a L-O-N-G time.

These days it seems that manufacturers try to squeeze a lot of power out of everything.

Case in point. My PSD trucks are 7.3 liters but only put out 225/235 hp.
 
Trapper_Pete

Trapper_Pete

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
479
Age
43
Location
Wisconsin
there is only engineered enough and under engineered.

equipment should be made to last decades with maintenance and be repairable.

if you made a piece of equipment that was modular and you could fit all the tools needed to work on it in one tool box , just change parts as they wear out then it would be engineered enough. if you could predict when those components would be worn as in hour or miles or cycles that would be even better.
 
rarefish383

rarefish383

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
7,597
Age
64
Location
MD
The Ford 2.7 twin turbo has a lot more HP and a lot more torque than my Ram 360, and gets about twice the fuel mileage. So, that’s what I’m looking at getting in a couple weeks. Only thing that worries me, is how long will those turbos last?
 
8wr_zj

8wr_zj

ArboristSite Lurker
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
19
Age
35
Location
The Bayou
We maintain a fleet of f150's for a local big pipeline/oil pump company at the shop. There are several 1st gen 3.5 EcoBoost that have over 300k with zero work done to the engine other than plugs, water pump, few various sensors, and coils. All have had leveling kits and 35 inch toyos MT's from day one. We have had these truck since 5k miles. It might be why my wife has a expedition with the 3.5

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

U&A

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Jan 17, 2016
Messages
2,140
Age
32
Location
Michigan
The Ford 2.7 twin turbo has a lot more HP and a lot more torque than my Ram 360, and gets about twice the fuel mileage. So, that’s what I’m looking at getting in a couple weeks. Only thing that worries me, is how long will those turbos last?
The ecoboost has its problems though it is a good motor.

Direct Injection cause high amounts of carbon buildup on the back of the intake valve. Enough that walnut blasting is becoming a common service. The intake valve gets zero fuel wash.

The ecoboost had issues with LSPI (LowSpeed Pre-Ignition). Most All the new turbo high torque gas engines do... so the ALL the oil manufacturers had to change additive formulas. Reducing calcium drastic ( think of calcium as an anti-acid) and raised the magnesium to try and take its place. Its ok at it, but calcium is much better. Though this is not all bad, they had to use true synthetic base stocks (PAO mostly and some ester) instead of group 3 to help fight how these new turbo engines shear oil. I really like PAO and esters.

The ecoboost is strong for sure. I had a 3.5 ecoboost for 3 years. But id rather have a port injection V8.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Streblerm

Streblerm

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Akron, OH
I mowed 4 acres of grass in my youth with a 1940’s Farmall A. This was in the late ‘80s so it was already close to 50 years old. It had a 1.9l OHV 4 cylinder engine rated at 16 HP and governed at about 1500 RPMs. It spent its entire life outside as far as I know. It was pretty standard for me to pull the plugs in the spring to get all the water out of the cylinders after the cup on top of the muffler blew off. I’d change the oil, and then mow all season.

Dad still has it, it’s finally in the barn. I’m sure he’d still be mowing with it except it blew a freeze plug in the bell housing area. (Radiator leak/no antifreeze). The repair requires splitting the tractor. I have no doubt with a battery and some fuel it would fire right up. Heck if it has any fuel left in it it would probably start with just a battery.

Sure every modern 2 liter engine makes more than ten times the power but I doubt they’ll still be going 50 years from now. Any one of the insults that poor old A suffered would be the end of a modern engine.
 

agvg

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
209
Age
51
Location
Norway
You can say much negative on modern tractors but I'm not sure the oldies would be very economical if you clock 12 -14h a day and consider 10 to 12000h a normal economical life span.

Most old tractor's are very tiring to use, clutch knee was a common plague for old farmers.

Sent fra min Nexus 5X via Tapatalk
 
Streblerm

Streblerm

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Akron, OH
You can say much negative on modern tractors but I'm not sure the oldies would be very economical if you clock 12 -14h a day and consider 10 to 12000h a normal economical life span.

Most old tractor's are very tiring to use, clutch knee was a common plague for old farmers.

Sent fra min Nexus 5X via Tapatalk
I’m not saying that that the old Farmall is a superior machine to newer equipment. just that it is overbuilt, and better than a horse. I wouldn’t be surprised if it had 50,000 hours on it.

I worked on the neighbor’s small farm (200 acres) around the same time. He was still using the same vintage tractors. A Farmall Super M for ground engagement , an H as a utility, a Super A for cultivating, and an Oliver 77 for most PTO duties because it had live PTO.

His parents bought a new “A” in 1940 He. Said it was revolutionary for them. At the time they were using horses. It started on gas and ran on kerosene or even less refined “distillate”. I guess it was soo much cheaper than gas they would often just let it run all night. He said his mom and dad would literally run it 24 hrs a day during planting/harvesting. Not only did they work in the fields, but they could run any kind of belt drive equipment so it gave them access to all kinds of existing equipment. It was responsible for mechanizing their farm. It was kind of like the original CUT. All that for less than $10k in today’s dollars.
 

agvg

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
209
Age
51
Location
Norway
Of course the tractor was a revolution, but if you remove all nostalgia and feel good a lot of this old equipment is not very nice to use, I'm nearly 50 and in resent year I had the pleasure to drive things I did when I was 18, and it was all just horrible old junk, absolutely nothing to have, and I have owned Ferguson's from the early fifties an it's not much you can use it to, it doesn't lift much, few gears, useless gasoline engine, a diesel Ferguson could be used at least to something very, very light work.

Sent fra min Nexus 5X via Tapatalk
 

agvg

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
209
Age
51
Location
Norway
But if you get up to a MF35 Perkins diesel then the machine is much more useful and a lot of 35 and MF100 series are in commercial use in farming even today.

Sent fra min Nexus 5X via Tapatalk
 
Streblerm

Streblerm

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Akron, OH
I’m also not claiming the A was a good mower by today’s standards either. No live PTO and non synchronized 4 speed. Engaging the pto or switching gears not only required a complete stop but also waiting for everything to stop spinning. 1st gear was too slow but left a really nice cut and second gear was too fast. It would take me 10hrs to mow the whole yard. I can do it 3 today with a 48” zero turn which also cut the trimming time in half.

It sure beat a homeowner riding mower of the time or a push mower. It isn’t in my garage today though and it has been offered.
 
Multifaceted

Multifaceted

Firewood Hoarder, Axe Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 31, 2017
Messages
1,223
Age
38
Location
Hillcountry, South-Central PA
I'm waiting for manufacturers to start implementation of the Opposed Piston engine configuration. Achates Power is doing R&D into various size displacement configurations, one of them a 2.7L (3 cylinder, 6 piston) 2-Stroke Turbo Charged and Super Charged Diesel engine with no valve train nor spark/glow plugs. The amount of torque these things put out in testing is incredible for the displacement. There are a few OEM that have signed in to using the engine technology in the coming days. Very exciting.
 

agvg

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
209
Age
51
Location
Norway
It's always fun to try things from the past, and I own and restores old equipment if it has some useful value, so I'm not immune again nostalgia :)

Has several projects in progress or on hold, at the moment it is four two-wheel mowers and I have an David Brown 995 tractor waiting for some love and attention.

Sent fra min Nexus 5X via Tapatalk
 
tdiguy

tdiguy

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
158
Age
47
Location
NE Iowa
It's nice when you can find one of these machines that fits your needs. I'm not sure if the term should be over-engineered or just engineered. Engineering then was to make things last essentially forever, today's engineering is to last a predetermined life span, or at a certain price. As for new versus old, my neighbor has an 806 farmall 7-8000 hours on the original tach when it quit, went 3-4 years until the tach was fixed, then has rolled over 10000 hours on the new tach. The only engine related repair it has had was to reseal the injection pump. If a tractor lasted that long today, the manufacturer would use it as an example of bad engineering. Sadly that 806 doesn't have enough power to run a big auger today.
 
Top