It has been my experience that there have been zero issues of leaks as a result of my lifting the engine as shown. The open-end grain of the wood conformed to the point of contact and spread the load over the face of the said 2x4 footprint. Further, the entire weight of the engine is not supported as such, the rear (transmission) took some of the load. As shown, there is no load presented to the damper nor directly to the crankshaft.

Works just fine for the intended purpose. If things were that delicate, the Cummins probably wouldn't have the reputation it currently does. This is not to diminish the value of working by the FSM.

 

I used the same method when I was experimenting with the new double mounts. I had no leaks afterward.

 

simple math formulas tells me that fifty percent of any lifting force will be transferred to the rear mount and anything else attached to the engine the moment the wood block starts to lift the engine tranny combo and that the sheer force required of the timing cover bolts and oil pan bolts to any damage far exceeds any weight put on it by a factor of ten to one. the 2x4 will split first !!!

 

Sorry my input has caused such a reaction. Selective response will be adhered not to offend the sensitive. Thanks anyways!!

 

bosshawg ......questions are good don't be afraid to ask them an issue raised is always good so all can learn >

 

This is one of the main points of our forums: To figure out ways to service/repair our old heaps without necessarily adhering to the FSM. Backyard mechanic mess.

 

I used wood in a similar fashion but lifted on the sill of the oil pan on the side I was doing. No leak issues nor squashed fingers. I was pretty careful not to put them in any created spaces tho', ....

 

Alright bosshawg, my point is that there is indeed no load transferred to the cover if you lift the engiine by its crankshaft. The only support to the end of the crank is the first main bearing...so how does the timing case and cover get loaded?

I don't see any issue to lifting the engine by pushing on the damper. That rubber in between the hub and mass is not very likely to go anywhere.

The damper is for torsional vibration. It( the crank) is a torsion spring( steel being one of the finest low loss spring materials ). The damper is to take out energy when the excitation frequency is near resonance. As the excitation approaches resonance the amplitude increases. The lower the losses the higher this peak will be. If there are not enough losses this peak will be beyond the strength ov materials and you'll then need to be brougnt home to comtemplate finding a rusty truck with a good motor to resurrect yer heap...
cheers,
Douglas

and if credentials are important, I have a Master of Science ME degree I got paid by the NSF to get it.

 

Agreed; the piece of paper stating one's credentials means nothing, particularly if not adhered. Where has the practical experiential learning upon which you base your input on whether a process is procedurally and safety sound?? What you or others do in their backyards is totally your business but when it pertains to submitting information on a public forum which others use who may have little or no experience whatsoever, could be a different matter of concern.

Here's a statement an elderly, well-learned, experienced, licensed mechanic told me early in my apprenticeship; and I quote:

"Once you think you know it all is when learning stops".

Personally I do not have to substantiate any credentials; my 30+ years in the licesened repair trade, as well as, my 10+ years of mechanical instructional experience of technicians pursuing or advanced in the repair trade speaks for itself.

And with this I leave this topic and posting thread. Again, very sorry if I offended anyone; or seemingly attacked the bureaucratic structure of this forum's integrity; this was not my intent or purpose.

Thank you for all the valuable infomation; keep up the good work; really; it's greatly appreciated and surely helpful; cheers.........bosshawg

 

wow such serious thoughts and statements I believe we all know our own level of expertness and as such our abilities to do a job with in our comfort zone .there are many ways to skin a cat as the saying goes no one should ever take offense or become enraged over how some one SUGGESTS how to do something. we are all here to learn and Laugh .Don't sweat it Bosshawg so did ya here the one about the Austin mini and the elephant.......... LOL

 

fully in tune with you tech-ed, all's cool here; I'll enjoy continuous searching variuos threads on the forum; chow now!

 

I need to replace my motor mounts soon. I'm wondering about building a small lifting cradle for my floor jack to lift the motor by the oil pan flange on either side of the block. Does anybody see any issues with doing so? I'd prefer more stability than a 2x4. Not that it didn't work in this case or that it doesn't, but I'd feel more comfortable with a more stable lifting apparatus.

 

I an thinking the same thing. I need more stability to install a motor mount cross member.

 

Uh... With your manufacturing abilities....im sure youll be fine

 

Well I am always up for a challenge