Detroit diesel in a lincoln welder?

admin

http://chambana.craigslist.org/tls/2921736016.htmlI have never heard of anyone here talk about a Detroit diesel in a lincoln welder.  I could not imagine listning to that run all day but it sounds intresting.  Has anyone owned or ran one before?   I am going to take a look anyway but looking for other thoughts about the machine.ThanksDan D.
Reply:The Detroits are suprisingly quiet near idle.  They're only loud above 1200 rpm.  Looks like a 2-71 to me.  Awesome engines, never wear out.  2-71 parts are getting few and far between. The overhaul parts are still available but anything beyond that is long since discontinued.  There are a lot of differences between the 2-cylinder engines and the 3+ cylinder engines.  I have seen Detroit powered Hobarts before.
Reply:Diesel engines are the best when you need something dependable.  Imagine having an engine sit for years and being able to hit a button and have it fire up.  Gas won't do that.  Diesel will.
Reply:A have a friend thats a Detroit fan boy.   has a bunch of different 2 stroke jimmy powered equipment and one of his prizes is an old SAM-400 with a two stroke Detroit.   I always threaten him that one day my neighbors are going to push me one to far and i will spend the next two weeks burning rods with that machine.Vantage 500's LN-25's, VI-400's, cobramatics, Miller migs, synch 350 LX, Powcon inverters, XMT's, 250 Ton Acurrpress 12' brake, 1/4" 10' Atlantic shear,Koikie plasma table W/ esab plasmas. marvel & hyd-mech saws, pirrana & metal muncher punches.
Reply:SAE -300/400  SAM650 all had Detroit Power
Reply:Why wouldn't they show a pic of the front & side vs. Back & side?"Where's Stick man????????" - 7A749"SHHHHHH!! I sent him over to snag that MIC-4 while tbone wasn't looking!" - duaneb55"I have bought a few of Tbone's things unlike Stick-Man who helps himself" - TozziWelding"Stick-man"
Reply:I would rather stick toothpics under my fingernails then own another 2 stroke Detroit Diesel.  I had a 8V71 aka 318 10 wheeler.  That was 25 years ago.  My ears are still ringing
Reply:Detriots : the most efficient way to turn fuel into noise that has been invented in the last hundred years Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Reply:best i heard,   they are converters.   They convert diesel fuel into smoke and noise.Vantage 500's LN-25's, VI-400's, cobramatics, Miller migs, synch 350 LX, Powcon inverters, XMT's, 250 Ton Acurrpress 12' brake, 1/4" 10' Atlantic shear,Koikie plasma table W/ esab plasmas. marvel & hyd-mech saws, pirrana & metal muncher punches.
Reply:I'm with 76GMC1500 on this one.The GM's were a good ‘ol engine -reliable, serviceable, economical-  and in this application still practical to run today. It's way better than any of the other power plants that Lincoln (and others) offered in days past.  Yet today, this engine could probably be rebuilt to as-new condition for less cost than the rebuild of any other multi-cylinder engine ever offered in any Lincoln welder... and that even includes the "lawnmower" air-cooled engines.This welder would've probably already been blown-up and junked as uneconomical-to-repair if it had some other previously offered engine, such as an English engine, or Hercules, or big Continental... Did I mention Buda?  Sure, the GM is louder than any other 75 year-old engine design you're likely to hear running, but that's because the others have all gone silent with rigor mortis.  Meanwhile, the GMs are still going strong in HUGE numbers, and thus still have a strong support network offering dirt-cheap and readily available parts and service. To the "Detroit Detractors" I'd like to hear it, (if I could ) which of its contemporaries you would put up against the Detroit? Good Luck
Reply:Originally Posted by stefuelI would rather stick toothpics under my fingernails then own another 2 stroke Detroit Diesel.  I had a 8V71 aka 318 10 wheeler.  That was 25 years ago.  My ears are still ringing
Reply:Originally Posted by Stick-man I had a Ford LT9000 tractor with a DD 318 8V71, no turbo. Yep it was louder than loud. It drank a gallon of oil per week. It struggled pulling itself empty @ 33k lbs. BUT, it would start right up and get me thru a days work without fail. When I bought a brand new Freightliner, three months later, on a night job, going down the road it just stopped. Cam or crank sensor went bad in the 3176 CAT. Had to have it towed and dealt with a bunch of BS because I had a hot load of asphalt on. Never would have happened with the 318!
Reply:I was thinking today, (I know: With what?) about this thread and  Detroits. I believe that the 2-strokes have set a record that will never be broken. No - not for oil consumption. Lookit - The same basic design's been in production for 75 years, so far. Of course there are thousands and thousands of ‘em still on the job today, including plenty of 50+ year-olds, as well as brand-new 2012 models. With that, I'd say it's a safe bet that the design is easily going to be around for another 25 years; to hit a 100 year working life. So barring the unforeseen,  it looks like in a short 25 years, when the design hits the 100 year mark, the 2-cycle Detroits will still  be on the job in some quantity. So my thought for the day is that I don't believe that any other engine could ever come close to matching the 2-stroke Detroit's long production run.What's holding 'em back now is that in order to buy a new one you have to be a government who's cushioned form fuel costs and exempt from the rules that all other new engine users must comply with. Good LuckLast edited by denrep; 04-10-2012 at 09:25 PM.
Reply:Apparently, in 2010 Detroit Diesel tooled up to go from 2,500 71 series engines to  in excess of 25,000 engines per year.
Reply:Originally Posted by 76GMC1500Apparently, in 2010 Detroit Diesel tooled up to go from 2,500 71 series engines to  in excess of 25,000 engines per year.
Reply:Originally Posted by 76GMC1500Apparently, in 2010 Detroit Diesel tooled up to go from 2,500 71 series engines to  in excess of 25,000 engines per year.
Reply:The 2500 a year was for military use but I think they realized they can still sell the engines everywhere else in the world.  They aren't cheap to make.  If you ever build a Detroit they are very intricate engines with many parts and lots of hand fitting required but they are the only small engines that can pretty much run 24/7 straight shutting down only for oil/filter changes and some minor maintenance.Last edited by 76GMC1500; 04-11-2012 at 12:13 AM.
Reply:Green, screaming, leaker.Live with an old two-stroke jimmy in an engine room and you will understand.They are not economical to run with the price of fuel these days, or the cost of engine oil.When fuel was cheap it was a no brainer, give it air and fuel (oh, and lots and lots of oil!) and it will run and run and run!-IanMiller Dynasty 350Miller XMT 304
Reply:Detroits are quite pleasant at 1200 rpm, especially with the clean cam conversions.  Fuel consumption is supposedly very competitive with the modern common rail 4-strokes.  I did work on a boat with 1800 rpm 12-71 gens on Friday.  It's a bad combination because those engines will drive you to a level of insanity where you may kill somebody but what is worse is nobody will hear it happen.You can also dial in your oil consumption on a Detroit.  They offer many different expanders for the oil control rings.  I think it's the white colored expanders that are the stiffest and will yield the least oil consumption.  Our John Deere 6081's burn 1 gallon every 24 hours.  I haven't got consumption numbers on my 6-71 yet but I'm going to guess it's closer to 1 gallon in 100 hours.  I get a lot of oil out of the crankcase breathe due to our 15 psi airbox pressure at moderate loads.  The scraper rings are meant to keep oil in the crankcase, not boost in the airbox.Last edited by 76GMC1500; 04-11-2012 at 01:28 AM.
Reply:Originally Posted by 76GMC1500Detroits are quite pleasant at 1200 rpm, especially with the clean cam conversions.  Fuel consumption is supposedly very competitive with the modern common rail 4-strokes.  I did work on a boat with 1800 rpm 12-71 gens on Friday.  It's a bad combination because those engines will drive you to a level of insanity where you may kill somebody but what is worse is nobody will hear it happen.You can also dial in your oil consumption on a Detroit.  They offer many different expanders for the oil control rings.  I think it's the white colored expanders that are the stiffest and will yield the least oil consumption.  Our John Deere 6081's burn 1 gallon every 24 hours.  I haven't got consumption numbers on my 6-71 yet but I'm going to guess it's closer to 1 gallon in 100 hours.  I get a lot of oil out of the crankcase breathe due to our 15 psi airbox pressure at moderate loads.  The scraper rings are meant to keep oil in the crankcase, not boost in the airbox.
Reply:That was the old manual.  I'm running high tension (city bus) rings in my last build.  A quart every 24 is a lot better than the gallon every 24 we see in our John Deere's.