Snow Attachments Snow PUMP

[fitterski]

Thanks for that summary. Things that come to my mind;

Diesel engines are heavy, and hard to start in cold weather. The older non-electronic diesels seem to be harder to start than the newer electronic diesels. So it looks like you are backing yourself in a corner and not helping your cold weather starting problems very much. .

By migrating off the loader/backhoe I solve the by far worst half of the starting problems. As for the digital/electronic threats to mission-critical reliability I have no doubts ..nor choices. I broke down once in the middle of the road half cleared and it cost me. I had to call a pro but he couldn't get past me so that part had to be done with a little honda, then I had to get towed out to the public road so the rest could be cleared, then I had to get towed back to the house where I had started. $2000, NEVER AGAIN. Once I start engines they must not stop, not even if the Lord cometh to clean things up.

You could put a more powerful gas engine on the unit you have now. It would start easier and be lighter or close to the same weight as the diesel engine you are using now. You said something about you can't change the gearing for a higher rpm gas engine, but could you change just the auger rpm and let the fan turn at the higher speed?.

NocanDo, the fan would turn too fast ui.e. I could only use what I get below 2500 rpm which is why diesels are so great if you wanna do improvised and simple gearing. The gas engines need to run much faster so in any gearing situation they're out in my case. An exception would be for example if I hook up a Triton v10 with a transmission the outshaft of which would be at the same speed as with any other engine gas or diesel. For any hydraulic pump they're not a problem either BUT I will have eyeballed the mechanical setup with engine in place before I get to make that decision. Also I've had a real hard time finding a good Cummins bt6 so that if I can then I will bag it before the weekend. It's raining 24-valve digital engines around here, engines that nobody wants, while real-rod jobs are in VERY high demand (the industry would do well to listen to such rumblings).

I see a lot of problems with the driveshaft running through the cab idea. I see a lot of important stuff in the way, I don't think there is that much room through there. Usually the heater core is on the pass side along with the blower fan, wiring, and you will have to sneak by the inner fender and the radiator. It will be tricky. What if you ran it down the outside of the cab by the pass side door? A piece of channel laying across the frame in the back and another across the front frame rails(ditch the front bumper) with pillow block bearings on the ends for support. That offset would give you plenty of opportunity to gear up or down also.

I'm going to strip the cabin until there's nothing but echo in there. Any drive-shaft passing through beside my own sweet butt would also have to be candystriped but more importantly contained in a 6" pipe 1/4" thick. I can put the rad in lieu of the heater core anywhere else and solve two problems at once while the inner fender can go decorate the neighbour's piano for all I care. But your idea of a side-shaft on the outside is a good one, I certainly would not dismiss it until I get there. It's just all those kinks that I'd have to feel good about. I've also kicked the underneath approach around but then I'd end up coming out the front too low for anything but a 24" fan and I don't really want to get into more lincoln lockers than I have to )) I don't have he thing right here and there's nothing to size-up in the junkyard either, everything is under 5 feet of snow, but I'm pretty confident that I'll get it done, it won't be my first hacking experience. Depending on the engine, right over the frame might be where I get one shot at it.

 

[pmsmechanic]

Well I like the idea of a Cummins sitting on the back of a Ford! It would be nice if you could run both the Ford and the snowblower with the cummins but that's a bit of a rig-a-marole. If you do settle for a 24 valve they can be changed to a P-pump by changing the front cover. The aftermarket makes injectors and fuel lines that work. http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/98-5-02-24v-p-pump-conversion/ lots of information in this forum. If you bump up the horse power make sure you torque the head bolts to 125 (?) ft lbs. I think that's the number. Or use ARP or equivalent head studs.

If you double the rpm of a shaft you can put 4 times the hp through it so keep that in mind as you're designing. Have a look at a Schulte snow blower. The neighbour has one and they can easily blow the snow in a long arc well over the power lines. It's awesome to watch. I wish I would have taken some pictures.

 

[bigdeano]

You should be able to put the driveshaft just under the cab and the radiator and above the front axle tube. You may have to raise the truck a few inches with a spring lift. A 2" solid driveshaft doesn't take a lot of room.

If you double the rpm of a shaft it transmits twice the horsepower at the same torque, not 4 times.

It would be cool to put a 8V71T in that thing. They only weigh a mere 2600 lbs. Go big or go home!

 

[pmsmechanic]

If you double the rpm of a shaft it transmits twice the horsepower at the same torque, not 4 times.

I know for sure that this statement is wrong but don't get to excited. I could be wrong too. I just remember reading that if you "double your rpm you can transmit 4x the hp" somewhere. If I can't find the answer on the internet I have engineer friends that will know.

The reason I know that you can transmit more hp by doubling the rpm is because that's why 1000 rpm pto's were developed. I'm just not 100% sure on how much. I'm pretty sure the article said 4x because that's what stick in my mind but it probably around 35 years since I read that.

 

[franklin2]

Looks like the next step is finding an engine and a truck to work with cheap. I think you are set on a cummins diesel of some sort, and a decent sized pickup truck that runs.

 

[bigdeano]

I know for sure that this statement is wrong but don't get to excited. I could be wrong too. I just remember reading that if you "double your rpm you can transmit 4x the hp" somewhere. If I can't find the answer on the internet I have engineer friends that will know.

The reason I know that you can transmit more hp by doubling the rpm is because that's why 1000 rpm pto's were developed. I'm just not 100% sure on how much. I'm pretty sure the article said 4x because that's what stick in my mind but it probably around 35 years since I read that.

The formula for HP is Torque X RPM / 5252. So doubling the torque or RPM would double the HP. If you double both then you get 4X HP.

 

[Fallon]

The formula for HP is Torque X RPM / 5252. So doubling the torque or RPM would double the HP. If you double both then you get 4X HP.

Yup. When doubling the RPM though you loose half the torque (Assuming using a gearbox & not increasing engine speed or torque).

That's the whole reason big tractors use 1000rpm PTO instead of 540. Half the torque means you can use a lighter cheaper PTO shaft & other drive train. Generally there is going to be a gearbox on the other end already so it's just a matter of getting the right gear ratio gearbox & the same power & RPM gets to the other end with lighter & cheaper running gear. Most blower fans being direct drive does kind of contradict some of that argument, but in the big picture blowers are a small percentage of big tractor impliment.

 

[pmsmechanic]

So I had a talk last night with my friend that owns the Schulte snow blower. It's about 8' wide with a 3' diameter blower housing. There is a reduction gearbox on it from 1000 rpm pto. He figured they were blowing snow about 100 feet. I know the arch was easily clearing a power line because I saw it. The tractor was 135 pto horse power and his words "we were crawling along". Next time we get enough snow here to use it I will take a movie and post it here.

 

[fitterski]

Looks like the next step is finding an engine and a truck to work with cheap. I think you are set on a cummins diesel of some sort, and a decent sized pickup truck that runs.

I bagged the engine yesterday, it's the 175hp version with 138 kiloclicks on it made for clutch-jobs. Apparently the automatics couldn't take 175 so their engines were detuned to 160. Sounds like a stretch but that's what the vendor told me. I would have thought he opposite, that since automatics are gentle on the piston rods you can turn more horses lose with them. Anyway, this part of the puzzle is solved, I'm very happy that I dumped the duramax idea. This thing will start with a booster cable and will never again know if there's a battery connected to it or not. ALL engines should be made like this

I will check to see if killer dowel pin is modded, then just test it as is.

 

[fitterski]

So I had a talk last night with my friend that owns the Schulte snow blower. It's about 8' wide with a 3' diameter blower housing. There is a reduction gearbox on it from 1000 rpm pto. He figured they were blowing snow about 100 feet. I know the arch was easily clearing a power line because I saw it. The tractor was 135 pto horse power and his words "we were crawling along". Next time we get enough snow here to use it I will take a movie and post it here.

I took a good look a them Schulte types back in '08 when I started the old rig. Very impressed, also with Ber-Vac who manufacture (actually mostly engineer) very solid stuff for many others. If either one would sell me a 48" prototype cheap, or just give me a copy of the drawings I'd be very happy. One of them has already told me to visit far away exotic places without delay, in so many words never written. That part is still far down the road though.

 

[fitterski]

I know for sure that this statement is wrong but don't get to excited. I could be wrong too. I just remember reading that if you "double your rpm you can transmit 4x the hp" somewhere. If I can't find the answer on the internet I have engineer friends that will know.

The reason I know that you can transmit more hp by doubling the rpm is because that's why 1000 rpm pto's were developed. I'm just not 100% sure on how much. I'm pretty sure the article said 4x because that's what stick in my mind but it probably around 35 years since I read that.

You must have read about air resistance for your rat-rod. That one does increase with the square of the speed. There are may ways to calculate power, if you double the rpm and the torque now that's different story.

 

[KWentling]

I bagged the engine yesterday, it's the 175hp version with 138 kiloclicks on it made for clutch-jobs. Apparently the automatics couldn't take 175 so their engines were detuned to 160. Sounds like a stretch but that's what the vendor told me. I would have thought he opposite, that since automatics are gentle on the piston rods you can turn more horses lose with them. Anyway, this part of the puzzle is solved, I'm very happy that I dumped the duramax idea. This thing will start with a booster cable and will never again know if there's a battery connected to it or not. ALL engines should be made like this

I will check to see if killer dowel pin is modded, then just test it as is.

I can vouch for the detuned engines on the early 2nd gen Dodges. I had a '95 with the auto. Corrected that with a '98 5-speed.

 

[fitterski]

I can vouch for the detuned engines on the early 2nd gen Dodges. I had a '95 with the auto. Corrected that with a '98 5-speed.

Did YOU notice a significant power increase from 160 to either 215 or 235?

As far as my use of a transmission might become a factor, that'll be if and when I morphe the machine into a truck hosted one, and then I would rather use an automatic with a transfer case which would give me some usable outshaft rpm options. A standard would give me those options too but if my wife clears the snow then a nice linear auto selector N-1-2/4Lo1-2 sortof thing would be much more practical. What I don't understand is why the engine needs to be throttled or derated when there are automatics handling 500hp. This one is over my head, what auto and tx-case could I use in such an eventuality after raising the HP to maybe 230-250?

 

[fitterski]

Well I like the idea of a Cummins sitting on the back of a Ford! It would be nice if you could run both the Ford and the snowblower with the cummins but that's a bit of a rig-a-marole. If you do settle for a 24 valve they can be changed to a P-pump by changing the front cover. The aftermarket makes injectors and fuel lines that work. http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/98-5-02-24v-p-pump-conversion/ lots of information in this forum. If you bump up the horse power make sure you torque the head bolts to 125 (?) ft lbs. I think that's the number. Or use ARP or equivalent head studs.

I looked into p-pumping it but now with the 12 valve bought it's no longer required. I think it's cheaper to buy a 12-valve and boost it. As for the rigmarole option it's less so in my case because an in-line 6 might just leave more room for a drive-shaft. If I plan aEhad and scout for a wrecked f350 with no engine then the cost would be offset too.

 

[KWentling]

Did YOU notice a significant power increase from 160 to either 215 or 235?

As far as my use of a transmission might become a factor, that'll be if and when I morphe the machine into a truck hosted one, and then I would rather use an automatic with a transfer case which would give me some usable outshaft rpm options. A standard would give me those options too but if my wife clears the snow then a nice linear auto selector N-1-2/4Lo1-2 sortof thing would be much more practical. What I don't understand is why the engine needs to be throttled or derated when there are automatics handling 500hp. This one is over my head, what auto and tx-case could I use in such an eventuality after raising the HP to maybe 230-250?


View attachment 497536

There was absolutely a noticeable increase in power. A friend bought a '97 5-speed and that truck would run away from my '95 on big hills. My '98 that replaced the '95 pulled the same trailers better too. I know the later Dodges weren't derated with the automatics but I don't know what year or transmissions those were. Those RE transmissions are going to put you back into having to deal with electronic controls. They put Allison transmissions behind those engines in Ford's F750 trucks but I think those are also electronic controlled but would be another option. Those engines were in a lot of construction applications so there are probably other options too.

The aftermarket builders did a good job beefing up the Dodge autos so any of them could be made to work for you. I'm not sure what all was done to beef them up but I think the torque converters and clutch pressures were improved. I think some of the reasons Dodge derated the first years autos was because of the torquey characteristic and the low rpm that the Cummins makes that torque at was a challenge to make an auto live with. The v8s were a little smoother and made their power at higher rpms so it was a little easier for Ford and GM autos to cope with.

 

[bigdeano]

The NP205 is considered one of the strongest transfer cases for pickups. It's all gear drive. I don't know what years Dodge used them.

 

[fitterski]

The NP205 is considered one of the strongest transfer cases for pickups. It's all gear drive. I don't know what years Dodge used them.

I know they weigh like a hundred pounds but this guy is holding one like he was waiting at the cashier with it and determined not to let go :laughing::laughing:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_H3LmUSIH80E/TGeKwqfX-jI/AAAAAAAAAFI/PXvF0un8keI/s1600/np205za.JPG

Can you flip a tx-case so that it will fall on one side of the driveline or the other? I only need it to get some low gearing and only if i build on a truck, but if i could have it on the left side then i could mount the engine closer to CL on the truck frame.

 

[pmsmechanic]

You don't need maximum horsepower to move the truck you only need it to run the blower. So that means any automatic will do the job. You're not going back and forth so you don't need to worry about overheating the trans oil. All you need to do is keep the rpms up enough so that the torque convertor isn't in stall. Since you need rpm's for the snowblower the torque convertor stalling isn't an issue. Just don't run the snow blower off of the transmission. Run it off of a pulley on the engine. Preferably off of the rear of the engine.

A well built cummins will shred a 205 transfer case as will a built Chev 350 for that matter. You're better off with a 241 or a 271. But again that isn't going to be an issue unless you come to a dead stop at full throttle. Ford 271's can be economically modified to fit onto the rear of a Dodge standard or automatic. Also any of these three transfer cases can be made to drop to either side so that isn't an issue either.

 

[bigdeano]

The OP is going to put the Cummins in the bed of the pickup hooked to the transmission and transfer case. Power for the blower will be taken from the transfer case output to use the gear reduction for proper speed of the blower impeller.

 

[fitterski]

The OP is going to put the Cummins in the bed of the pickup hooked to the transmission and transfer case. Power for the blower will be taken from the transfer case output to use the gear reduction for proper speed of the blower impeller.

Yes, that'd be the rough idea in a truck setup. Whether I'd use the main output or what normally goes to the front differential would remain to be seen. The truck would need excellent 4x4 traction (studs and chains) just like one would need for a plow. The only constraint using the front-axle output would be that the engine would have to be facing forward which would put it too far in the front end of where the box had been. It's a C of G issue mostly. Or I could mod a tx-case to provide a side output in the normal direction parallel to the main out-shaft. That would give me the best of both worlds, good weight distribution and a lateral offset allowing the engine to be closer to CL, but would probably involve too much work and increased risks of oil leaks.