04mustang
-
Posts
29 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Articles
Store
Downloads
Posts posted by 04mustang
-
-
Ok so it's time for an update!
I have now rebuilt one side of my tracks! I ended up using the conveyor belt method and now I want to share my method. This is for the 55 grouser track on the later weasels.
I made a jig for drilling the holes in the conveyor belts using factory band drawings from studebaker. I made the jig 5' long to minimize the chance of getting the spacing off. I ended up using 7" wide belts for the base on each side of the center guide. I then used 3" wide belts towards the center of each track to mimic the original bands. For the thickness of the belts I used 13/32 for the base and top layer of the "inner bands", and used 1/8" belting between the two others on the "inner band" so that the overall thickness would be close to the original inner band thickness.
For the hardware I chose to use 1" long 1/4" - 20 grade 8 shoulder bolts to hold the base band in place. And I used 1 1/4" long 1/4" - 20 elevator bolts on the "inner band" holes going through all three belt layers. I used lock nuts on everything. I also made small plates to cover the joints where the ends of the belts meet. And I staggered the belt joints so that each one was in a completely different part of the track so that if one failed it wouldn't make the whole thing come apart.
To drill the holes I used a flexco hole punch made for drilling holes in mining conveyor belts. I purchased several bits as I knew I would wear them rather quickly. Even with using silicone spray lube on each hole. Also make sure to make the holes in jig large enough to accommodate the flexco bit. And drill a relief hole below the belting so that you don't go through the belting and into the wood table below. Failing to do this will dull the flexco bit in a very short amount of time!
Once I get the other side built ill put them on the M29C and be able to do some testing!
Thanks!
Corey
-
2
-
-
-
I have for sale an M29C weasel hull and most of the parts needed to make it a complete floater.
This weasel came from Northern CA in a very dry arid climate. The float tanks were located separately. They have had some repair done to them. It does have 3 side skirts, the capstan winch, bow shield and smaller shields by the windshield. Ive also got the rudder steering handle.
This weasel has no data plates or tags at all. It's located in Lumberton NC.
Asking $10,000 for everything. Or can separate the hull from the floater parts.
I also have another M29C the is 95+% complete. It does run and I have done a lot of work to it. I took the tracks off to rebuild them but haven't done that yet. I have purchased all the conveyor belting and even made a template jig for drilling the conveyor belt to get the spacing correct. I would like to get $12,000 out of this one.
If someone was intrested and wanted both weasels and all the floater parts, then I would sell them as a package for $20,000.
Thank you,
Corey (910)twofiveeight 2099
-
So my head is starting to spin a little bit in looking over the plans from Studebaker and comparing 55 to 56 type track and digging through the ORD manual (thank you @Patrick Tipton for the manuals).
Here are some comparisons that I have put together.
Studebaker Part No. Ordnance No. Notes Sprocket SD-905654 C128337 Part of Drive Wheel C128336 SD-908991 Part of Drive Wheel 7324249 Drive Wheel Assembly SD-905653 C128336 Used Through Serial No. 2101 (M29) SD-908167 C128459 Used Through Serial No. 2101 - 14229 SD-908990 7324249 Used After Serial No. 14229 (Supersedes 128459) 20" Tracks SD-908172 D73029 Outer Cable Type, Used Through Serial No. 2102 - 14108 (Except 13584, 13585, 13660) SD-908646 7016555 Outer Cable Type, Used Through Serial No. 14108-14158 (&13584, 13545, 13660) SD-908657 7016556 Outer Band Type, Used After Serial No. 14159 (Supersedes D73029 & 7016555)
For your viewing pleasure I have attached the actual drawings from Studebaker. These were prints that I purchased from the archives to compare the differences But i hope they can be useful to everyone. I firmly believe that getting information like this out to the general public is the only way that we can save these machines for future use/learning/generations.
One thing ill note is that The assembly drawing of the 55 type track shows an inner band thickness of 60/64 (15/16), but the band drawing shows a thickness of 0.960.
I also now believe that the critical distance isn't the thickness of the band relative to the grouser face. I think its more so important to look at the measurement from the top of the band to where it will be bending as the track turns (i.e. the internal cable locations).
Corey
-
1
-
1
-
-
A little further into this discussion,
What I drew above is based on 1" inner bands. We have the drawings that show it is actually 15/16". So I did another drawing to show the differences on that and a few options for using the 56 type track and 55 type track to achieve the same diameter.
The 55 type track with a 15/16" inner band comes out to a diameter of 78.88499277". Translating this over to the 56 type track, in order to achieve the same diameter we need an inner band thickness of 0.66455" which will give us 78.88499132" diameter. Using an actual number of 21/32" we have a diameter of 78.90159132".
I already have conveyor belting that is 3/4" for use on the inner bands. So that calculation works out to 78.71409132" diameter.
This comes out to the following overall distances/circumferences:
55 type track with 15/16" inner bands: 247.8245138"
55 type track with 1" inner bands: 247.4318147"
56 type track with 21/32" inner bands: 247.8766596"
56 type track with 3/4" inner bands: 247.287611"
56 type track with 1" inner bands: 245.7168147"
-
Thank you both for the feed back and confirmation of some of this data @nwarcade@OZM29C.
Based on what I've got so far I've drawn up what these difference look like in CAD.
The track sprocket image is just a simple sketch using measurements from a NOS sprocket that I have. I am assuming that all of the drive sprockets are the same in terms of the number of teeth and layout and diameter. I realize that there may be some differences in actual design due to production changes through the years, but that the functional parts of the sprockets remained the same.
On the track sprocket sketch you can see the comparisons of the 55 and 56 grouser layouts. The red circle is the 55 type track using the 4.613 pitch. The green circle is the 56 type track using the 4.5 pitch. The yellow circle is the actual diameter of the sprocket where the outer rubber wheels would ride. The blue lines are the length and locations of the drive sprocket teeth. As you can see, both track types will ride in the middle of the sprocket teeth.
On the track band diameter sketch you can see the comparisons of the 55 and 56 grouser layouts and the different bands when it comes to the diameter of the entire track. The red line is the 55 type track with a 4.613" pitch and diameter of 80.75999277". The green line is that same 55 type track and 4.613" pitch, but removing 2" from the diameter to account for the 1" thick rubber inner bands. The blue line is for the 56 type track using 4.5" pitch and a diameter of 80.21409132". The yellow line is the same 56 type track and 4.5" pitch but removing 1.4541" from the diameter to account for the calculated o.72705" inner track bands. The purple line is using the same 56 type track with 4.5" pitch but removing 1.5" from the diameter instead of 1.4541", this allows for a more commercially available size of 3/4" inner track bands. The difference in the diameter is almost negligible.
Where I think people in the past have gone wrong is rebuilding the 56 type track using the 1" inner bands. Doing this will result in a 1.715" shorter circumference from the 55 type track and will causing timing issues. Even using the 3/4" inner bands on the 56 type track instead of the calculated 0.72705" will cause a circumference difference of 0.144203695" when compared to the factory 55 type track and 1" inner bands.
I plan to make a test run of this and verify what I'm getting on the computer before too long.
Thank you,
Corey
-
1
-
-
Well, after many months have gone by and my primary plan of having new bands made here in the USA have fallen apart, I have decided to just rebuild my own tracks with conveyor belting as that was my very first option anyways.
In making up a template I have discovered some questions. In looking at original Studebaker prints on the 56 grouser tracks I have based my template on that pattern. The spacing/pitch is 4.5" center to center and 56 pitches per track. That works out to a length of 252". I have been told on Facebook that the 55 grouser tracks use a spacing/pitch of 4.613" and 55 pitches for a length of 253.715". Now doing the calculations on the radius that works out to 40.37999639" on the 55 count and 40.10704566" on the 56 count.
In order for those tracks to be interchangeable, which I'm sure they were, then the inner bands that the road wheels ride on would have to be different thicknesses so that the timing of the sprocket is correct. With that in mind, its common knowledge that the 55 count tracks have 1" thick inner bands. So doing the math on that using the 4.613" pitch, as given on Facebook, and subtracting the 1" thickness for the inner band, you would have a new radius of 39.37999639" and new circumference of 247.4318" for the top of the inner bands.
If you then take that circumference of 247.4318" and reverse the calculations to determine the band thickness of the 56 count tracks, I come up with a inner band thickness of 0.72705".
This would make sense being that the sprockets don't change and the further away from the center of the sprocket you are, the further apart that the grousers would need to be spaced in order to still be in correct timing. And the closer to the center of the sprocket that you are, the closer together that the grouser would need to be in order to still be in correct timing.
Does anyone have more knowledge on this subject that can confirm or deny my assessments here?
The 4.613" pitch came from a drawing the someone had that showed the spacing between the grousers was 2.363" from bolt hole to bolt hole, then adding the 2.25" spacing of the distance between the bolt holes on grousers.
On the earlier 56 count tracks all of the hole spacings are 2.25" on both the grousers and between the grousers.
-
Hi everyone. I've recently been digging deep into the wiring of my weasel and found the TMs a bit lacking when it comes to wiring diagrams. They have multiple diagrams but not a composite of the entire thing. So I made one. I spoke with Patrick about some areas of this and we talked for a while on these things because some areas of the TM diagrams are hard to understand.
So here is my diagram and a list of the wires with size and colors based on what info is in the TMs.
I will note that I did this based on a later model vehicle with the round headlight switch and electric fuel pump.. But the same information could be used to work on earlier models.
I hope this helps someone!
Corey
-
1
-
1
-
-
Would anyone happen to have photos of the inside of a metal fuel tank with the electric fuel pump?
I'm trying to remove the electric pump and have followed the TM but cannot get the lower portion with the screen to come out of the tank.
Wing nuts and even screen nuts have been removed but I still cannot get this thing to come out.
Thank you,
Corey
-
Hey john,
Who did you get your stencils from for your m29c? They look exactly like what I am looking for. Minus the black letter Kenny decals.
-
Very awesome work sir!
Do have any plans to build a version for the M29 series? Or what does that option look like?
Corey
-
I can now add that M29C Hull #: M-29C-7676, Reg. #:40196503 S, Serial #: 12107,
has engine #: T24 14124
Thank you,
Corey
-
1
-
-
@Conner Bush that's most likely doable, except for the float tanks. Those are normally over 5k alone in a needs to be restored condition.
-
@OZM29C the rubber tracks are around 6000 usd plus shipping. Where as the LAR tracks are 14000usd unless they went up again in the last 6 months.
-
Very nice and detailed writeup @Byron! I do have to ask about where one in the states can purchase these tracks from? I believe these are the staman tracks? and they will not ship to US buyers?
Thank you,
Corey
-
1
-
-
Here is all in one bearing/race/seal chart that I've put together for future reference for anyone that may be looking through manuals and searching for this info. Im still needing some info on U joints and a few oil seals though.
Item Description Quantity Needed Ord Number Studebaker Number Timken Number SKF Number Koyo Number Bogie Bearing 32 705371 SD-511587 9078 Bogie Cup/Race 32 706806 SD-130983 9194 Bogie Oil Seal 32 7061963 SD-901988 12391 Return Roller Bearing 8 709424 SD-900812 T0116P532533 Return Roller Insulator 8 7016439 SD-199388 Return Roller Shaft 4 7010417 SD-908277 Idler/Drive Bearing Inner 4 705053 387-A Idler/Drive Cup/Race Inner 4 706647 382 Idler/Drive Oil Seal Inner 4 A307800 SD-900816 Idler/Drive Bearing Outer 4 705034 359-S Idler/Drive Cup/Race Outer 4 706640 354-A Drive Wheel Axle Shaft Seal 2 7016436 SD-908496 U Joint 2 A307552 SD-188641 Differential Axle Bearing 2 A307794 SD-900733 25581 Differential Axle Cup/Race 2 A307793 SD-900732 25520 -
3
-
-
6 hours ago, OZM29C said:
@04mustangAs an alternative to the return roller needle bearing, I have fitted bronze bushings. This mod was done to the Australian Weasels operating in Antarctica. This mod also allows you to fit a wider bushing (on one side only) to more evenly distribute the load. The take out return roller shafts that I have all show extreme wear in way of the needle rollers. The needle rollers don't take too kindly to lack of lubrication and being exposed to water/moisture. Just a thought. I have attached a couple of photos for you to study. Cheers
John, I have to ask, where did you find the return roller bushings and shafts?
I do believe I will end up needing to replace at least 2 if not all 4 of the shafts on my M29C because they appear to be bent from over tension of the tracks.
-
16 hours ago, Patrick Tipton said:
FWIW - the early ORD 789 G154/179 does have the Timken Numbers....they are only cross referenced to the Group so the chart itself is not useful without the rest of the book - you have to go to the Group Number and locate the Timken Number there (usually in a parenthesis...)
Here is the download:
and we sell a nice reprint if you want the printed and bound version: https://www.portrayalpress.com/product-p/ord-789-g154.htm
Thank you Sir!, I already had purchased it from you some time back, just didn't have it with me at the time I was typing yesterday. I spent some time a dug through both manuals and found the chart you referenced. It is a bit confusing but I worked through it with the group numbers.
-
I'm in the ord 9 snl g-179 March 1953
-
1 hour ago, Patrick Tipton said:
The ORD 9 parts manual has Timken numbers......you should be able to find everything you need online pretty easily.
Thank you Patrick. I found those numbers for the bogie parts but nothing in the manual has a Timken or any civilain bearing numbers for the return rollers, idler, or drive parts.
So the search continues....
-
1
-
-
Hi,
I'm sure that this has been addressed in some form or fashion in the past but I can't seem to locate it.
Does anyone have a reference for modern bearing, race and seal numbers for the suspension on the weasels? Ive found the bogie seals with skf 12391. But can't find the bearings or races/cups.
Also looking for the same info on the idler and drive bearings.
And u joints for the drive shafts for that matter. Any help would be appreciated! Thank you!
-
Does anyone have either repo or original seat backs and pads/seat cushions for sale?
I need a full set of 4 for my M29C.
Thank you,
Corey
cjwalte2(at)gmail.com
-
D.R.H.
I did not call to waste your time nor did I try to hide this post from you. I posted the exact same thing in the weasel forum.
And like I messaged you on that forum, I have planned to make my own versions but if you had something ready to go then I would just go your route and buy from you. But you never gave me a price or offered any more than some photos of your conveyor bands that are cut small and still need the clips slavaged from original bands. I would hardly call that an accurate reproduction. But thank you for showing me on here the kind of person that you are. I felt that we had a good conversation and I even told you what my plans were on the phone. So please tell me how I'm going around behind you and posting things about you. Look at the date this was posted. I created this post last Sunday. And we spoke on Wednesday.
You really need to grow up.
From where I sit, I dont see anyone making an accurate reproduction of original bands here in the US. So I see a need for it and will go my own way. If I only ever make a set for myself then so be it. Im restoring them for my track, and if I can help fill a need in a group where one doesn't exist then I'm glad to do so. You offered a solution and I didn't feel like it was good enough for me in my ventures. Im not stealing your idea. I have a US manufacturer here on the east coast that says they can make this and I am good friends with the owner of that company. End of story. And they will look like original track bands. -
Hi jim!
My weasel is hull number M-29C-7676.
Supposedly the actual usa number is 40196503.
It does have the serial plate but I dont have the weasel in front of me just yet. Its coming from CA and has supposedly been there basically since surplus. It will no reside on the east coast in NC.
Thank you,
Corey
-
1
-
Differential Information
in Headquarters
Posted
Hi,
I have looked all over online for information on the differential in the weasels (t24, m29, m29c). I can see from one of my manuals from portrayl press that it is a clark 3-127D-1. But I can't find out anything beyond that, like the high and low speed ratios, the axle ratio, torque, etc.
Does anyone know much about these?
Also, I'm looking for similar information on the T84 transmission. I have found that the jeep versions have a ratio of 2.94 for 1st gear, 1.94 for 2nd gear, and 1 for 3rd gear. Does anyone know what the ratio is for reverse? And is this information the same on the T84J? I'm assuming it would be, but you know what they say about assuming, lol.
Thank you,
Corey