Combines ENGINE QUESTION FOR DAN HURTT

You wouldn't be able to afford the belt it would take to drive that rotor at 400 rpm in the setup that you describe. The higher speed takes lots of load off of the belt.

local Case user of 3 units went through $2,500 + dollars of rotor belts this fall using the 'ax i al ' setup. Takes a little longer than the 15 mins it takes on the R's to change a belt also.

FYI -there were two versions of the 3500; early ones did not have piston cooling, production after '76 -'77 (foggy memory) did . The designation changed to the, 670 in the mid seventies. I seem to remember in the changeover you could not tell which blocks had been drilled and which ones had not as either are interchangable. Ken Kaply told me it was the 'gol darnest mix up he had ever seen'. Good thing it didn't matter huhIJ I would think the 3500 piston cooled version would handle 190 hp AT 2300-2400 RPM rated load for 2500 hours safely if kept cool and had the intercooler swap to keep piston top temps lower. The N series as well as the late 426ci engines had larger wrist pins to handle the higher RPM's and higher loads. 4w-220's and 8000 tractors and N's had these as well as the rifle drilled rods for better piston cooling.

Yeah ok,Gleaners have basically no rotor belt trouble compared to case.they are always doing them,trying to get them right and then wrecking them anyway and what a pain to change. So one intercooled 3500 engine coming up heyIJ Bye chaps.

Yea I think I would want to know exactly what the 3500 come out of. I don't know if I would go out to buy one just to have a spare. We had '80 hi reving N6 engine in salvage machine ready to go for quite some time before someone needed it. As HP went up on these machines they went to counterbalanced cranks, fluid vibration dampers, stronger iron main caps, 3 ring pistons, idems that others have mentioned hear, ect. ect. I had an Allis 8030 with 130 PTO HP that a guy wanted set at 160 PTO HP. He mainly needed power for PTO work and very little would be used for ground drive (like right, I told him not to come to me in a year or two and brag about how many bottom plow he is pulling with no problem). Any way the belts and rubber vibration damper started talking to me when lugging that engine set at 160 PTO HP. I set it back down a bit and told him if it ain't enough than crank it up yourself. As far as cylinder varible drive I would rather stay with simplicity of what we have. Rarely ever have belt problem anymore after getting headers, feeders and cylinders to work properly. Yes we have a little snow now but hardly enough to take snow machine out.

Beaware that Allis made some "military " engines..that say 3500 or2900 on them but have some major differences.. We have run into two or three and I can't remember exactly what wasn't the same as a tractor application but there are some differences.. In fact some how we have a military engine in our salavage yard.. and I have not been able to use it for anything so far..

I ran into this a few years ago when talking to Ken Kaply, a former AC Harvey plant engineer. We were shot peening a crank for something and I called to ask a question the machine shop ask me. I mentioned 'military spec' and Ken replied 'oh no, those were engines we built by the scores to run at 1800 rpm and very low hp setting, but at that low settings they would run forever'. None of these engines had any degree of crank work or dampners, etc. and one 3500 I saw had a To4B80 turbo which normally went on 301's -2900s. This was to provide boost at very low rpm levels I assume.