|
Author
|
Topic: Perkins/Fordson Engine Questions?
|
tmac
True Blue Posts: 465
From: USA Washington state
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted June 21, 2006 18:25
   
I read the write up on the Dexta Fordson engine.
So if it is a Fordson engine design How did Perkins get it to sell to others like MF? And industrialize that engine as the Perkins P-3
Why if it is a Fordson/Ford wasnt it used in more Ford tractors?
It seems to have and be everything that a size of tractor of the Dexta needs? Pulling Power fuel economy ease of maintence and low cost of maintence, ease of diesel starting. So why and what more could asked for in this size of engine. I know that as a Perkins P-3 Engine that maybe millions of these are in use as industrial engines.[This message has been edited by tmac (edited June 21, 2006).] IP: Logged |
Emiel
True Blue Posts: 680
From: Etten GLD Netherlands
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted June 21, 2006 18:32
Hi,Ford and Perkins worked together on the Dexta engine. And once, Ferguson bought Perkins. The pure Perkins engines are not identical to the ones made by Perkins for Ford. I'm quite sure Brian can give more details. Regards
Emiel IP: Logged |
tmac
True Blue Posts: 465
From: USA Washington state
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted June 21, 2006 18:56
They are close enough that they would have had infringments on the design if Fordson held any rights at all ? Not only that a lot of the P3 parts interchange. Other than the fuel system?
I understand that Perkins only assembled them for Fordson. The US Ford 3 engines are not the same at all. Ford also used their own Ford 4 in the US made tractors of simular size, which I belive is a take off on the early gasoline OHV engines. Early models of these engines were the pits.
quote:
Originally posted by Emiel:
Hi,Ford and Perkins worked together on the Dexta engine. And once, Ferguson bought Perkins. The pure Perkins engines are not identical to the ones made by Perkins for Ford. I'm quite sure Brian can give more details. Regards
Emiel
IP: Logged |
Brian
Rules All Things Blue Posts: 2824
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted June 21, 2006 19:31
The P3 was a totally different engine to the ones we are talking about. It came out in the 1940's and was part of the P series P3, P4, P6.The P3 that Perkins built had a wide number of differences to the Ford/Perkins. Some were visible others were not. Ford made all the castings to their spec which was higher than the Perkins one. They aso changed the oil pump and the fuel system from the P3. Perkins had input into the design and some Perkins parts were used. Ford Tractors threw out all the developement work on this engine and the Super engine when Ford America took over the running and design departments at Basildon. We then got the "world" engine. The Super engine went on to be developed by the industrial department and became the power source of a wide range of equipment. Perkins changed the F3 engine to their specification and it went on to power a whole range of MF equipment. In those days Ford did not want its main rival in charge of its engine production. How things have changed!! ------------------
Kind regards
Brian [This message has been edited by Brian (edited June 21, 2006).] IP: Logged |
dewaltdisney
True Blue Posts: 90
From: Essex , England
Registered: Jun 2005
|
posted June 21, 2006 19:47
I was talking to a very knowledgable person retired from the trade (not Brian  ) and he used to ship the castings from Dagenham foundary up to Perkins at Peterborough who did the assembly. He reckoned that Perkins only made £5 profit per engine. That was not a lot of money in the 60's so Ford must have screwed a hard deal. No change there then He had loads of Fordson stories but the affects of Stella Artois on my brain that evening has made it difficult to recall them DWD IP: Logged |
tmac
True Blue Posts: 465
From: USA Washington state
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted June 22, 2006 18:45
OK I may have mistated the model name,
But The A-3 that is used in the Massey 35
now these engines are 2 chicks from the same hen right? While we could talk about who was the best at building the engines is like Rolls Vs Allison or Packard.
I have running MF 35 Perkins that shows 5000+ hrs on the Tach and a dead Dexta with 5000+ on the tach . Which I doubt either have a major OH, The 35 still runs it is in need of rings and liners, The 35 may have had a little better maintence as it has good oil pres. The Dexta needs bottom end and liners. So there is my comparison of the engine life.
Iam still at a loss of who came up with the basic design of this engine, if it was Fordson of just how Perkins either stole/accquired this engine. Seems that Ford/Fordson either had little or no control of this design of the engine. Or just plain didnt see what they had and didnt care. Opting to supply the US Ford 4 as an industrial version instead, many of which, early ones, were not as reliable as the 144 D seems to be.
My running Dexta seems to have a better fuel economy than the MF 35. It has now about 300hrs on SMOH just a guess as no tach on it.
And I think that it may have been bored out to accept bigger liners as the former owner who had the job done said it had Genuine Perkins liners and pistons installed. I dont think Perkins supplied 144 liners did they? As that size was a Fordson product right? My running Dex has all Perkins marked gears in the train, ones that are marked. As I had to go in there and saw them, to make it run the flywheel was off one hole and threw all the timing, nobody could make it run. I retimed the gears via degree wheel, + Brians help, disregarding flywheel marks. Now that the flwheel is set on right I will have to set them back sometime.  (
quote:
Originally posted by Brian:
The P3 was a totally different engine to the ones we are talking about. It came out in the 1940's and was part of the P series P3, P4, P6.The P3 that Perkins built had a wide number of differences to the Ford/Perkins. Some were visible others were not. Ford made all the castings to their spec which was higher than the Perkins one. They aso changed the oil pump and the fuel system from the P3. Perkins had input into the design and some Perkins parts were used. Ford Tractors threw out all the developement work on this engine and the Super engine when Ford America took over the running and design departments at Basildon. We then got the "world" engine. The Super engine went on to be developed by the industrial department and became the power source of a wide range of equipment. Perkins changed the F3 engine to their specification and it went on to power a whole range of MF equipment. In those days Ford did not want its main rival in charge of its engine production. How things have changed!!
IP: Logged |
Emiel
True Blue Posts: 680
From: Etten GLD Netherlands
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted June 22, 2006 19:19
Hi,According to the Dexta history book, from Allan Condie: Importing a Ford engine from the states was to dear, manufacturing and developing a fully own engine cost to much capacity on the production, so Ford decided to coöperate with Perkins, which was by then not from Ferguson. Ford had good experience with Perkins from the time they used to put a P6 in a E27N. Discussing which engine is better is useless, if you don't know the service history of both tractors in detail. Ford engines are often said to be not very lasting. I know many of them who clocked up 10.000 with no problems, because they worked hard, but treated neatly and serviced at regularly intervals. Kind regards
Emiel Import IP: Logged |
tmac
True Blue Posts: 465
From: USA Washington state
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted June 23, 2006 19:23
My point in comparing the 35 and Dexta was only to point the current status of each. Seems both tachhour meters quit at nearly the same hours and more than likly are not the real time.
The now the non running Dex was running, just not when I got it. It did run for nearly 4 years in its orginial condition, and done a LOT of work, but finaly lost so much compression that it will not start. I intend to rebuild the engine and install new clutches in it. Just to much to do now.So I guess that Ford never controlled the engine design?
quote:
Originally posted by Emiel:
Hi,According to the Dexta history book, from Allan Condie: Importing a Ford engine from the states was to dear, manufacturing and developing a fully own engine cost to much capacity on the production, so Ford decided to coöperate with Perkins, which was by then not from Ferguson. Ford had good experience with Perkins from the time they used to put a P6 in a E27N. Discussing which engine is better is useless, if you don't know the service history of both tractors in detail. Ford engines are often said to be not very lasting. I know many of them who clocked up 10.000 with no problems, because they worked hard, but treated neatly and serviced at regularly intervals. Kind regards
Emiel Import
IP: Logged |
Brian
Rules All Things Blue Posts: 2824
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted June 23, 2006 20:27
Yes Ford did control the engine design, that's why it was different to the P3 and the later engines. If Perkins had been in charge of design, the Dexta would have had a timing chain as this was their standard at the time.MF simply took a design that Ford did not want, changed it, and continued to use it. In the MF range at the time, they used proven engines in all their new tractors like the 4-270 and the 4-236. They did not go for a completely new product like Ford. Their reliability was far better from 1964 onwards and Ford never did recover back to what they were in the early 1960's. MF had some lift problems but not the engine, clutch, gearbox, rear axle and hydraulic problems that Ford had after the change. Ford improved after 1968 with the Ford Force tractors but were never again completely dominant in the market. The F3 did not go into MF tractors. Their block was not built to Fords spec. The pump and injection system is different, the cylinder liners are different,the cylinder head is different and the oil pump is different. That's why the Perkins liners do not fit correctly in a Dexta engine and the block has to be machined. Perkins liners are push fit and are retained by a lip. Dexta liners are press fit and have to be bored to size. There are similarities but they are not the same. Bit like the petrol Dexta engine. It looks like a TE/TO 20 at first sight but then, when you look closely, its a totally different beast. ------------------
Kind regards
Brian IP: Logged |
tmac
True Blue Posts: 465
From: USA Washington state
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted June 24, 2006 08:19
Well any of the changes were not substantial only that of small operational or of the manufacturing type not the basic design. Ford must of just have washed their hands of it.
Or they didnt have enough legal ownership/control of the design to enforce it.
Guess that Fergy had a better business model, than the Ford people. That would be to reconize somthing good and run with it. Ford must been either asleep or were brain dead.As far as I can see that the only major inovations are with the head and camshaft. Geartrain drives were well entrenched in engine building for a loooong time before Dexta.
Those would be on the head, would be the plenum chamber intake and the head contained combustion chambers. And on the high block cam not using pushrods.
But I am not sure just makes it such a desireable engine as it is for tractor use. As it is very econonical in fuel with a good power output. That may be due to the long stroke bore ratio?? Nothing in the design would indicate anything else. So maybe it was just that it was manufactured well huh?? Just always wondered why they never got into the American made machines and tractors, Ford opted to industrilize the Ford 4 instead. Many of the Ford 4 powered Forklifts and I seen so many of them just didnt hack it. Although many that used the Ford made SMD engines stood up well and many of these SMD Ford made engine were heavly industrilized in the USA. By the way the Dexta trany is so far superior to the Ford series 5+R trans ,of that era, was such a pain to shift, it will make you understand why there are Dexta lovers if only for the trans.
quote:
Originally posted by Brian:
Yes Ford did control the engine design, that's why it was different to the P3 and the later engines. If Perkins had been in charge of design, the Dexta would have had a timing chain as this was their standard at the time.MF simply took a design that Ford did not want, changed it, and continued to use it. In the MF range at the time, they used proven engines in all their new tractors like the 4-270 and the 4-236. They did not go for a completely new product like Ford. Their reliability was far better from 1964 onwards and Ford never did recover back to what they were in the early 1960's. MF had some lift problems but not the engine, clutch, gearbox, rear axle and hydraulic problems that Ford had after the change. Ford improved after 1968 with the Ford Force tractors but were never again completely dominant in the market. The F3 did not go into MF tractors. Their block was not built to Fords spec. The pump and injection system is different, the cylinder liners are different,the cylinder head is different and the oil pump is different. That's why the Perkins liners do not fit correctly in a Dexta engine and the block has to be machined. Perkins liners are push fit and are retained by a lip. Dexta liners are press fit and have to be bored to size. There are similarities but they are not the same. Bit like the petrol Dexta engine. It looks like a TE/TO 20 at first sight but then, when you look closely, its a totally different beast.
IP: Logged | |
Fordson Bulletin Board
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
