Multifuel engine life

"and do the occasiona 60 MPH blast to pass something"
You mean snail race by something!
Well, i do remember passing a gravel truck with about 90k going UP Cajon pass...I was empty of course!Guess it does happen

That's my understanding and phone calls in the past to Hercules have backed it up. Its rating is "continuous".

Click to expand...

Now we all know how much of a nut I am running my Deuce so hard and hot. I have put on over 10k miles on mine with out a problem (well have fuel problem but not engine). The Multi is a good "light duty" engine and when used and taken care of correctly it will last for a long ling time. It seams the real only thing that is talking out the Multis is fuel in the oil from the FDC. I being a member of SS for many many years now have not heard of a Multi tossing a rod or anything like that for no reason. There always seams to be a "cause" for the problem. Yeah they leak oil and coolant from time to time but all in all its not a bad engine.
There was talk about the oil we use today compared to oil of the 50's and such. I work in the auto place and I go to alot of meetings and shows about fluids and such (60% of money in the auto repair field today) and I can say for a fact that oil even 5 years ago has been surpassed at least 2 times with new better ratings. you remember the days when you got 100k on your Buick that was time to party, or a new motor soon to be? Now its hard pressed to find a car/truck with out a 100k full warranty. Lubrication is so vital to a engines life, its the number one life blood or killer to a engine.
I have just under 20k on mine and I dont see why its going to die anything soon. Well I may have to replace the injection pump again but I know I wont have the heads off anything soon.

just my 2$$

An anonymous post, ha!, and filled with false and biased information, this really gets me, I wasn't going to respond, but my brain works while I'm asleep, so for good or worse...It sounds like the Macks and the Cummins are the revered ones or the "Cats", we are trying to save the reputation of a mil spec engine that did its job for decades despite terrible mistreatment, by 18 year old draftees, mostly without any training at all and who couldn't care less what happend to their trucks. I know, I was licenced to drive a deuce or even a 5-ton. I got my training by driving around the block with two other guys plus the "instructor" in the cab. The first man would drive and actually shift into second gear, then stop get out and walk back while the second man would hop into the driver's seat and drive another 100 yards, stop get out and walk back etc.
Overrevving was of no concern with the operators or it wouldn't have been mentioned over and over in PS Magazines and TM's and with decals right in front of their faces.
There is a hill coming up, let's see how fast we can get this rig going down the other side, 3,000 rpm, that's no problem it's on the dial, isn't it? BTW, it's a lot easier to overrev in a low gear than trying to obtain some cross country speed record.


The multifuel engine WAS NOT built or designed in Germany, it was designed by Continental in the USA, with the very efficient hypercycle combustion process patented by MAN in Augsburg/Nurnberg, Germany. The patent was licenced, that's why there is tag on the engine to that effect.
Why would a German company build an engine on a US military contract? The engine was designed for extreme low temp operation, with coolant flowing though the intake manifold for heating and the oil canisters mounted so that they would drain again, for heating at operations at -65°F. It features an extremely efficient cooling system for operations in the desert and tropics. The engine would burn fuels commonly available anywhere. It had a heating systems that would run on whatever the fuel was in the tank and it would run without batteries if need be. Still, it is probably as efficient or more efficient than today's engines that need more computing power than the first space shuttles needed to run. 10-11 mpg in a deuce is better than a lot of PU's with power strokes or what ever they are called.
Add some biodiesel to the fuel and the multifuel engine will meet any of today's air pollution regs because of its efficiency.

The FDC was patented by Continental in 1965.

Sure it had to fit the foot print of the previous gas engine it replaced, makes only sense.

The engine IS reliable when operated correctly.
They were built for a lifespan of 20 years not for a million mile over the road service, there is a difference.

I had a visitor a couple of years ago who told me how they always started the multifuels first at the motorpool, so that they could jump start the newer engines in the Winter....

Bjorn: in your "dolly offloaded at Jason's.jpg" picture, the rear tire looks pretty worn. How many miles did you have on them when you started the trip and how many at that point? Was there a point at which you changed any tires for wear?

Good observation Andy. Fact is that I traded the delivery of the dolly (from Florida) for six new 1100-20 NDCC's. Jason mounted 4 of them on the spot, great guy!

Thank you Jason, Westech and most especially Bjorn and David (sorry, I have my favorites). I love this thread and am taking notes. This is giving me lots of information in regards to my previous post on the typical lifespan of a Deuce engine. I learn more here than I ever could in the TM’s, if I could keep my mind from wandering that is…guess I should also thank Chris!

The author of that email is an occasional poster here. I'll let him respond. I think that even the most casual of observors would rcognize that the multifuel has issues. What made me take notice is that the multifuel was never a commercial success.

Just my .02 cents.

Most mechanical devices (military and civilian) from trucks to pencil sharpeners will give LONG faithful service if you do the maintaince on it and dont abuse it.. Change fluids, repack bearings, do PMCS, and dont beat on it. I had a Jeep Cherokee that I got 200K miles out of before I went and bought another one. I changed the fluids faithfully, did preventative maintainence and it served me a long time.
I saw trucks in my motorpool that would blow engines often because Joe PVT liked to hear the turbo scream when it was up in the danger zone. Well moron, the manufacturer says dont operate it at that RPM, as evidenced by the DANGER arrow sticker on the tac. It doesnt take long to blow up a brand new engine if you operate it above safe RPM speed.. Conversely, if you operate it correctly, give the turbo it's 5 minutes of idle time before shutting it off, keep it in safe RPM ranges, dont do jack rabbit starts, and treat it with a bit of respect, it will give you a long healthy life.

How many miles, I have no clue, ask Herc for the specs.. If you abuse it or dont do maintaince on it, I guarantee it wont last as long. Our trucks can take abuse, but it's at the cost of something for sure.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...................

Invest in the TM's for your truck, read and heed them, and your truck will thank you for it. If you dont, you'll be sorry eventually.

I'll have to research the valve issue a bit later on.

Click to expand...

Page 53/54- LDS troubleshooting manual: The machined type upper valve spring retainer... were used on the LDS-427-2 engine, then on the LDS-465-1...is subject to failure when overspeeding... causing extensive damage...As a result the machined retainer has been replaced by a new stamped type retainer..."

Page 49- "Inspect heads for cracks. Cracks are frequently found in two areas...Cracks do not necessarily mean the heads are unservicable..."

"Three types of cylinder head gaskets...have been used...P/N 7748879... head gaskets are now obsolete and should not be installed on any engine...Continued development by Continental Aviation and Engineering resulted in a multi-piece, vented, head gasket, P/N 10951428..."

Page 11- "No-load high speed governer setting: 2850-2900rpm"

Forward- "Remember an engine, like other pieces of equipment in our machine age, is only as good as the men that operate and maintain it..."

JimK

the engine was unsuccessfully marketed for years commercially. Nobody bought them for reasons industrial or vehicular. Given the choice of better proven designs I don't blame them.

Click to expand...

Not very surprising when you consider it was not designed for commercial applications. JimK

It'll be a few more days before I get home - so I can't at this time address specifics and cite references. However, the LDS-427 was not built from the ground up as a Multifuel engine. A Continental engineer saw a MAN engine on display in Europe that was being promoted, IIRC, as the "Whisper Quiet" engine (MAN engines had for years had a reputation for being noisy). Continental's engineer engaged in a conversation with the MAN team. When told about the hypercycle combustion process being used to quieten the MAN engine, he realized that the same design features would all the engine to effeciently and quietly burn a variety of fuels. He also knew (as did virtually everyone in the US automotive industry at the time) that this was an attribute that the US military was VERY interested in. He on the spot, and without authorization from home office, signed a licensing agreement (IIRC, the sum was a song) for the combustion process.

Continental took their proven, existing and successfully marketed commercial gasoline engine and with minor design changes created the LDS-427 Multifuel. It was Continental's gasoline engine that determined the size, shape and configuration of the Multifuel. (Much like GM did decades later when creating their first V-8 diesels for passenger cars).

Continental then demonstrated this to the army - who liked what they saw.

Continental did not produce all the Multifuel engines - but even after they were not the builders, they remained the primary design authority (which was contracted and paid for separately). Hercules did indeed produce many thousands of these engines, but off the top of the head, I cannot recall ever seeing a single document relating to the Multifuel engine that cites Hercules's engineering department contributing anything to the design. I am NOT saying that Hercules did not refine or improve the design - merely saying I don't recall seeing evindence of same.

The 465 Multifuel engines did indeed find commercial use in agricultural applicatons.

Will post more when my schedule allows - or this may jog some other folks into posting.

Regards,
David Doyle

Went to the museum today. And saw old Desert Rats truck sittin there. And rembered he drove that thing all over this country! Even drove it to houston from howards in low range with a busted transfercase. And he drives it 56MPH every where. I know a multi's got to be tough if it can put up with his driving!

Continental made two gas engines with 427 cu in during that era: The B-6427 and the T-6427. Was the multifuel based on one of these?

multifuel motors used in farm tractors

DDoyle said:

The 465 Multifuel engines did indeed find commercial use in agricultural applicatons.
Regards,
David Doyle

Click to expand...

Yes, that's right....the Oliver big 4x4 tractors of Charles City, Iowa got them in one model, I believe the 2125? I'll have to ask John Winslow again, he has one out at his place.

I have a couple pictures of that beast somewhere....and, FWIW, tractor pullers still use these motors in sled competitions. Apparently, there are hop-up items used for these....
Adam Lee

RE: multifuel motors used in farm tractors

Found a few more details - I wrote this back in 2003 - have found additional info since, but nothing to contradict what follows.

Copyright David Doyle

In the late 1950s the military was keenly interested in developing powerplants that could run on more than one type of fuel. Aware of this, Continental licensed M-A-N's "whisper engine" design which utilized a combustion method that Continental dubbed the Hyper-Cycle combustion process. After extensive tests this engine was adopted and installed in the G-742 series trucks. This engine was a straight six model LDS-427-2 Multifuel engine, with 427 cubic inch displacement. These engines are able to burn diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, or gasoline, or any combination of these, without adjustment or modification. The cargo truck version of the G-742 series powered by this engine was the M35A1. Initially, trucks with high front axle loadings continued to use the gas engine, due to concern about the considerably higher weight of the Multifuel engine.


The US Military had long desired an engine that was capable of burning a variety of fuels. This was advantageous from both the supply-chain standpoint as well as the capability of utilizing whatever fuels were locally abundant in a given theater of operations.

In the 1950’s Continental Motors Corporation’s engineer Carl Bachle learned of a new engine that had been developed by M-A-N. Dubbed the “whisper engine”, the new engine had been designed by Dr. S. J. Meurer to combat the prevailing (at the time) reputation of M-A-N engines as the loudest on the market.

Bachle made two trips to Germany to learn how the new engine design reduced noise, and in the course of his examination, concluded that the “whisper engine” was also capable of multi-fuel operation.

Bachle struck a licensing arrangement between Continental and M-A-N predicated on M-A-N providing an engine meeting certain testing requirements. The licensing agreement did not require an entrance fee, but rather a royalty arrangement.

The M-A-N engine performed to specification, and Continental Motors redesigned their TD-427 6-cylinder gasoline truck engine into a Multifuel engine, the LDS-427. The new engine was based on the block and crankcase of the gas engine.

In 1958 WORK STARTED ON MULTIFUEL M35E7 & E8. 22 OF EACH BUILT LDS-427-1the M35E7 HAD MANUAL TRANNY.

In 1961 M35E7 CLASSES STANDARD A AS M35A1. GAS ENGINE RETAINED IN APPLICATIONS WITH HIGH FRONT AXLE LOADINGS. EMPTY FRONT AXLE LOAD 6455 (S4)

1961 Studebaker contract in the amount of 27 million for 5030 multifuel deuces.

JUNE 1963 HUPP GETS 24 MILLION MULTIFUEL CONTRACT. THE STATE JOURNAL, LANSING MI JUNE 14, 1964.

JUNE 14, 1964 CONTINENTAL GETS $53,458,539 ORDER FOR MULTIFUEL ENGINES OVER 3 YEARS 9854 1ST YEAR, 8461 2ND, 9011 3RD. ORDER FROM ARMY MOBILITY COMMAND (AMC) THE STATE JOURNAL, LANSING MI JUNE 14, 1964.

"SINCE 1969 THE ARMY HAS COMPETIVELY AWARDED CONTRActs to Hercules Engines, Inc. (formerly White Engines, Inc). of Canton, Oh to produce the 2 1/2 ton truck engine.(s6, pg1)

On June 30, 1987, Army requests EPA approve "Conditional National Security Exemption" from 88 and future standards for purchase of 15,000 2 1/2 ton truck engines over 5 year period. (S6, pg 2)

September 30, 1987 EPA gives one year exemption for 3000 engines. Same time told Army to..."establish a program to develop a cleaner configuration for the current engine." (S6, pg2)

Let the discussions continue.....

David Doyle

RE: multifuel motors used in farm tractors

It would be interesting to see some German applications of the MAN "Wisper Engine". Design details in particular.

I believe we had these engines in the MAN 630 military trucks, which still were in service in the eighties with the Bundeswehr. I enlisted in the army back then and did my service in a shortwave-radio truck of that sort.

see http://man630.jein-design.de/


The motor was a little different, though. It was a multifueler, too, but id didn't have a fdc. Instead, there was a large crank-handle in the cockpit which went right into the cylinderhead. With it, you were able to swing the intake vlaves simulanously around their longitudinal axis. The valves were so called "sleeve-valves". Because of the sleeve, which rotated infront of the intake port, you were able to adjust the amount of air entering the combustion chamber and therefore could manually lean or enrich the air-fuel mixture and thus adapt for different fuels. This is my understanding, I hope this is correct.

A few pictures of the motor can be found here:

http://man630.jein-design.de/start/content.php?page=vielstoffmotor

"Vielstoffmotor" means multifuel-motor. If you look closely, you can see the valve-crankshaft protruding through the back of the valvecover.


Regards,
Mark

Thanks Mark! Very interesting, puts a different perspective on things.
Check out this "Wrecker" application.
http://man630.jein-design.de/start/content.php?page=kranwagen

I'm thinking about your explanation of the "schirmventilferstellung" (item 20, in the figure), if you can restrict the airflow, perhaps an engine braking feature is also possible....like the throttle on a gas engine...never heard of restricting intake airflow on a diesel....

Bjorn,

the Schirmventilverstellung had nothing to do with the breaking system. I remember that we used to put some pretty nasty stuff in the fueltanks of the MAN and had to to use the cranks to make the motors start more easily. It was also supposed to be used on starting when the temperatures were very low.
Maybe I'm wrong about the leaning/enriching, it also could be that the fuel-air mixture was finer due to vortexing around the protrusion on the valve. I'd have to check on that!

The Magirus-Deutz Jupiter wrecker on that picture you have posted here is a quite popular MV here, and many off-road shows like Koblenz would be half the fun without the "Juppi" dragging all the stuck vehicles out of the mud. Of course, it's a multifueler, too


Regards,
Mark