Joined: Apr 22, 2012 Posts: 119 Location: the Netherlands
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 6:40 am Post subject: Correct Rear main seal?
On Ebay Item no. 271024066321:
"This is an original NOS Military surplus rear main seal. This is for the 134L and 134F four cylinder motors. These were made in the late 60's and are in beautiful condition. These actually fit, where all the ones being sold now that are made in China or Taiwan do not. This is the real thing and even has the graphite coating. The two rubber dowels are included. Sorry, they are not in the picture. Part number 800093. QTM Parts"
Joined: May 14, 2012 Posts: 150 Location: Milford CT
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:12 am Post subject: M38-ORD 9 SNL G-740
According to M38-ORD 9 SNL G-740, page 28, that is the right number! "Seal, Oil, Rear (upper and lower)", qty 2.
This manual available in the downloads section in pdf format. _________________ "Frugality keeps me in the Game"
1952 M38 Project "Lazarus"
1951(?) M100 Trailer
1956-60 USAF Special Weapons Program
http://www.bill-capes.com/insanity - Updated 04/26/14
Joined: Apr 22, 2012 Posts: 119 Location: the Netherlands
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:33 am Post subject:
Thank you for your response, but the correct number is not to say that it is the correct seal is!
There is a lot of chaff among the wheat. (Dutch proverb)
Chris
The only way to be sure a rear seal is correct for your engine is to remove and inspect the crank. There's no quarrantees today that any jeep crank is original to the engine you have. The key is the dimension and conditions of the seal bearing surface of your crank. It is common to see folks using the formed (conventional) late seal in place of the rope seal today. This is fine as long as the rules and service letter are followed.
Generally replacing the early type rope seal with another rope seal is not a problem so long as it is done properly per the manual.
The real problem are formed garloc type two piece seals designed to be used on later cranks. The dimensional issue is important on all old rope seal cranks that are now trying to use the formed seals. Make sure your crank's seal surface is clean and free of any rubber debris. Then make sure it has dimensions withing the posted limits to accommodate the formed (conventional) seal.
The Victor formed seal had production tolerance errors during the 90's and many of these old NOS seals show up on the market. Avoid them. Also the industry standard on shelf life on these rubber parts is 10 to 15 years. So anything older than that and you will have some risk of potential failure.
Joined: Oct 12, 2011 Posts: 27 Location: Auburn, AL
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 10:37 pm Post subject:
chrisk wrote:
Thank you for your response, but the correct number is not to say that it is the correct seal is!
There is a lot of chaff among the wheat. (Dutch proverb)
Chris
Chris is right and this guy has been called out more than once in this forum for advertising "mislabeled" parts. The most recent were the claimed M38 front springs that were taged G740. He refused to correct his ad even though he was contacted by several of us over a number of days. These could be the right seals, they could be also be a batch of the Victor seals that have been circulating for a while or they could be something else entirely. Bottom line is you won't have any certainty what they are before you buy. My two cents, but I'd stick with John at Midwest or some of the other more well known vendors to this forum. I wouldn't want to have to replace my seals twice.
Joined: Feb 16, 2007 Posts: 206 Location: Gold Coast Australia
Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:33 am Post subject:
Part number 800093. QTM Parts....that number seal has caused much grief lately....check www.g503.com for more than one recent thread on the technical forum. _________________ John GIBBINS
ASE Master Medium/Heavy Truck & Auto Technician 2002 USA
Licensed Motor Mechanic NSW # MVIC 49593 Current
YOU CAN'T TROUBLESHOOT WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND
Before we beat up QTM parts please note that QTM Parts is not mentioned in the MA engine failure thread over on the G503 board. The seal listed on Ebay by QTM are sealed packages dated long before the fit issues and flashing issues that erupted from Victor in the 90's. The seals referred to in the thread were recent production 800093 seals and 1990's produced seals.
http://www.g503.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=214106
The only issue I saw with the QTM listing is the shelf life of the rubber parts that anyone sells when packaging shows a date over 15 years old.
That G503 post also overlooks the already known issue of early (pre 50/51) crank journal dimensions not always appropriate for the formed lip seal. The early cranks must have the seal bearing area of the crank dimensioned between 2.302" and 2.312" to insure the modern lip seal is not too tight. The seal bearing area must also be clean and smooth/polished. _________________ Wes K
45 MB, 51 M38, 54 M37, 66 M101A1, 60 CJ5, 76 DJ5D, 47Bantam T3-C & 5? M100
Joined: Apr 22, 2012 Posts: 119 Location: the Netherlands
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:13 am Post subject: Correct Rear main seal?
Folks thanks for the comments and Wes for the reference to the G503 topic # 214106. This discussion makes much clear.
Question: Have VICTOR its own brand, code, number, or date of manufacture on the Rear Main seals?
Now I know that the seals of QTM Parts are right, I can buy them there.
Merry Christmas We wish for everyone, Chris
See the code to the left of the Willys # in the photo above. _________________ Wes K
45 MB, 51 M38, 54 M37, 66 M101A1, 60 CJ5, 76 DJ5D, 47Bantam T3-C & 5? M100
49650 is the Victor Gasket PN. 12 I have no idea what that is for. VG is for Victor Gasket. _________________ Wes K
45 MB, 51 M38, 54 M37, 66 M101A1, 60 CJ5, 76 DJ5D, 47Bantam T3-C & 5? M100
Joined: Apr 22, 2012 Posts: 119 Location: the Netherlands
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:40 am Post subject:
OK, clearly.
The number 12 with VG, the problem seal, is often mentioned in combination with photo's in the topics. (WillysMjeeps, G503 and CJ3B Forums)
But the numbers 4, 10 and 17, I have seen a few times in the topics, also with problems.
The numbers 4, 10, 12 and 17 are, in my opinion production charge numbers.
So, when there are problems with a production charge the producer the whole series can take back.
Chris
12 could also simply be a date code or production run date code since these are not a continuous production item.
The Victor Gasket company has been contacted by several MV enthusiasts on this topic and have been very uncooperative. They insist there are no problem seals. They have never taken steps to remove any produced 49650 seal from the market.
Perhaps a call from Europe may achieve better results.
In the interim the safest course of action is to not use any of them.
John at Midwest Military sells a seal from a different manufacturer. Other kit providers have discontinued carrying the Victor 49650 in their gasket sets and only include the rope seals. _________________ Wes K
45 MB, 51 M38, 54 M37, 66 M101A1, 60 CJ5, 76 DJ5D, 47Bantam T3-C & 5? M100
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
