1968 780 Rebuild (lots of photos)

This is for members to post photos of their restorations, either completed or "works in progress"

Moderators: Segrie61, admin

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

RE: Sirocco

Post by dsk » Sun Nov 28, 2010 7:55 pm

Thanks everyone. That looks very similar to mine. Just a slight difference in the way the plate connects to the box, but if my one sits as close to the lift latch as that then I don't think I will have any worries.

It was quite rusty, so it went straight into the de-rusting tank. However I don't think the frosty weather is speeding up the process so it might be near Christmas before I have any decent photos for you.
780 880 990

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

RE: Sirocco

Post by dsk » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:21 pm

I would like to thank Anne for sending me some detailed photos of their 780.
I am now pretty much certain that my frame does not match the ID plate that it came with.
In other words it is not going to fit a 780 or 885. The mounting plate does not curve inwards to clear the wings the way Annes does.
Image
compared to mine
Image

It will have to go into storage until I do a larger tractor. :roll:
780 880 990

Dieter
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:50 pm
Location: Everdingen, The Netherlands

RE: Sirocco

Post by Dieter » Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:56 pm

Reffering to the Sirocco questions: This post has nothing to do with a 780, but regarding Sirocco and DB =>

- 1212 with Sirocco weather frame

- 1212 with only the Sirocco steel structure/ ROPS for 12XX/ 14XX series

User avatar
denbute
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Location: Breendonk. Belgium.

RE: Sirocco

Post by denbute » Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:49 pm

Are these sirocco ROPS only for tractors with the reinforced full fenders?
Would be pointless with the non reinforced fenders in my opinion.
<b>1964 David Brown 880 Implematic sn: 880C357040 4 cylinder
197? David Brown 1210 sn: 1210/1/728679
1978 David Brown 996 sn: 995/6/11083514

Dieter
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:50 pm
Location: Everdingen, The Netherlands

RE: Sirocco

Post by Dieter » Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:33 pm

@ denbute

Agree there, no point in fitting the ROPS to non-reinforced fenders, but as Holland is flat, I wouldn't be surprised....

Without ROPS you would be stopped by the police, ROPS on non-reinforced fenders would keep you out of trouble :D

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

Re: RE: Sirocco

Post by dsk » Thu Feb 03, 2011 8:52 pm

dsk wrote: It will have to go into storage until I do a larger tractor

Or plan B

Image

I decided for now to fit the frame, and build replica flat top wings around them. On the plus side the entire frame sits lower than 7' on standard tyres.
Been studying an 885, and I reckon that the standard flat tops look good on 32" wheels and also with the taller bonnet. But for the 780 I am going to try scale them very slightly smaller and lower.
If it looks poor I can always bolt on some proper wings later.

I am currently waiting for a loan of a friends engine hoist, and the rust solution has stopped working in the very cold temperatures so nothing else to report for a while.
780 880 990

Guest

RE: Re: RE: Sirocco

Post by Guest » Thu Feb 03, 2011 9:10 pm

Whatever you do in fitting a roll-bar, DO NOT cut, weld or alter it in any way from its original design as this will render it illegal for use. The roll-bar side frame sections should bolt on the inside of the final drives on the ring of bolts and a hoop with large securing nuts go under the axle casting up through the plate on the top which is an integral part. In fitting a roll-bar to the tractor you may have to modify the mudguards, either shell or flat-top or fabricate ones yourself. If your tractor was manufactured before April 1972 you are under no obligation legally to have a ROPS fitted providing that you only operate the tractor yourself being either the registered keeper or owner.

User avatar
jimc1390
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: cornwall

RE: Re: RE: Sirocco

Post by jimc1390 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:32 pm

has anyone ever been convicted of this? its plenty of rules but no enforcement
db 990 selectamatic
case ih 1594 com ed
db 1390 gd90 loader

Guest

RE: Re: RE: Sirocco

Post by Guest » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:44 pm

I know several farmers that have had prohibition orders put on them for using a tractor without a frame, farmers that employ or use casuals that technically could drive the tractor and I know of a couple of farmers that have removed the cab completeley, in one instance it was a 995 'bottle opener' with the weather frame, he got away with it saying he took it off to clean out a low shed but the inspector was not convinced as the shed roof was pretty high and the tractor did not have a loader on it. Prosecution is normally the last upshot if things aren't rectified within a given time. Nowadays, if you undertake an operation that presents a potential risk in which you can't comply with the regulations in practicality then you are required to conduct a 'risk assesment', record it and give adequate instruction to other parties involved in the task.

joeproctor
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 3:07 pm
Location: drax, nr, selby, north yorkshire
Contact:

Post by joeproctor » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:51 pm

dsk,
the 780 will look out of place with the 885 shortened square tops ,i'm sure that saving up for the right thing is better than putting your efforts into some thing that will not look right.better to buy 'right' than pay 'twice',
regards
joe

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

Post by dsk » Wed May 11, 2011 9:40 pm

Still working away slowly. nothing very exciting. Just thought I might add a few more photos to show that I haven't given up. I am currently working on the engine and thinking about getting the fuel pump reconditioned. I am sure it works but must be worth at least a checkup after 42 years?

Image
Image
Image
Image

all the exhaust valves look like this,
Image

I am sure that most of that is hardened dirt, but that one is also bent. Luckily I have two other cylinder heads here to play with.
780 880 990

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

Post by dsk » Mon May 16, 2011 10:18 pm

It turns out that none of that ^^^ step in the valves was dirt. They really have worn down that much.

Today I removed all the pistons and then rings from the donor engine, and ran a cylinder hone through the block.
I have not used a cylinder hone before so I wasn't sure what to expect. I literally did it by the book. But I need not have worried. It would seem quite difficult to get wrong. The hardest part was getting the bores properly clean after.

Image

Cylinders 1 and 2 didn't really need to come apart but number 3 has suffered a bit from water in the bore. It rusted up the rings and the oil control ring came out in four parts. So new rings are ordered.

ImageThats just an old mini piston in the picture for comparison.

The good news is that the big end bearings look shiny new. All the oil was lovely and clean. The bad news is that the donor engine fuel pump controls are seized solid, so that pretty much decides which pump I am going to use.

And in other news. Something I just worked out but might be common knowledge to others. I found one other tractor manufacturer who used a three cylinder engine of this bore and stroke, nearly ten years before David Brown.
My other favourite tractor, Valmet.

Edit: 19/05/2011
This is where the rebuild starts to bite me. Reconditioned fuel pump, exchange = £395.00 plus Vague Additions to Total.
I was getting quite used to the idea of a ten pounds here and there.

Edit: 19/05/2011
New rings gapped and fitted
Image

Image

Image
780 880 990

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

Post by dsk » Fri May 27, 2011 9:48 pm

Started cleaning head number three.

Image

Apparently they fitted three different valve sizes depending on year. And between the three heads I have been working on, I have all three sizes. 34mm 36mm and 38mm. The head I am now working on looks the best with 38mm inlet and 36mm exhaust. The others are in a poorer state with damage to the valve seats. Since the valves are not worth saving I will try and get them machined to take larger valves and set one away for a future engine build.

Autohead Recon in Inverness are rebuilding the original pump for me, so I am hoarding my pennies until I get the bill for that. In the mean time, I am just constantly cleaning up rusty metal.
Image
780 880 990

User avatar
dafydd990
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2011 6:06 pm
Location: Gwynedd,North wales

Post by dafydd990 » Sat May 28, 2011 9:06 pm

I used to know an old lucas-CAV worker, Done it all his life & knew all the tricks. He Rebuilt 100's of pumps,injectors,alternators,starters for me in his retirement years for £10-£20 notes until he went too old for it.
Luckily not needed to send one off since then, £395 is a lot of money for such a small job?

User avatar
dsk
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Caithness

Post by dsk » Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:02 pm

I found someone cheaper for the pump work, but he promptly went and vanished and wont answer his phone. At least with Autohead I know exactly who I am dealing with and what I can expect for my money. Which turned out to be £340 in the end.

I had a quick look at the camshaft when I first took the sump off the donor engine and it didn't look desperate at the time but for some reason I took a closer look at the lift pump cam today. It is pretty bad. There is a very deep groove in that particular lobe. I'd be surprised if it works the pump at all. I really didn't want to get this involved but, since I am this far in, I think I may have to see whether I can find a better camshaft.
780 880 990

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests