Search results

Saturn Surplus has the connector shell and socket but they are out of male pins and have no more coming. That's why I was asking about the pins in my post above. If nothing else you would need to sacrifice a Packard connector set and rob the pin from it.

Does anyone know of a source for the pin shown in the above photo? NSN 5999-00-057-2929. I've run every part number that I can find to no avail.

INFChief got you on the right path. That shell appears to be the same one that is on the pump. To connect to the pump I think you need the mating shell listed below. Also available though Erik's. https://www.eriksmilitarysurplus.com/meshcodco771.html Upon closer inspection it looks like the...

The old 2013 thread that I ran across titled "Divided by Zero" appeared to be talking about running dual 11.00-20's. Thanks for lending some clarification and measurements.

Compared to the Cummins that we deal with I look at these as a heavy equipment/tractor engine that is very good at its intended purpose. It performs in brutal conditions when needed and makes rated power on what I would consider the nastiest of fuels. What more could you ask from a powerplant...

I was just posting what had been stated in another thread. Any numbers other than the ones you have given I'm taking with a grain of salt. Once my trailer is back and I can take my own measurements first hand I'll know what I'm up against.

I'll take any photos I can get. Always good for inspiration. It's too bad that the original posts were deleted. I saw where someone had quoted one of the deleted posts and I didn't see any bad language used in it. Hard to say what went on there. I did see that a member had asked him how he got...

Thanks 11echo. I sent you a pm late last night regarding a full sized version of the picture below. I stayed up far too late reading old threads and doing searches. I finally ran across the original thread by silverstate55 where he covered this build. Unfortunately all of his posts were...

Completely changing what I was using for search terns netted this post. https://www.steelsoldiers.com/threads/m105-axle-assembly-to-accommodate-dish-out-combat-wheels.176255/post-2104844 Looks like 8'-9" overall width. I will need to drop 3" to be legal.

My plan was to have my sheet metal guy fab up factory looking fender extensions and to add a small triangular step ahead of and behind the fender to tie them into the body better. According to gringletaube's numbers I'll need to drop about 1" per side of overall tire width to be legal. As soon...

LOL! Easy for you. I should have known that you would have all of the data at your finger tips. Thanks G. =) Looks like I need to find a 1.3" solution.

This has been interesting for sure. Here's what started my questioning. TM 9-2330-205-14&P for the M200A1 lists the race separately as 7411377 which is the same race (Timken 39520) that is part of the bearing assembly used in the M105A2. As stated above we know that the race used for the...

So, let's recap... The correct bearings for each application are as follows: M105A2 NSN 3110-00-198-1757 Timken 39590-39520 M200A1 NSN 3110-00-100-5951 Timken 3984-3920 If that's all you came to see you can stop right here. A few few thoughts and observations of my own...

Gerhard, Your understanding of all of this is well beyond mine. I was going by dimension B from the Timken CAD drawings. Dimension B of the 39590-39520 shows 1.1875" while dimension B for the 3984-3920 shows 1.1830". Maybe I'm reading the drawings incorrectly. 39590-39520 3984-3920 If...

A couple of questions... How many gallons of each color on average to do a 3 color on an M35A2C? How is everyone getting what appear to be such clean edges between the colors? The airless sprayers I've been around seemed to have a lot of spatter around the edges of the spray pattern. Richard

Armed with the NSN finally thanks to Gerhard I went back to WB Parts and compared the M200A1 bearing set to the M105A2 bearing set. It appears that the M105A2 set is a mere .0045" thicker than the M200A1 set. All other dimensions appear to be identical. With this information I see no reason that...

I do but I sure missed that in Section IV. Thanks G!

I saw that too and assumed it was a typo.

The M2196 is actually a Twin Disc Inc. number and not Timken. That's why I was seeing no results. I'm digging around on Timken sight right now.

I don't understand why the correct p/n MS19081-112 never had an NSN assigned or why it is so hard to locate. It's not like they only built a handful of M200A1 trailers. Looks like I'll have to tear down a hub to get a number.