F-134 Camshaft End Play

[JohnK]

You provided the answer a few posts ago.  I reinstalled the old cam and now have the end play.  Looks like the distance from the end of the shaft to the bearing side is shorter on the replacement - not having the experience of a machinist, it's a little tough for me to accurately measure with my caliper.  But it looks like they are different and the re-installation of the old cam seems to confirm it. I wonder if there was a change in camshafts along the way, the block and cam came from a Jeep Dealership in PA that closed 30 years ago and the block had never been reworked. So I tend to think it was an original.
I was using the matched tappets that came with the replacement shaft.  I'm guessing that you would recommend new tappets along with the new camshaft.  Correct?

Thanks for your assistance, I really appreciate it.

John

[JohnK]

In case anyone has insight on camshaft markings:

original 800517  C  H15  CW0 (maybe)  4
replace 800517  C  J12   CW0  (maybe) 1

original pic 1965, replacement 1968

[oldtime]

30 years ago simply implies the camshaft to be New Old Stock (NOS)
It could be either New Old Replacement Stock (NORS) or OEM NOS.
IMHO  OEM NOS parts in good storage condition are always the most desirable.
No upgrades nor changes for the F-134 camshafts.
Good condition used tappets are fine so long as they fit snugly to the tappet bores.
If the tappet adjuster tips have ridges from valve stem contact then they can be reground to a smooth surface.
I once had an OEM NOS set of F-134 tappets but I actually opted to use a refurbished set of used tappets because the used tappets fit more snugly into the tappet bores.

Solution...
I highly suggest you place the bronze thrust plate on a flat machined iron table  (like a table saw)
Then sand it by hand using a random orbital motion.
Use 220 grit paper and take a few thousands off the thickness.

[JohnK]

I see some NOS advertised but have to check on whether they are really available- if one is that's what I'll get.  If NOS is not available - I see Omix, Melling, and Sealed power replacement shafts - but I think I will stay away from the Omix based on past experience with some of their replacement parts.

Regarding the tappets, thank you for that tip since I now have two complete sets to choose from and I should be able to select the best serviceable ones that fit snugly into a bore.

Thanks to your help, I will hopefully get the engine back in before the snow starts coming down.

[oldtime]

Be aware that NOS is an abused term and it often means your actually getting NORS.

Yes just wiggle the tappets in their bores for comparison and that will tell you what you need to know.

[Bruce_W]

  The width of the front cam bearing journal has absolutely nothing to do with it. What matters is the distance from the front of that journal to the back of the gear when installed, compared to the thickness of the thrust plate. You have already (more than once) determined that that distance (set by the thickness of the spacer) is .006" more than the thickness of the plate.
  The problem appears obvious to me - the upper bolt on the thrust plate has an overly thick head or is not seated properly against the plate, and the backside of the gear is rubbing on it. When you tighten the gear retaining bolt, the gear contacts the bolt head, which prevents the gear and shaft from moving back, and at the same time pulls the camshaft forward against the thrust plate, which prevents it from moving any further forward. Hence, your ".000" end float. Try turning the camshaft and gear until that bolt aligns with one of the holes in the gear, and see if you have end float then.  BW

[JohnK]

Yes Bruce, I am of aware of that fact concerning the front bearing journal.  I was just noting that difference as well.  The distance from the front of the journal to the end of the shaft was shorter on the cam that showed no end play.  In addition, Once I saw the back side of the gear, I replaced all the offending bolts on the engine plate and thrust plate.  However, you certainly are correct - excessive size of the bolt heads would cause that problem as well.

[oldtime]

One reason I suggest light surface sanding of the thrust plate is to eliminaqte the possibility of it being warped/ distorted.
The only other thing I can imagine is that the OAL of camshaft is too long and its hitting at the back side of the cam bore.

[JohnK]

I have thought about this a lot and haven't really come up with an answer.  Yesterday, I received the new camshaft from Peter Debella. It certainly looks old and will take a bit to clean it off. 

[JohnK]

Well, finally back at it.

cam end play with new cam = .002 -.003  better than none but still out of range- still playing and researching.

current Crank end play = .025  , way out from the .004 - .006.  That's going to about 10 .002 shims at 7 bucks a piece.  McMaster Carr has a many in stock for less.   Stainless - the best fit for diameter would be  35 mm , the ones from Kaiser would be about 1.29 inches = 32.766
the OD should be 2"  = 50.8 mm   , these would be 45 mm = 1.77".  Anybody have an opinion on those differences in ID, OD affecting the crank.

Secondly, I can buy these in many thicknesses - thoughts on how many to use   i.e. 2 .010's, vs 10 .002's, vs 5 .004  ........

Thanks in advance.

John

[Bruce_W]

  You are aware, of course, that adding shims will increase the crankshaft end play, right?
  BW

[JohnK]

You're right of course Bruce - end play has turned my brain to mush.  For some reason, I think adding shims would decrease it.  That would indicate that I need to add shims to the camshaft.  No one sells those that I can find but I can probably get something from McMaster.  To reduce the end play of the crank, it appears that I will have to dress the thrust washer.