Issues with F6L912 NEW #2 rings

[bad sector]

Project is moving forward, re-assembly has began in May (picture).




BUT..........

I bought 6 new sleeve-kits which included the cylinders,
the pistons. the pin, and circlips for each. The sleeves
part # are 0423-8667 with the serial numbers below.

Piston rings #1 & #3 measured in the sleeve they were
received with gave gaps that were acceptable. HOWEVER
all the #2 rings also measured in the sleeve received
with gave gaps of about the WEAR-LIMIT 0.8 instead of
the new-spec 0.20-0.45

Rings #1 (newspec=0.35-0.55, wearlimit 0.
205122 = 0.457
205133 = 0.381
205156 = 0.356
205235 = 0.457
213565 = 0.467
213566 = 0.457

Rings #2 (newspec=0.20-0.45, wearlimit 0.
205122 = 0.889+
205133 = 0.889
205156 = 0.813
205235 = 0.813
213565 = 0.762
213566 = 0.889+

Rings #3 (newspec 0.25-0.40, wearlimit 0.
205122 = 0.406
205133 = 0.330
205156 = 0.335*
205235 = 0.305
213565 = 0.356
213566 = 0.279

I bought a set of new rings (0415-6566) which installed
into new cylinder (0423-8667 ser#213566) gave gaps of:
#1 0.356 (newspec=0.35-0.55, wearlimit 0.
#2 0.279 (newspec=0.20-0.45, wearlimit 0.
#3 0.305 (newspec 0.25-0.40, wearlimit 0.
These gaps fall well into the 'new' specification.

Not having the instrumentation to reliably measure
cylinder bores I took the sleeves to a machine-shop
for professional measurement. The bores measured in
2 planes at 4 depths were generally acceptable. However,
to also gauge my piston-ring gap measurements I also
had the shop countercheck the gap for #2 ring in as
received with sleeve 213566 installed on that piston.
This measurement was 0.27" or 0.6858mm, marginally
less than my measurement of 0.889+ but still WAAAAAY
above the newspec and thus confirming that all #2
rings fail the acceptance test.

The question:
Has anyone run into this problem? Has the newspec
been changed? If so where can I validate with the
documentation?

Thanks

 

[bad sector]

I've seen a common wear limit of 0.8mm for all 3 rings in one manual, in another the #2 ring wear limit for FL912 and BFL913 is 1.3mm which is 0.5mm more. So I wonder if this larger wear limit might not be related to an also larger gap (such as 0.85mm) which would also be about half a mm more but which is what the rings actually have but I cannot find documented anywhere?

Given the same engine number of 7683932, another dealer (probably supplied by the same distributor who was given the same engine number) sent me the new rings set above (for 1 piston) which has good gaps but both #2 and #3 rings are much too thick to fit the grooves (about 2.52mm & 5.05mm respectively).

And, while on all these freaking #'s, which number on a Deutz-Fahr-Dx-6.05 is THE vehicle serial# (Vehicle Identification#)? There are numbers all over this tractor, the one on top of the instrument panel is 50936 , but one dealer said this was not the VIN, he wants an 8-digit one other plate says Type: D-1038A-T # 74497281.

 

[Kai6.05]

Hi Bad,

the vehicle ident number is 7449 7281.

Greetings from Germany, Kai

 

[bad sector]

Thank you, that much at least is settled then

I'd like to backtrace the tractor; where it was initially sold (Holland I think), how it ended up in Canada, what kind if work it did, etc? The liquidator who sold it to me first gave the engine # as the VIN, I had him change it to 50936 thinking that that was the VIN. The license bureau said that no such vehicle existed and did not want to give me plates for it. Finally the police conducted a in-depth inquisition and declared "no vehicle with a VIN of 50936 has been stolen as far as we have been able to determine" so THEN the bureau gave me plates for it. Now I'll have to start the whole (yet another) nightmare again.

 

[bad sector]

Further investigation revealed that the separate ring-set I had bought for $250 was the bad one, I had given the dealer the only part number in the parts manual. The problem is that when he sends it back to the distributor he gets chopped 40% on account of 'restoicking' so he wasn't happy until I offered to share the penalty. Lesson learned, from now on I provide NO part #, only the tractor model and serial #!

As for the sleeve-kits, I guess someone somewhere screwed something up, the distributor wanted a picture of the huge gap so I sent them one. They will replace the entire set of 6 kits, I will accept only boxes with the holographic Deutz seal. I will report back when done (I might go to the dealer at my own expense to open one box with their tech and measure the goods).

A nice day to all from Quebec
{blinking around 48n66w}

 

[bad sector]

I opened just one of the sealed boxes of the entire 6-set replacement to measure the ring gaps as a first provisional test. They are ALL out of limits, worse than the first batch!

#1 0.889+ mm
#2 0.889+ mm
#3 0.533mm

Has anyonme run into such an issue? Why is Deutz allowing the holographic seal to be affixed to such boxes?

 

[Kai6.05]

Hey Bad,

are you sure, the sleeve is in spec?

Kind regards, Kai

 

[bad sector]

Thanks for the interest! The sleeve-kit set that was rejected as a whole by the dealer (who had no choice but to reject them on account of just the #2 rings being all out of limits) had sleeve bores 'reasonably' within spec. They were measured by a local machine shop which cost me $80 (takes an hour to do a decent job: 8 reads in every jug). That machinist is on vacation and I won't be able to get him to repeat the measurements (another $80 out of pocket) for another week or two but I think the sleeve bores might be OK again. For now I've written the dealer who didn't know because the boxes WERE sealed with the 'famous?' Deutz holographic seals. Meanwhile I'm here with a 2 month delay, extra costs, and no engine being assembled! NOT happy.

 

[bad sector]

Still not resolved, I'm beginning to wonder if contraband pieces are being peddled at OEM prices by Deutz distributors in Canada (that's what one pro has suggested to me)?

Here's the score in review up to this point.

I BOUGHT 6 sleeve-kits, part # on sleeves is 0243-8667, each sleebve also has a serial #.

The sleeves are standard, they are straight, and the bores are acceptable.

The 3-ring pistons have #2 and #3 ring thickneses that are not at all the same as the thickneses in OEM ring kit 0415-6566 for this engine (7683932).

The #2 rings have gaps of the order of 0.90mm which HAPPENS to be close to the WEAR limit (as if some idiot in the pieface factory had punched the wrong number into the CAD machine). Corollary question: whose the monkey that decides to pre-install rings to pistons when gaps HAVE to checked during assembly regardless (each time a ring is removed/installed there is a risk of breakage)?

When I raise the issue the dealer in good faith (probably not believing me) sends me ANOTHER set of 6 sleeve-kits. The gaps in this set are even WORSE than in the first one. At least in the first set only the #2 rings were scrap with a gap of 0.90mm instead of 0.20-0.45mm.

So I inform him and suggest that maybe OEM ring sets might be the answer. He thereupon and again in good faith immediately sends me an OEM ring set for 6 pistons.

Unfortunately I didn't know, I guess the dealer and distributor didn' know either, that the ring grooves and rings in the sleeve-kits are not at all the same as those in the OEM ring sets. My engine ALREADY had aftermarket pistons so I could not verify, only compare to the OEM ring set thicknesses.

The distributor tells the dealer that these gaps are OK and they send me a copy of the WEAR limit section from the manual. I send them a copy of the spec ghaps (pissing contest bullshit!).

The dealer eventually takes back the 2nd set of 6 sleeve-kits as well as the 6 new ring sets. He pays for the 340km shipping again, all in good faith as before.

I'm here with an engine waiting to be built and no suitable #2 rings, the dealer (from what another dealer tells me) gets hit with a 40% restocking fee if he ships back to the distributor (which is outright criminal if you ask me).

Has anyone been down this road? I mean this is definitely NOT the Deutz that I remember! Accepting a 0.9mm gap is out of the question since it violates even the common engineering rule of thumb gap formula (0.05-0.11mm per inch of bore). What are my options? Are separate OEM sleeves and pistons/piston-kits and/or ring sets availabale that would rectify this freakin' FUBAR????

TIA