WD or WD45 block?
Printed From: Unofficial Allis
Category: Other Topics
Forum Name: Pulling Forum
Forum Description: Forum dedicated to Tractor and Garden Pulling
URL: https://www.allischalmers.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=84738
Printed Date: 25 Jun 2024 at 7:10pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: WD or WD45 block?
Posted By: bigcountry48
Subject: WD or WD45 block?
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 12:28pm
|
I am building a pulling motor for my wc, it's gonna have a wd45 crank in it that has been restroked, a 170 cam, farmalls h rods, and 4 1/8 inch pistons. What block would this combination fit best in? I have a wd and wd45 block I can use and I was thinking it might be nice to have the pushrod cover be able to come off (like that on the wd block) that way I wouldn't have to pull the motor apart to see if I have a broken rod. Is that a good reason to use the wd block, of should I just use the 45 block? Looking forward to the expert opinions, and you fellas stay warm! ------------- 1950 B, 1952 pulling wd, and 1954 wd45 |
Replies:
Posted By: Charlie175
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 12:39pm
|
Depends how your rules are. The W201 would pass inspections while the 226 would not if they are picky ------------- Charlie '48 B, '51 CA, '56 WD45 '61 D17, '63 D12, '65 D10 , '68 One-Ninety XTD |
Posted By: patrickmull
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 4:31pm
| me i used a d17 in mine but like charlie said it depends on the rules at the tracks your pulling at |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 5:45pm
| A WD-45 "W-226" block was/is the factory replacement block for the older/previous W-201 block. There was a point in time, say the mid 1950's, when they simply quit making W-201 blocks and said, here's your replacement block.....take it or leave it. |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 5:46pm
| Use the WD-45 block......it's stronger than any W-201. |
Posted By: dawntreader74
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 6:49pm
| the 45 block is the one to use' it's the wright replacement for wc. you can pull any place with that motor it's right. you cant pull a d17 block in a wc only if theres on rules or there sleeping with the club people. the 45 will be ok anywear been did that. d17 is called a outlaw tractor like casey popcorn pulls''' |
Posted By: patrickmull
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 7:00pm
| can you tell the difference in a series 1 d17 226 or a wd45 226 and i dont sleep with the club people I am a founding member of the club and the club VP and i pull all over the state in usap and natpa pulls |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 7:06pm
| All D-17 blocks from the oldest to the newest are easily identifyable by the strengthening rib that runs horizontally back to front on both sides of the block about 3 inches up from the oil pan rails. |
Posted By: patrickmull
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 7:13pm
| A lot of people don't know that it takes a good AC man to tell in the classes I pull in you can pull a E engine |
Posted By: dawntreader74
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 7:15pm
| yes SR'' mister dr allis' we know one from the other.one is right an one is not. |
Posted By: patrickmull
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 7:24pm
| bring your tractor and come on down and pull with us we like the competition we have 6 pulls a year |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 8:32pm
| Well, I was told many years ago, that the WD45 block replaced the WC/WD block. That is kind of a no-brainer. I was also told that into the early to mid 1960's that AC discontinued the WD45 block and then made the D17 block its replacement......plus you had to buy a crankshaft from a D17 to fit your new D17 replacement block. I can't prove it, but this info came from an old retired AC dealer. I don't know of any Antique clubs that wouldn't allow a D17 or E Gleaner engine in a WC, because the performance parts all interchange. You have some weight advantage to stay with the older series engine if weight is a problem. |
Posted By: bigcountry48
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2014 at 8:50pm
|
Thanks fellas, ill go ahead and use the 45 block seems go just make sense! ------------- 1950 B, 1952 pulling wd, and 1954 wd45 |
Posted By: Kip-Utah
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2014 at 9:48pm
|
We have a 1941 WC that had a WD45 factory replacement block installed by the dealer in the early 60s. Had all WC internals and the original WC head. Kip ------------- HANSEN'S OLD ORANGE IRON. Showing, Pulling, & Going!! |
Posted By: Sugarmaker
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2014 at 8:14am
|
Does a WC have a gearing advantage over a WD in these types of pulls? The WD I used didn't do very well but it has not had a thing done to it either, so I cant say much. Clutch did not slip and basically spun out. So it did not seem to be lacking power. Not sure I am going to get real serious about pulling, but when you go it would be nice to be more competitive too. I do have a extra 45 block, WD crank, WD flat top pistons and short WD head. With those parts what would be a good approach to building a good engine on a low budget? I am not a engine builder so any suggestions would be helpful. I am sure sending it to a engine builder would be one option. Are there AC pulling engine build 101 classes:) Regards, Chris ------------- D17 1958 (NFE), WD45 1954 (NFE), WD 1952 (NFE), WD 1950 (WFE), Allis F-40 forklift, Allis CA, Allis D14, Ford Jubilee, Many IH Cub Cadets, 32 Ford Dump, 65 Comet. |
Posted By: bigcountry48
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2014 at 11:37am
|
Just from looking, the rear end on my wc looks bigger than the reared on my wd45. I think it has a different gearing in the rear end and possibly the tranny because, it doesn't have to go through the hand clutch, hydraulic pump, and all that. ------------- 1950 B, 1952 pulling wd, and 1954 wd45 |
Posted By: mufflerboltz
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2014 at 12:28pm
| WC is faster then WD, wd is faster then wd45. |
Posted By: CTuckerNWIL
Date Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 1:51pm
You can't see the rods with the push rod cover off. All you can see is the push rods and maybe the top of the lifters. ------------- http://www.ae-ta.com" rel="nofollow - http://www.ae-ta.com Lena 1935 WC12xxx, Willie 1951 CA6xx Dad bought new, 1954WD45 PS, 1960 D17 NF |
bigcountry48 wrote:Posted By: Jasonillinois
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2014 at 7:11pm
|
Per Natpa rules. WD blocks are a replacement for a WC but that is it until you hit div 3. Which is up to a D17. Depending on what your rules say. Newer is better as has been pointed out. |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2014 at 8:21pm
| You mean WD-45 blocks are replacement for a WC, right ?? WD and WC blocks are the same. |
Posted By: Jasonillinois
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2014 at 8:51pm
|
No I mean you can use a Wc or Wd block in a Wc. In div 1 or 2. 2t and up you can use anything up to a D17. If you find a document that shows factory replacement block for a Wc other than a Wd block I would like to see it. |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2014 at 6:27am
| I cannot after all these years have gone by. The supersession of the block P/N's going from the WC to the WD and then to the WD-45 makes perfect sense. Every single engine part from a WC will bolt right onto a WD-45 block......no exceptions. There is zero performance advantage to this change. The change makes perfect business sense for AC. Why continue to produce an old obselete block when the newer one will replace it without any consequence?? And then, the people who define a stupid rule like that, probably allow a WD-45 crankshaft in a WC !! ...and that would be a performance advantage, where the newer block would not be. Clearly a poor decision made here with no common sense or deep thought given to it. The Rules commitee must be loaded with 2-banger supporters. |
Posted By: Jasonillinois
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2014 at 7:21am
|
The key to Natpa rules "visual appearance". Just like you can run a leroi head if you can find One since they look the same externally. Or a 45 crank. If you can find me info that says they did factory replacements, I can get the rules changed but otherwise it lets In a lot of other direct drop ins for other makes. |
Posted By: blue924.9
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2014 at 8:41am
------------- hi my names dan, I am a young guy. i have a problem, i prefer my tractors orange and my clutches mechanical, thanks for letting me share |
Posted By: wi50
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2014 at 9:15am
|
Years ago when I was running the WC in our local pulling association we didn't have much for rules, but had to have a "stock block" Not much else mattered. Fellow built a MM Z with a billet alumnium head, overhead cam setup. I had to run the 201 block, it was almost a problem to use a later #40 block, but it was alright. I could not use a 45 block. I would have loved to be able to use D-17 and Gleaner E parts, common and much much stronger but the Oliver guys seamed to have a problem with the Allis guys and made sure we had the right parts. So being nothing was impossible, but some things take a long time, I hogged out billet caps, girdle, cross bolted the block above the center main and tied the deck to the crankcase by welding the sleeves in. I cross bolted the new main caps to the pan rails. We didn't have any oil pan restrictions or such like I think some NATPA classes to with a certain thickness girdle. It was pretty strong and proved to be bullet proof for many many years even taking a hit of NOS when the rules would allow. At first getting much past 5200 RPM proved more than stock rocker arm shaft could handle, the ends of the shaft that were un supported would just bend up. Then I made L shaped brackets to go under a head bolt on each end and slugged the ends of the rocker shaft and bolted them down. That took care of things, much over 6500 RPM though the valves would float. I had changed valves and springs, different cam profile and ran a downdraft carb with a new intake setup and with a light load in the yard in testing the pipes were ringing pretty good and the recall on the tach said 7050 rpm so I never tried to turn it that hard again, I figured the setup was fine. I got into the Alcohol Super Stock and just haven't messed with it since. If I had to build over again, I'd counterweight the crankshaft to take the stress off the block. I just built this  ------------- "see what happens when you have no practical experience doing something...... you end up playing with calculators and looking stupid on the internet" |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2014 at 6:27pm
| I just took a quick look at AGCO Parts Books.com and was pleasantly surprised to see the engine block part number for a "WC" or "WF" or W-201 power unit is 70227049 (no fuel pump) or 70227051 (fuel pump). Then, I went to the "WD" and "WD-45" and W-226 power unit and I'll be darned......the SAME PART NUMBERS !! 70227049 AND 70227051 for the WD and WD-45 and W-226 Power unit!! Soooo, there you have it. The part number supersession is on the internet and there WAS a way to trace the replacement parts for the engine block. Sign in as a "Guest" and use AGCO-Allis as the brand name. Now, what excuse will the competitors have to complain about ?? |
Posted By: Jasonillinois
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2014 at 8:35pm
|
I'll talk to the tech man tomorrow about it then. Since it is online I'm not sure How that will work out but worth a shot. I'll call my local dealer and see if I can get a paper version from there parts book. |
Posted By: Jasonillinois
Date Posted: 25 Feb 2014 at 6:56pm
|
Per the tech man the replacement block from the agco dealer would not be the same as an Allis mainly due to it not being an oem (as in AC) factory replacement part. The other point that was made was you can get a lot more clearance for stroke out of a WD #40 block than you can a Wd-45 block. Not the tech man.. Just an AC/Massey guy |
Posted By: DrAllis
Date Posted: 25 Feb 2014 at 7:13pm
| Well, your tech guy just ain't that bright, I guess. Go ahead and try and order a replacement block for a WC or WD or WD-45, and you'll be told the P/N is 70227049 and they are discontinued/no longer available. Been like that for 30 or more years, I'd suspect. The point is, a WD-45 block truly was the authorized REPLACEMENT block for a WC or WD. That's all. There have always been people who make stupid rules and probably always will be people who continue to make stupid rules. No WC or WD owner should be disqualified for having a WD-45 block. It's just ignorant to do so. The claim of "more stroke room" being available in a late WD block (which is true).... what in Sam Hill does that have to do with calling a WD-45 block in a WC or WD illegal??????? Nothing. |
Posted By: dawntreader74
Date Posted: 07 Mar 2014 at 11:13pm
| DR'' ALLIS'' WE was right all along the 45 block is the wright motor replacement. don't care what the teck people say the ITPA' TELLS US THE SAME AS WE SAY THE 45 POWER BLOCK IS THE WRIGHT ONE. NOT A COMBINE OR D17 if i go to a hook with one of them motors they will send you home |
Posted By: patrickmull
Date Posted: 08 Mar 2014 at 5:49am
| dawntreader USAP mod and NATPA div 3/4/5 you can pull a 17 or e block you people from chicago need to get with it you can look here http://www.natpa.com/rules.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.natpa.com/rules.htm or here http://www.usapuller.com/USAP-Rules.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.usapuller.com/USAP-Rules.html usap says ag blocks itpa say Tractor must have OEM external dimensions cast iron block and crankcase.s http://www.itpapulling.com/tech.aspx" rel="nofollow - http://www.itpapulling.com/tech.aspx |
Posted By: Jasonillinois
Date Posted: 08 Mar 2014 at 7:13am
|
As I said before d17 Wd-45,Wd,Wc can be used in 2T and up. For Natpa. Otherwise it's oem block or Factory replacement. |