# 2.8l v6 engine on a band sawmill?



## redheadwoodshed (Oct 4, 2012)

Has anyone tried a car engine on a home built band mill.I have a 2.8 v6 ford engine I was thinking about trying.I think it puts out 190hp.


----------



## scor440 (Oct 4, 2012)

Book of the Bandsaw,Sawmill plans,Make lumber,Band saw | eBay


----------



## k5alive (Oct 4, 2012)

I've seen a bandsaw mill with a 4bt Cummings.
I don't think HP is as important as torque 
keeping steady rpm through thecut seems important


----------



## discounthunter (Oct 4, 2012)

weight would be an issue. most mill are 13hp-25hp, so you have lots more than needed along with components needed for the motor. but that aside ,no doubt it will cut some wood!


----------



## redheadwoodshed (Oct 4, 2012)

discounthunter said:


> weight would be an issue. most mill are 13hp-25hp, so you have lots more than needed along with components needed for the motor. but that aside ,no doubt it will cut some wood!



From what I can find out on the 'net, the 2.8 weighs in at around 300 lbs. then add a fuel tank,battery, radiator, I'm sure it would be heavy.Also from the 'net, it supposed to kick out 205 fps @3000rpm.I think it would cut pretty good if you just kept the throttle steady. Besides the weight issue, does anyone have any other objection.These engines can be had cheaper than a new Honda 13 hp. I'm not building my mill to be portable, so I'm not really concerned as much about the weight. I've got some good wheels for the carriage that will carry the load, no problem.And I'm trying to come up with the best way to install a drive.Maybe with the 12v charging system I could drive it with a reversible electric motor.


----------



## redheadwoodshed (Oct 4, 2012)

scor440 said:


> Book of the Bandsaw,Sawmill plans,Make lumber,Band saw | eBay



Does anyone have that book, is it any good?Good info etc.?


----------



## Jim Timber (Oct 5, 2012)

You could use that engine to run a 30KW generator and run a 10hp electric motor for the mill... still having enough to run AC, a tv, coffee pot, and fridge - along with a boomin stereo and some yard lights.

Your fuel costs will make using it a false economy.


----------



## DaltonPaull (Oct 5, 2012)

I'm planing to use a 1000CC Kawasaki Ninja engine for my mill. Got the complete running engine/transmission/charging/starting/ingnition systems for $100. 

Lots of old mills used big diesel engines and the LT40 can come with a 50HP diesel but I do think a V6 would be getting a little excessive. Is there a Toyota 4cyl you can get just as cheap?


----------



## tolman_paul (Oct 5, 2012)

The thing to remember with car and especially motorcycle engines is they are not designed to put out their full hp for extended running time. They are designed to put out that full power only for short periods of time, i.e. measured in the seconds. The power and rpm they operate at at cruising speed is much lower, and they aren't pulling a heavy load. So while your engine may have a peak hp that seems impressive, the hp you can use when running at an rpm for extended run times will be much lower.


----------



## Jim Timber (Oct 5, 2012)

I don't even care about the peak HP numbers - the question is how much of that fuel is being turned into sawdust, and how much of it is just being turned into heat and smoke?

The only reason for more HP IMO, would be to make the blade spin faster. Anything above the mechanical threshold of the blade and you're going to break them, so you have a limited window of what's even beneficial.


----------



## redheadwoodshed (Oct 5, 2012)

The engine is free, it puts out around 200 fp of torque at 3000 rpm.I don't see bogging down a v 6 on something a lawnmower engine can run.I was just wondering if anybody had done it before, and how they set it up etc.


----------



## Jim Timber (Oct 5, 2012)

It most certainly won't bog down - but when gas is $4/gal, do you really want to burn any more of it than you have to? The cost of a few hundred dollar engine might be absorbed/recouped in a year in efficiency savings.


----------



## Burlhunter13 (Oct 6, 2012)

It would be nice to run a larger engine when pulling a 3" or 4" bandblades!!! Might not break as easily if snagged. My 15hp motor can blow apart a 1 1/4 - 1 1/2 band like a piece of thread when it wants too. I had no idea the power behind smaller motors. 200+ hp seems a bit much. Even the largest woodmizer 1000 bandmill uses a 30hp electric motor, Which is the gas equivalent of a 70-90hp. Yours is over double that. Maybe you can gear the rpms way way down for torque. You will also have the additional cost of fuel/maintenance. Would be neat though. Post pics!


----------



## DaltonPaull (Oct 8, 2012)

tolman_paul said:


> The thing to remember with car and especially motorcycle engines is they are not designed to put out their full hp for extended running time. They are designed to put out that full power only for short periods of time, i.e. measured in the seconds. The power and rpm they operate at at cruising speed is much lower, and they aren't pulling a heavy load. So while your engine may have a peak hp that seems impressive, the hp you can use when running at an rpm for extended run times will be much lower.



The engine I'm using is 137HP at 10K RPM but I'm planing to electronically govern it to 5K or so and get ~50HP which will leave plenty of reserve. I doubt demand will exceed 15HP on average.


----------



## DaltonPaull (Oct 8, 2012)

Jim Timber said:


> The cost of a few hundred dollar engine might be absorbed/recouped in a year in efficiency savings.



Do some research, take some data and let us know. I haven't seen much published data for small engine efficiency. A small diesel engine would be nice for efficency but they cost more than a few hundred dollars.


----------



## redheadwoodshed (Oct 8, 2012)

DaltonPaull said:


> The engine I'm using is 137HP at 10K RPM but I'm planing to electronically govern it to 5K or so and get ~50HP which will leave plenty of reserve. I doubt demand will exceed 15HP on average.



Is the engine mounted on your carriage? How do you transmit power to the band wheels? Thanks!


----------



## DaltonPaull (Oct 8, 2012)

It's still in the conceptual stage but yes, the engine will be mounted on the carriage. I'm going with something similar to the Linn Lumber design. It seams the easiest/cheapest thing to do will be to just use a motorcycle chain and sprocket to connect it up.


----------



## dwraisor (Oct 9, 2012)

The 2.8L is a good little engine. Came out in everything from the Pinto to the Bronco II / Ranger. Production ended I think around 88/89 as they switched to the 2.9 which was basically the same engine w/ EFI. The 2.8 did have timing gears, and solid lifter cams where the 2.9 used a timing chain and hydraulic lifters. Makes no mind for a saw mill but us gear heads appreciate those features. If I recall my Bronco II w/ 31" mud tires and 3:73:1 gears averaged around 23-25 MPG. Not completely unrepresentable for a lifted 4x4 w/ 80's engine tech.

As for a way to mount it, or power something, look to the boat/marine world. An I/O (inboard/Outboard) boat uses a flex coupler to transfer power from the crank of the engine to the stern-drive.

The flex couple is basically a plate that bolts to the flywheel, and in the center has a large rubber isolator. Inside the isolator is a set of female splines.

Like this:






IF the 2.8 was ever in a boat, or you could find a compatible (bolt patter/balance) coupler and then the input shaft from a matching stern drive the input shaft could be modifies to drive your bandsaw. The input shafts terminate in a universal joint so either finding a matching drive flange to mount to the u-joint or by having a machine shop add a flange on the end.

dw


----------



## jnl502 (Oct 9, 2012)

dwraisor said:


> The 2.8L is a good little engine. Came out in everything from the Pinto to the Bronco II / Ranger. Production ended I think around 88/89 as they switched to the 2.9 which was basically the same engine w/ EFI. The 2.8 did have timing gears, and solid lifter cams where the 2.9 used a timing chain and hydraulic lifters. Makes no mind for a saw mill but us gear heads appreciate those features. If I recall my Bronco II w/ 31" mud tires and 3:73:1 gears averaged around 23-25 MPG. Not completely unrepresentable for a lifted 4x4 w/ 80's engine tech.
> 
> As for a way to mount it, or power something, look to the boat/marine world. An I/O (inboard/Outboard) boat uses a flex coupler to transfer power from the crank of the engine to the stern-drive.
> 
> ...



Not to say that wouldn't work but your trying to over engineer this mill's power plant. Even at idle that engine will make more power than needed. At idle or just above say1500 rpm it should sip gas. 
A friend has a circle saw and 2 band resaws and ran them with a 6 cyl. power unit. A few years ago the 6 broke down and he needed to fill a large order. His dad knew where a big V8 non turbo out of old machine of some sort that was dead but ran great when parked. It is a monster but he is still running it because it uses less fuel and runs at just above idle. He can also flip a switch that makes it run a little faster and run tha circle saw and both resaws at the same time.
Also I would run it off the front of the crank. 2 V belts should work and be more compact and simple.
jnl


----------



## Jim Timber (Oct 10, 2012)

I wouldn't run it off the front at all. I'd use the block to add stiffness to the carriage and run a pulley direct drive off the flywheel. I'd use a flywheel too - from a manual. That's where your smoothness will come from since you won't have any rotating weight without a torque converter if you use a flex plate.

I'd also use the biggest pulley I could so you have lots of surface contact and don't need to torque it down to transfer the power without slippage. If you have the machinery, you could go real fancy and use the automotive clutch to apply or remove power, but that'd take some doing and you'd need a bellhousing and the clutch parts for that. It'd also add a lot of bulk to the package. An electric clutch on a jack shaft between the engine and drive wheel is probably your best bet.


----------



## redheadwoodshed (Oct 10, 2012)

Now we're gettin' somewhere! Thanks fellers, I still have the 5 speed transmission and everything, so I have the flywheel.I hadn't thought of a 12v clutch on a jackshaft.I had considered using the transmission and all but that would be a bit long in the footprint and heavier, although, it's out of a 4wd , so I would have another pto to run a drive off of, which I plan on adding at some point, no sense having that much power and not getting everything you can out of it. I have a 18" pulley, too and an odd assortment of other sizes. I looked at some pto's for stationary engines, but I could buy a big Kohler for the price of one of those.


----------



## Jim Timber (Oct 10, 2012)

So run a hydraulic pump off your jack shaft too. I wouldn't keep any more of the driveline than the flywheel, and having a belt eliminates a lot of your alignment problems right out the gate.

You could run it on the front of the engine as well, but the accessories aren't intended for a lot of side load, and a big pump might be a little much to be hung out there in the breeze figuratively speaking. Solid mount it along side your engine and you can either run it off the shaft or off another groove on the flywheel.


----------



## dwraisor (Oct 10, 2012)

I would think an electric clutch would hit to hard given the hp output of the engine. They have two positions on & off an no way to ease into the on position. I know on my mowe when I hit the switch for the blades the electric clutch kicks in the blade deck jolts violently as the blades go from 0 to 10K RPM (or whatever) in a split second.

If you did use a clutch system at least w/ the automotive clutch you will ease the lever out and the hit to your equipment down the line will be lessened.


dw


----------



## Boleclimber (Oct 11, 2012)

I would go with less of an engine for economic reasons. With that much power you would want to run a much larger band and have it cut forwards and back. A mill set up with such a band is huge investment in time and money.


----------



## redprospector (Oct 11, 2012)

You're on the right track! 
I didn't use a V-6 but a 1600cc VW engine works good.
Over kill is a good thing, you can run a hydraulic pump and eliminate any electric drive motors.
Depending on what blade you choose to run you will need to gear it to turn the blade somewhere between 4500 and 5200 fpm.
Here's a few pics.

















It works better than a SpeeCo 22 ton splitter. 

Andy


----------



## redprospector (Oct 12, 2012)

redheadwoodshed said:


> Now we're gettin' somewhere! Thanks fellers, I still have the 5 speed transmission and everything, so I have the flywheel.I hadn't thought of a 12v clutch on a jackshaft.I had considered using the transmission and all but that would be a bit long in the footprint and heavier, although, it's out of a 4wd , so I would have another pto to run a drive off of, which I plan on adding at some point, no sense having that much power and not getting everything you can out of it. I have a 18" pulley, too and an odd assortment of other sizes. I looked at some pto's for stationary engines, but I could buy a big Kohler for the price of one of those.



Don't over engineer the drive. I had a plate made with a shaft centered & ballanced. It bolts on to the flywheel where the clutch would go. You can run the blade direct drive, or put a snap over center pulley to tighten the belt rather than a clutch. You may need the bell housing (or part of it anyway) to mount your starter on. 
It takes a lot of head scratchin', but I'll bet you can get her hummin'.






Andy


----------



## dwraisor (Oct 12, 2012)

redprospector said:


> ... You may need the bell housing (or part of it anyway) to mount your starter on. ...
> 
> 
> Andy



Yes, all Ford engines (well I'm not sure of the current engines) the starter bolts to the bell-housing. The bell housing and flywheel are matched, as they would use a different flywheel/bell-housing in different cars to save tunnel space.

dw


----------



## redprospector (Oct 12, 2012)

Boleclimber said:


> I would go with less of an engine for economic reasons. With that much power you would want to run a much larger band and have it cut forwards and back. A mill set up with such a band is huge investment in time and money.



That would be the optimum if it could be made into a double cut mill. But the economic's of a larger engine are surprising sometimes. 
I've ran a lot of different band mills. The last one I ran before I built this one had a 24 horse Kohler, It would burn between 8 & 10 gallons a day (depending on how I felt that day). This mill, while pushing over twice the horse power, and probably 5 or 6 times the torque will only burn 6 to 7 gallons in a day. Just not as much strain on the engine I guess. The Kohler ran at 3600 rpm to be able to power through bigger logs, the VW runs at about 2500 - 2600 and just slips through them.

Andy


----------



## mad murdock (Oct 13, 2012)

If You want to figure fuel consumption for any given engine, you need to know the BSFC(brake specific fuel consumption) then calculate the projected HP you will be using on the mill, multiply by the BSFC (which represents pounds of fuel per hp per hour), an engine that
Is designed to have 160BHP in a car, can easily be a fuel miser in a mill application, because you are not using the maximum hp that it can produce. Usually auto engine are more efficient than air cooled small engines like you Kohler or Honda.


----------



## Wagnerwerks (Oct 13, 2012)

You guys need an old diesel rabbit engine. They can be had for a few hundred with a whole car attached. Then scrap the car and recoup some cash.


----------



## redprospector (Oct 13, 2012)

Wagnerwerks said:


> You guys need an old diesel rabbit engine. They can be had for a few hundred with a whole car attached. Then scrap the car and recoup some cash.



Naw, I've got an inline 6 out of my wife's old 84 Volvo 760 GLE. I should have got rid of it a long time ago, but I keep thinking I'll use it somewhere. I've got a Cat 3054T out of an old ASV, and a Deutz 2011 oil cooled diesel. If I bring home any more engine's my wife may......well, you get the picture. 

Andy


----------



## DaltonPaull (Oct 16, 2012)

Andy - what did you use for a governor on your 1600?


----------



## redprospector (Oct 16, 2012)

DaltonPaull said:


> Andy - what did you use for a governor on your 1600?



I've got a belt drive governor hanging on the wall in the shed. Haven't installed it yet. It's really not much trouble to keep it where you want it.

Andy


----------

