McCulloch Chain Saws

[BigBlue]

This is the one I'm thinking of getting. Only $35 plus shipping and it is the right part number for my B cylinder.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MCCULLOCH-8...-BORE-PISTON-KIT-PART-92519-NEW-/141700319878

Rob

 

[Mr. Piste]

Does anyone have a rubber grip for the top portion of a McCulloch 380 rear handle? I have the bottom insert, but the top seems to be a hard part to track down.

 

[heimannm]

Piste - Did you check with Bob Johnson?

Plenty of chrome bore saws used thick rings so no issue there but I wish customchainsawparts still had some of the original 92519 pistons, I'd put a couple more spares in the attic.

Mark

 

[Walter Glover]

Based on a 10-10 ipl it seems my saw is missing the manual oiler check 'valve'
Would anyone know the dimensions of that part? Looks to be a small disk sitting on the pickup tube rubber flange.
Also: anyone have and willing to ship a nice 82cc Mac?
My favorite Mac disease enabler has me hankering for a big brother to the CP70L!

 

[Brian Thacker]

This is the one I'm thinking of getting. Only $35 plus shipping and it is the right part number for my B cylinder.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MCCULLOCH-8...-BORE-PISTON-KIT-PART-92519-NEW-/141700319878

Rob

That is the one from Little Red Barn that I had reservation about. I think it will be alright.

Brian

 

[Mac&Homelite]

Based on a 10-10 ipl it seems my saw is missing the manual oiler check 'valve'
Would anyone know the dimensions of that part? Looks to be a small disk sitting on the pickup tube rubber flange.
Also: anyone have and willing to ship a nice 82cc Mac?
My favorite Mac disease enabler has me hankering for a big brother to the CP70L!

I got an 80cc Mac 250 up for grabs, only a two cc difference! It would be a big brother for sure, little slow cutting, but it does have the torque.

 

[BigBlue]

Oh, gotcha. I didn't catch that they were the same seller. I tried to find that one from customchainsawparts but couldn't. Maybe it sold already.

Rob

 

[Walter Glover]

I got an 80cc Mac 250 up for grabs, only a two cc difference! It would be a big brother for sure, little slow cutting, but it does have the torque.

M&H, i have the old ones covered with a 1-52. Hoping for an SP80 etc
Thanks though!!

 

[Mr. Piste]

Piste - Did you check with Bob Johnson?

I couldn't reach him today, so I thought I might as well put the word out here as well. I'll definitely be trying him again tomorrow.

 

[heimannm]

I thought I had the 10 Series seals figured out but it seems I have gotten off track along the way.

Looking at the IPL's there are three different part numbers for the flywheel side, 65746 on the older saws and 67906, and 61618. Based on my earlier photo I thought 61618 was the larger O.D. but according to the parts in my bin (all written on the seals by me) 67906 is the larger O.D. and 61618 is the smaller.

In any case, this is what I have for the flywheel side seals:

67906 - 1.560" O.D. and .562" shaft diameter
61618 - 1.382" I.D. and .562" shaft diameter (I think this one is in fact 35 x 15 mm?)

The key is the seal with the larger O.D. fits the same bore as the bearing, the seal with the smaller O.D. fits inside the outer race of the bearing like you see in the earlier photo.

I don't have any with the 65746 written on them so I'm lost there.

PTO side is 5/8" shaft and 7/8" O.D. for both the shaft and bearing.

If anyone has some additional information, I'm listening per se.

Mark

 

[fossil]

I'll be looking for a sub for the 65746 seal for my 5-10 and my 2-10. The IPL on both looks like the bearing goes in followed by a snap ring and then the seal.

Does the seal sit under the snap ring or does it just fit in the crankcase bore?

 

[rwoods]

A little info and questions for the McMasters here. With all the talk on AS about .020" being the ideal squish for a work saw, I just left the lab where I checked the squish on 4 82cc Macs and a PM700.

The info/results: .037 - .0385 .0365 - .0385 .0375 - .0385 .038 - .040 .038 - .040

The questions: Would tightening the squish to .020 make any significant performance difference? Would this be a significant detriment to the long term durability?

I am not ready to say how I may tighten the squish. Top level security clearance is needed for that info.

Ron

 

[heimannm]

Tim - the ring goes over the bearing the fix the position in the crankcase, you can see the groove for the ring in the crankcase halves below. Seal either presses into the O.D. of the bearing or the bearing bore. This particular CP70 was one of the rare ones with a ring on the bearing insert as well. Most have a pin that locates the insert in the crankcase.



Ron - nogoinback had a way to reduce the squish in his kart saw, high rev's were stretching the connecting rod. It worked for a short while...

Mark

 

[fossil]

Thanks Mark. Looking forward to finishing both of those saws off with the seals when I finish the saw on the bench.

 

[rwoods]

Thanks. I am not going for the ragged edge and too much is going to be invested for short while performance. I thought .020 was considered ideal - maybe for a hot rod, but not a ten series work saw??? All this stuff is over my head and I am pretty gullible. Ron

 

[Walter Glover]

Snowmobiles iirc we were happy at 0.050" squish. I venture that stock numbers are fine as is.

 

[Brian Van]

A little info and questions for the McMasters here. With all the talk on AS about .020" being the ideal squish for a work saw, I just left the lab where I checked the squish on 4 82cc Macs and a PM700.

The info/results: .037 - .0385 .0365 - .0385 .0375 - .0385 .038 - .040 .038 - .040

The questions: Would tightening the squish to .020 make any significant performance difference? Would this be a significant detriment to the long term durability?

I am not ready to say how I may tighten the squish. Top level security clearance is needed for that info.

Ron

How do we get clearance?

 

[Brian Van]

On that 7-10, if you go 30 over, do you have to mess with the jetting?

 

[heimannm]

Referring to post 26792 above - I checked the list that Eccentric put together and it crosses the 61618 to a national 471551 which is 1.375" x 0.562" and described as an inch measurement oil seal so it looks like I was wrong about the 35 x 15 mm. I believe, however, they are close enough to exchange without any ill effects.

Mark

 

[rwoods]

How do we get clearance?

If I understand your question - placed small diameter solder through spark plug hole, cycled engine and measured flatten solder in multiple places.

Ron