Horsepower Performance Plays Part In Case Heritage Celebration At Pawnee And In Mt. Pleasant Activities 1987

Content Tools

Box 94, Rt. 1, Nashville, IL 62263

The 1987 Pawnee Show continued with more tests on the Prony Brake and at the Mt. Pleasant show a great many Prony Brake performance tests on both steam engines and gas tractors were run, which stirred the interest of large crowds. Also at Mt. Pleasant the Prony Brake crew made numerous drawbar horsepower tests on both gas tractors and steam engines. This was carefully done with the help of several of the Caterpillar tractor exhibitors who furnished a Cat for the smooth regulated load, which enabled us to make the tests.

Part 1: The Pawnee Show

The Case Heritage event at Pawnee has already been well covered and it is here added that the Case engine performances played a big role in impressing thousands of spectators.

The Hill Climb event by Chaddy Attebury with that fine 40 Case, assisted by Helen Brigham, continued as spectacular as ever! That 40 Case and particularly two other Case engines along with the Martens' fine 98 Nichols & Shepard and other makes, made up a long list of HP performance exhibits. As always, the engines were smoothly and carefully tested with no sudden loads and no overloads to pull them too hard so that safety and not straining the engines was foremost in our minds.

In view of the Case Heritage event at Pawnee, I cover mainly Case performance there, and for the Mt. Pleasant Show I emphasize other makes.

At Pawnee the Case 50 owned by Thomas Gingell of Emmetsburg, MD performed at 251 Brake RPM and at 80.3 HP, one of several readings. This engine was a pleasure to test and to observe its true performance.

Then there was a 6 HP Case and a Case 65 which truly 'stole the show'!

The 6 HP Case owned by Bill Raische of Louisville, KY and Byron Leatherman of Lexington, IN, was being brought by Pawnee on its way to a new home in Kentucky and it put on an exceptional show for us. With somewhat reduced pressure, the engine made its run as follows:

Case 6 HP Portable Engine

scale wt.

brake rpm

HP

1.

95

229

21.7

2.

105

225

23.6

3.

115

220

25.3

4.

120

219

26.2

5.

125

215

26.8

6.

130

212

27.5

7.

135

208

28.0

8.

140

205

28.7

9.

145

197

28.6

10.

150

191

28.7

11.

155

187

28.9

12.

160

180

28.8

13.

165

175

28.8

14.

170

165

28.0

15.

175

155

27.1

Note particularly how the HP curve from reading no. 5 through no. 14 is superior to the latest and highly advertised Cummins and Cat engine high torque rise models. To make it a more simple comparison, make the no. 5 brake 215 rpm compare to 2150 diesel rpm and do the same through no. 14 brake rpm of 165 compare to 1650. Now compare the % HP rise of this Case 6 to those for the proud diesels and the Case 6 will be the better one.

During the entire performance time the boiler steamed easily and with reserve capacity. We particularly note how the governor held excellent speed control. The weight increase on the scale and loss of rpm balanced out so that over a wide range of scale weight increase the HP stayed at 28 HP. This fine little engine was a pleasure for many to observe and it was clearly evident how handy and useful this simple engine must have been for many of the farm power needs of its day.

Now we report on the famous Case 65! This was the last of the Case designs and its reputation would surely go along with the last and best of Case engineering. Its 10 x 11 cylinder moved Case from the squares of the 10 x 10, the 11 x 11, and 12 x 12 and back to a longer stroke than bore, which in the final analysis thousands of steam engine models including railroad locomotives, Case 6, 9, 40, 50 and other makes of traction engines, proved to be the best. The 65 too showed that once again. This 65, owned and operated by Chaddy Attebury, is in first class condition. So with one of the last Case designs in excellent condition and operated by Chaddy (being the top flight engineer he is), we truly saw excellent performance!

We report on a lengthy run with the engine at about 20 to 25 rpm high. It was commonly practiced by numerous companies at Winnepeg as they used some extra rpm to obtain a few additional HP. Every diesel and gas engine builder tries to utilize more rpm to produce added HP. Whereas automobile engine ratings are at such ridiculous high speed rpm ratings that cannot be used, the steam engine people added only 30 or 40 rpm. We use about 20 to 25 rpm more but even that is quite an assist. So, with this, with an excellent governor, with good valve action and opening, with smooth steam flow and with no back pressure, we made the following run:

Case 65 (864 cu. in.) 3 May 1987

owned by: Chaddy Attebury, Pawnee, OK

scale wt.

rpm

HP

1.

200

275

55.0

2.

215

273

58.6

3.

225

272

61.2

4.

235

271

63.6

5.

245

271

66.3

6.

255

272

69.3

7.

265

271

71.8

8.

275

271

74.5

9.

285

270

76.9

10.

295

269

79.3

11.

305

269

82.0

12.

315

270

85.1

13.

325

271

88.1

14.

335

270

90.4

15.

345

271

93.5

16.

355

271

96.2

17.

365

271

98.9

18.

375

270

101.2

19.

385

270

103.9

20.

395

280

110.6

21.

405

280

113.4

22.

415

280

116.2

23.

425

279

118.6

24.

435

277

120.4

25.

445

263

117.0

26.

455

269

122.4

27.

465

258

119.9

28.

475

251

119.2

29.

480

250

120.0

30.

485

248

120.3

31.

490

247

121.0

32.

495

245

121.3

33.

495

268

132.6

34.

505

262

132.3

35.

515

253

130.3

36.

525

243

127.6

37.

535

231

123.5

There are several interesting and important points to be noted from this chart:

1) Note the engine was not pulled down to lug, which would have resulted in less HP anyway.

2) The governor was superb! Reading 1 through 19 when HP increased from 55 to 103.9 and valve gear hooked up there was a speed change of only 1.8%.

On diesel engines it is extremely difficult to obtain 2% regulation on a generator set with a mechanical governor and here it is 1.8%. Compare this further the 8-9 and even 10% regulation on farm tractors in our modern world. If we carry this one step further and take the Case 65 rated HP which was obtained at 271 brake rpm. And follow all the readings through #19 the brake is at 270 rpm producing 103.9 HP. One rpm drop from 65 to 103.9 HP is simply fantastic! Reading 20 through 32 the valve lever was moved one notch and reading 33 through 37 the valve gear was at full open setting. Most efficient was 1 through 19 while 20 through 32 was less efficient and 33 through 37 far less efficient. The last two valve settings gained little HP compared to the increased steam and coal usage. The exhaust was much louder too. Mr. LeRoy Blaker used to call these wo settings, 'Blasting the Sky', and rightly so.

3) During the entire test run, Chaddy was never rushed as he calmly fired and could easily lift the pop when he so desired to use the boiler reserve.

4) Loads were slowly added and slowly released for slow and smooth temperature changes.

The Martens Nichols & Shepard 98 again made an excellent showing. Last year it performed well even as compared to the Case 110, and particularly when compared in cubic inch displacement. It was the same this year, but it must be added that in cubic inch displacement, the Case 65 also outperformed the 110 by a large amount.

The Martens 98 Nichols & Shepard performance run:

30-98 Nichols & Shepard 895? : cu in owned by Marten Bros. 3 May 1987

scale wt.

rpm

HP

1.

300

266

79.8

2.

320

262

83.8

3.

340

262

89.1

4.

360

262

94.3

5.

380

263

99.9

6.

400

260

104.

7.

420

259

108.8

8.

430

258

110.9

9.

440

257

113.1

10.

450

255

114.7

11.

460

255

117.3

12.

470

255

119.8

13.

480

254

121.9

14.

490

251

123.0

15.

500

249

124.5

16.

510

246

125.4

17.

520

240

124.8

18.

530

240

127.2

19.

540

230

124.2

20.

545

228

124.2

21.

550

215

118.2

Here too is an excellent governor action and performance. Note that at 266 rpm in no. 1 producing 79.8 HP, at 257 rpm in no. 9 the HP was 113 with only a speed drop of 9 rpm or 3.3% drop.

This rpm range was slower than the Case 65.

In closing this Pawnee portion of the report, it must be said that an engine in good condition, whether it be a Case 65 or the 98 N & S as shown here, will usually perform fairly comparable to its displacement if the valves are right, the governor is right, there is no back pressure and the steam flows freely. In this situation the N & S has 895? cu. in. displacement and the 65 has 864 cu. in. Note that at similar rpms such as the following, the performance is very close together:

Nichols & Shepard

rpm

wt

HP

230

540

124.2

240

530

127.2

251

490

122.9

Case 65

rpm

wt

HP

231

535

123.5

243

525

127.5

251

475

119.2

The difference of displacement is similar to the difference in performance. Can it be then that the Link Valve after all gives about the same performance as the Wolf?

Part 2: The Mt. Pleasant Show 1987

The horsepower performance exhibit was a popular event with a long list of tractors, steam engines and models participating and too numerous to here list in detail. There were 32 runs on the Prony Brake. The drawbar tests were made on 14 tractors and engines with a total of 39 readings taken. The tractors and engines at times lined up for their turn. The models, the Kitten engine, the Woods engine, the Huber engine, the Keck Gonnerman engines, the several Oil Pulls, the Aultman Taylor, the Case 50, the 40, the Reeves, the Advance Rumely and more, all performed smoothly and without any excess loads.

The main performers on the Prony Brake were:

1)  Robert Tippet/Advance Rumely 20 from Monmouth, IL.
2)  LeRoy McClure/Kitten engine from Colchester, IL.
3)  John Sheppard/Woods Bros, engine from Drakesville, IL.
4)  LeRoy McClure/Huber engine from Colchester, IL.
5)  LeRoy McClure/Birdsell engine from Colchester, IL.
6)  LeRoy McClure/20 Jumbo engine from Colchester, IL.
7)  Larry Nelson/Keck Gonnerman 22 from Muscatine, IA.
8)  Roy Larson/Keck Gonnerman 19 from Fairview, IL.
9)  Robert Higton/40 Case from New London, IA.
10) Louis Van Mark/50 Case from Pella, IA.
11) Aultman Taylor engine.
12) Various models and gas tractors.

The Keck Gonnerman 30-60 tractor owned by Bob Balzar of West Burlington, IA stood out as an excellent performer both for its good governor action and for the power it produced. Also a truly outstanding performer was the M Rumely model owned by Tom Turnbull of Rushville, MO. This model did an excellent job at Pawnee, too.

The drawbar HP testing at Mt. Pleasant was based on the standard formula MPH times the drawbar pounds pull divided by 375. The criticism of that formula last year is here by answered to say that it really doesn't matter how the calculations are made as long as the correct answer is obtained! If you want to use something other than pounds pull or miles per hour and if several more steps are desirable, please do so as long as 1 drawbar HP ends up being 33,000 lbs. moved 1 foot per minute--in the criticism, the fixed 375 figure I had defined as a 'constant' was not liked. Please call it anything you like! You may wish to call it 'always the same' or 'can always be used in the formula with mph and pounds pull', 'always correct' or whatever else you like. We shall use the formula of it is correct every time. Now to more important things!

(DBPP x MPH)/375= DBHP.

We appreciated the help of many in making the drawbar pulls possible, especially the gas tractor men who provided the Caterpillar tractors for the movable and regulated anchors to make the variable load possible. Some of the tractors and engines pulled were tested as follows:

1. Oil Pull 30-60 built in 1927, owned by Gary Fick of New London, IA.
6000 lbs pulled    2.5 MPH 40 DBHP
6500 lbs pulled     2.3 MPH 39.86 DBHP
7000 lbs pulled     2.1 MPH 39.20 DBHP

2. Avery 20-40
4500 lbs pulled     1.62 MPH 19.44 DBHP
4800 lbs pulled     1.5789 MPH 20.21 DBHP

3. Aultman Taylor 30-60
6000 lbs pulled     1.88 MPH 30.0 DBHP
6500 lbs pulled     1.818 MPH 31.51 DBHP

4.  Case 50
6000 lbs pulled     2.222 MPH 35.5 DBHP
6500 lbs pulled     2.143 MPH 37.15 DBHP

5. Advance Rumely 20
6500 lbs pulled     2.68 MPH 46.45 DBHP
7000 lbs pulled     2.5 MPH 46.66 DBHP
7500 lbs pulled     2.4 MPH 48.0 DBHP
8000 lbs pulled     2.069 MPH 44.1 DBHP

6.  Cat RD 6
8000 lbs pulled     1.721 MPH 36.1 DBHP
8500 lbs pulled     1.62 MPH36.756 DBHP

7. Cat FIFTY
7000 lbs pulled     2.222 MPH 41.48 DBHP

8.  16 Reeves
7000 lbs pulled     1.818 MPH 33.963 DBHP

9. Oil Pull 30-60
7500 lbs pulled     1.47 MPH 29.40 DBHP
8200 lbs pulled     1.28 MPH 27.9 DBHP

(Returning to Oklahoma for a moment, the Nichols 98 and Case 65 both pulled 57-60 drawbar HP. More on that later.)

We appreciate and thank the pullers. Several, as Mr. Tippett made a number of pulls and cooperated to the fullest. This event has lots of potential and we look forward to expanding the interest and enjoy it together.

In closing, one word about hooking up the valve gears and the great saving in steam and fuel that can be achieved. A separate article will be devoted to that subject. Not mentioned in this article, the Case 65 at Pawnee also pulled in excess of the 65 HP rating with the reverse lever hooked up to the first notch from center.

Looking forward to those coming events in 1988