[JeepHammer]

Originally Posted by ego99

I'll post some pics after I get home. I am going to autozone after work to order some parts. After reading about how to replace the front seal I saw the manual calls for a timing cover aligning tool. Autozone has no idea what I am talking about. Know where I should look for one? This is all based on the assumption that the timing cover has to be removed to replace the front seal, it does right? Here's to riding my motorcycle in winter rain!

No alignment necessary, Once you get the balancer off and see the front seal, you will understand...
It comes out from the front, so if you use a seal puller tool, pop the old seal out, then you can just drive in a new seal.

If you don't take the cover off, you don't need to realign it...

The easy way to align the front cover is to put the cover in place, press the balancer on, then bolt the front cover down using the balancer as the centering tool.
No big deal there either...

[Pacfanweb]

Originally Posted by krazyzigzagger

By the way, we are discussing an engine here, not a motor.

They are one and the same. You must have had the same instructor at CC that I did, who told us that "motor" referred to an electrical motor and "engine" was what you called the powerplant in an automobile.

He was wrong.

From Merriam-Webster:
Motor:
2: any of various power units that develop energy or impart motion: as a: a small compact engine b: internal combustion engine; especially : a gasoline engine c: a rotating machine that transforms electrical energy into mechanical energy

[JeepHammer]

Originally Posted by Pacfanweb

They are one and the same. You must have had the same instructor at CC that I did, who told us that "motor" referred to an electrical motor and "engine" was what you called the powerplant in an automobile.

He was wrong.

From Merriam-Webster:
Motor:
2: any of various power units that develop energy or impart motion: as a: a small compact engine b: internal combustion engine; especially : a gasoline engine c: a rotating machine that transforms electrical energy into mechanical energy

Actually, that's not right either...

The proper definition of a 'Motor' is self starting, Air, Steam, Hydraulic, Electric, ect.
A 'Motor', By technical definition, starts as ROTARY motion,
NOT
Reciprocating, like the pistons in an Internal Combustion Engine.

The word 'Engine' is a bastardized version of the phrase, 'Internal Combustion Engine'...
(can anyone give me an example of an 'External' combustion engine?)

If you look at the quote from Websters, you will see they didn't finish the description, or it would have been self explanatory...
"a. small compact INTERNAL COMBUSTION engine",
"b: internal combustion engine; especially : a gasoline INTERNAL COMBUSTION engine,
AND,
If it's defined as an 'Internal Combustion Engine',
IT, by definition, Can NOT be a 'Motor'...

Engines are not self starting, and take a 'Motor' or some other outside force to start it. (like an idiot on a hand crank!, wanna see the scar under my chin!?)

Websters isn't the be all and end all when it comes to proper automotive terminology...
Try the Society Of Automotive Engineers (SAE), since they define, refine and standardized EVERYTHING automotive...

Word geeks should stay with the 'Words' and not jump to conclusions...
Like grouping any power producing device as a 'Motor...
Leave defining the technical stuff to the Technical people, Like the SAE.

[Pacfanweb]

I feel quite sure that the internal combustion engine was around long before cars were, so the SAE is also not the be-all, end-all, nor the originators of the definition of "engine".

And technically none of them are "self starting"....you still have to use something to get them moving, whether it's air, steam, electricity.

So yes, my definition, Merriam-Webster's, and every other dictionary in the history of the world are most certainly correct.

And engine is a type of motor. Whether it's an internal combustion, steam, etc, is irrelevant.

Also from M/W's "engine" definition:

4: a machine for converting any of various forms of energy into mechanical force and motion;

From M/W's "motor" definition:

2: any of various power units that develop energy or impart motion: as a: a small compact engine b: internal combustion engine; especially : a gasoline engine c: a rotating machine that transforms electrical energy into mechanical energy

From Encarta:
Engine

1. machine for powering equipment: a machine that converts an energy source into mechanical power or motion
a gasoline-powered engine

Motor

1. machine that creates motion: a machine that converts energy into motion and can be used as a power source, e.g. to drive another machine or to move a vehicle

2. automotive engine: the engine of a car or other self-powered vehicle

I would agree that "Motor" has a broader meaning, but technically, an engine is still a type of motor. It's just a more specific term.

[fatterman]

now that is funny!!

[Mr.Crowley]

ok..but why is a motorcycle called a motorcycle???


just pouring gas onto a fire..

[Pacfanweb]

Originally Posted by Mr.Crowley

ok..but why is a motorcycle called a motorcycle???


just pouring gas onto a fire..

Or why is a steam engine an engine?

[JeepHammer]

Originally Posted by Mr.Crowley

ok..but why is a motorcycle called a motorcycle???

Maybe you should NOT pick on a member of the early steam engine club next time, or someone that is into historic and classic vehicles...

ANSWER.
Because the first versions of motorcycles were ELECTRIC an made of wood to boot....
They had electric 'Motors', so the term 'Motor Cycle' would have been correct when it was coined...

The French, as inventors of the 'Motor Cycle, even got that one right!
Makes me ashamed that Americans can't do the same...
-------------------

Calm down there, 'Pacfanweb', you are going to pop a blood vessel!
This is America, you are allowed to believe ANY THING you want to!
------------

The first versions of 'Automobiles' were electric also.
Patent records show electric 'MOTORS' being used 35 years before the first carbureted 'Internal Combustion Engine' was even on the drawing board!
Every other kind of 'Internal Combustion Engine' was a 'Total Loss' fuel delivery system.
That meant once you turned the fuel on and got it started, since there was no way to control the fuel or ignition, you were in for the ride of your life, as fast as the engine could turn, until it ran out of fuel...

I'm sure the term 'Motor' was coined, again by the French, in reference to the electric motor driven cars and stuck as common usage.

Battery technology being what it was, the electric car didn't catch on and was just a novelty, like all cars were until the Ford Model T.
---------------------

'Internal Combustion Engines' as we know them did NOT predate cars.

There were a few 'Novelty' internal combustion engines on washing machines and the like, and some cars had involved, trouble prone internal combustion engines, but they burned alcohol or kerosene...
BUT,
Gasoline internal combustion engines were developed specifically for automobiles.

(Seems coal fired boilers weren't so economical to run after all!
And explosive to boot!)

Henry Ford's orignal Model 'T' engine, the first successful internal combustion engine design in this country, and was designed to burn grain alcohol.
He was later paid by big oil to manufacture engines that would run off gasoline so they had a market for their 'Waste' product...
Since gasoline is a waste product when making kerosene, and virtually every one used kerosene lamps until well after WW I, there was a lot of 'Waste' gasoline...

So were Rudolph Diesel's orignal engines.
Rudolph Diesel designed his engines to run on peanut oil, which at the time was a cheap waste product.

Most internal combustion engine farm equipment burned kerosene, including the orignal IH Farmalls, the first, and most successful, internal combustion engine tractor design of all time.
That design is still used to this day, just bigger...
IH Farmalls used to start on alcohol or gasoline, then when warmed up, switched over to kerosene, or they ran on Propane, another 'Waste' by-product of making kerosene.

Before Kerosene and alcohol engines, there were very large, placement internal combustion engines that burned stuff like Paraffin vapor.
One had to heat the paraffin pan until the paraffin boiled, and released combustible vapors,
Then you had to turn a huge flywheel until the compression ignition finally started.

These were HUGE engines, so they didn't fit too well in 'Cars'...

It wasn't until an abundance of cheap oil was discovered in Texas and Oklahoma until gasoline made the scene in any substantial way, and it was marketed because it was a waste product of producing kerosene for lamp oil, and instead of pumping it back into the ground, the oil companies sold it...

The term 'Steam Engine' is also a bastardized misnomer.
It should be 'Steam Locomotive' for the power unit of a train.
Again, common use references used in a technical application (this conversation) are inappropriate.

A steam 'Engine' was a steam boiler, hooked to a piston power unit, that ran a winch or other rotary device.
The actual ROTARY DEVICE was the 'Motor', and that would have been accurate, since it would have been powered by pressure, and been self starting when the steam valve was turned.

They were also called 'Donkey Engines' but I never saw a donkey running one! Maybe that should be in Websters!

We use compressed air now, saves a lot of boiler explosions on equipment that is 100 or 150 years old...

Horses brought us into the 1800's at about 6 miles an hour.
Wood and coal boilers brought us into the 1900's at about 60 miles per hour,
Jet engines brought us into the 2000's at 600 miles per hour,
I wish I could know what the 'Average Joe' can travel when we exit this century!
----------------------------

I really don't care what any of you want to believe...
This is America, and you are allowed to believe anything you can come up with!

Facts is facts.
I'm just stating facts.
Learn. Don't Learn. I'm going to sleep just fine either way.

If you want to dispute the facts, take it up with historians.

And since SAE is the 'Be All and End All' of everything automotive (and indeed industrial) I'll take their word over anything I read on the internet or in a general usage dictionary...
If you want to dispute any of their findings, I suggest you take that up with them.
http://www.sae.org/servlets/index
It only takes about 12 years and an engineering degree to become a master tech, then I'm sure they will take you seriously...

[Mr.Crowley]

Originally Posted by JeepHammer

Maybe you should NOT pick on a member of the early steam engine club next time, or someone that is into historic and classic vehicles...

.

I'm not picking on anyone..I'm just making light of the discusion..

if everyone used the proper terms all the time there would be no use in dictionarys or what ever..I know that an engine is an engine and a motor is a motor..But do I punish my self if I happen to slip up and call an engine a motor..No,cuz who ever I'm talking to at the time,its the least of there concerns..The sky isnt going to fall if I,You,or the board here uses an improper term,only by semantics ''I think thats the word I wanna use''

In jersey Here We sometimes call Tomatoes, Hot house's..Why?Cuz there raised in grean houses..There red,round,and taste like a tomatoe,so they must be a tomatoe...

[Pacfanweb]

*sigh*
Link

Evolution of the Internal-Combustion Engine
The first person to experiment with an internal-combustion engine was the Dutch physicist Christian Huygens, about 1680. But no effective gasoline-powered engine was developed until 1859, when the French engineer J. J. Étienne Lenoir built a double-acting, spark-ignition engine that could be operated continuously. In 1862 Alphonse Beau de Rochas, a French scientist, patented but did not build a four-stroke engine; sixteen years later, when Nikolaus A. Otto built a successful four-stroke engine, it became known as the “Otto cycle.” The first successful two-stroke engine was completed in the same year by Sir Dougald Clerk, in a form which (simplified somewhat by Joseph Day in 1891) remains in use today. George Brayton, an American engineer, had developed a two-stroke kerosene engine in 1873, but it was too large and too slow to be commercially successful.

Now when was the first car invented? Were there cars in 1859?

Obviously, this all happened well before anyone had these engines in a car, so the internal combustion engine was NOT invented for use in cars. Refined, reduced in size...yes. Invented, no. ICE's were in use before cars were around.
But we were talking about the terms "engine" and "motor".....not actual internal combustion engines, or any other type. And those terms were around long before the automobile. Was that engine in bold above "like the ones we know today"? Not exactly, but it WAS an internal combustion engine by any definition of the term, and was NOT developed for an automobile, which didn't exist yet. And last time I checked, the English language, (which is still spoken mostly correctly in the USA, not so much in Great Britain) was around long before the internal combustion engine, the automobile, and certainly the SAE.
Yes, I understand the difference between the terms, but since we were getting so technical with this term, the answer is, an engine is also a type of motor. That is THE fact.

[JeepHammer]

Like I said, call them 'Oatmeal' for all I care, but before you jump on someone for using correct terminology...

There were 'Auto Carriages' in Europe in the very early 1800. Before Fulton perfected the steam piston for the steam boat.

The first one I remember seeing pictures of was an electric car from 1802 or 1803 in France.

Benjamin Franklin wrote about 'Electrified Velocipedes' in the late 1700's
These were described as "Two and Three wheel contraptions that delight onlookers".
And as any Ben Franklin fan can tell you, the French were enamored with electricity, and still are to some extent.
They considered Ben Franklin to be a national hero because of his understanding of electricity.

This is your 'quote' but since you didn't reference it, I have no idea of it's authenticity...
(I don't believe anything that comes from web sources anyway)

"But no effective gasoline-powered engine was developed until 1859, when the French engineer J. J. Étienne Lenoir built a double-acting, spark-ignition engine that could be operated continuously."

The engine you post about took 6 hours to go three miles, and didn't use gasoline as a fuel.

Now, how could a placement engine, that had no throttle control, be used in a 'Car'?

You also 'Conveniently Forgot' to mention the first 200 years of 'Internal Combustion Engines' were mostly gunpowder charges that could only fire once, since there was no reliable way to 'Reload' the chamber...

Like I said, and most Experts in the automotive field will tell you, the first Commercially viable automobile engine was produced by Henry Ford for the Model 'T'.

Like I said before, there were constant velocity engines, for placement work, and there were a few 'Novelty' engines that were entirely too complicated and hard to manufacture before the Ford/Model 'T' engine,...

So, like I said, you can believe what ever you like.
Call them 'Oatmeal' or 'Fred' or whatever you like...
Most of the time we will be able to figure out what you are talking about...
Just don't try and sell it as 'Fact'...

[Pacfanweb]

1. I "conveniently forgot" nothing. What you claimed I "forgot" is irrelevant to the discussion.

2. Try re-reading that quote in bold in your post...that WAS a gasoline engine. Let's try it again:
[quote] "But no effective gasoline-powered engine was developed until 1859, when the French engineer J. J. Étienne Lenoir built a double-acting, spark-ignition engine that could be operated continuously."
See the bold part? That means the following description was of a gasoline powered engine.

3. It's also irrelevant how much power those old engines could make, or how far they would go. Things progress with time. Doesn't mean the older stuff never happened or doesn't "count".

4. I wouldn't argue at all that Henry Ford certainly did make the first viable car. I don't think anyone would, and that's also an irrelevant point to the original topic, which was.......

5. Whether a "Motor" and an "Engine" are the same thing. And they are. An Engine is technically a type of Motor. You can get off on tangents about who invented and patented what, which you already have, and who decides what term fits what, but the fact of the matter is, if you REALLY want to get technical about the meaning of a WORD......an Engine is a type of Motor. <--That's a period right there.
I understand that the words have sort of evolved over the years to the point where the word Engine usually means a gas powered engine, and Motor is more of an electrical part, and that's all well and good. Lots of words have evolved over the years.
The British still refer to all Americans as Yanks, from the word Yankee....but if you're actually in America, you better not come down South and call us that. Japanese are Asians, but they are still Japanese. Etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

But I will bet dollars to doughnuts that if you went back to the 1700's literature and read the papers about these engines we are discussing, you'll find more than a few instances where they are called MOTORS. You know, like....oh, General MOTORS. Ford MOTOR Company. Toyota MOTOR Company. American MOTOR Corporation.
Etc, etc. Those companies don't have MOTOR in their name because they all started off making electric motors.
Automobiles weren't referred to in the old days as "Motor Cars" because they were electric.
It's because that was one of the original meanings of the word. English > Engineering specifics

6. Oh, and Merry Christmas!

[Rollbar]

I'm glad the HEI/wiring problem question was answered.

[ego99]

I think everyone needs a laugh. If my pictures actually post you will see why a smart buyer(not me) will make sure there is no mud on the frame when inspecting a vehicle to purchase (come to think of it that is a lame excuse). Keep in mind I ONLY removed the top two bolts of the bracket that are not in the picture and the rest fell by itself. I guess the PO thought a hack weld job would hold the bracket on the frame after he stripped the bottom bolts. Hopefully this will lighten the mood, the only thing I can think of that was funnier was my wife and I removing my new ax 15 out of the back of her civic tonight.

[Mr.Crowley]

nice..My bracket split in two on the test drive in the yard with the new locker in the front..First turn whent fine,second SHE BANG...no more steering..

start soaking those bolts top and bottom with PB blaster..Best to buy a few cans as with a cj its needed on a regular basis..Let sit a few days and spray them down every chance ya get..Get inside the frame too..Do this for a few days,heat them with a torch and clamp on a pair of vice grips and work them back and forth...If you have a welder,after a few days of the PB treatment,weld on a nut on the end of the bolt..The heat from the welding is some times enough to break them loose of the rusts evil grip..