Valentine diesels

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

I am trying to find out which GMC diesels were used in Valentine tanks..one source suggested it was a model 6004...was it a twin 6-71 Detroit-Diesel pair or a Cleveland Diesel unit please?

[cantankrs]

Originally Posted by David_Hayward

I am trying to find out which GMC diesels were used in Valentine tanks..one source suggested it was a model 6004...was it a twin 6-71 Detroit-Diesel pair or a Cleveland Diesel unit please?

David,

I own an AEC Valentine so not super familiar with the GM version. Definitely a single 6-71 inline two-stroke diesel (no room for two ). I'll have to check my manual to see if it mentions anything more specific. The only motors in Vals that I know of were the AEC Petrol 6 cyl, the AEC A190 diesel 6 cyl and then the GM6-71 (inline) 6 cylinder diesel (but the old style 6-71 which might be known as 6004). Some Lees and Grants and possibly Shermans had the 6046 twin 6-71 GM diesel powerpack.

http://www.mapleleafup.org/vehicles/cac/valentine.html says 6004

wwiiequipment mentions 6004 but I think the 'S Stroke' is meant to read 2 Stroke.

Regards

Alex

[John McGillivray]

I beleive that these are the Valentine diesels used in the Canadian built tanks.

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

I have a copy of the original Data Book covering the Valentine and other 'tank-type vehicles of Canadian Manufacture'. It lists the Valentine engine as being a single 'General Motors Two Cycle Diesel 6004 Special 6-71 Series Engine modified for tank use'. It doesn't say where they were manufactured, but David ought to be able to sort that out from his detailed research.

The twin 6-71 diesel powerpack was used in the M4A2 Sherman family but is not mentioned in this book because the tanks were of US manufacture, so I don't know its numeric designation.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball

It lists the Valentine engine as being a single 'General Motors Two Cycle Diesel 6004 Special 6-71 Series Engine modified for tank use'. It doesn't say where they were manufactured

These engines were manufactured by General Motors' Detroit Detroit Diesel Engine Divisionin Detroit, Mich., USA. Designed in the late 1930s, the GM Detroit Diesel 71 series was built in one, two, three, four, and six cylinder inline models. The 6-71 obviously was the six cylinder version.

I suspect "6004 Special" refers to a the configuration needed for it to fit in the Valentine, e.g. different oil pan, exhaust manifolds, engine mountings etc.

Hanno

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra

I suspect "6004 Special" refers to a the configuration needed for it to fit in the Valentine, e.g. different oil pan, exhaust manifolds, engine mountings etc.

Like the "6046 Twin Diesel" was the configuration as fitted in M3 and M4 series Medium Tanks: two 6-71 engines combined in a single power pack (also see Sherman M4A2 diesel engine designation).

H.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Thanks! You guys might like to know this snippet of info about the connection between GM Limited in Southampton and GM:

... An Admiralty file of 1940 relates to the testing of GM two-stroke diesel engines by the Admiralty that GM Limited were proposing. Limited submitted a marine version of the three-cylinder Detroit-Diesel 3-71 design to the Admiralty for type tests. However the success of the trials came to the attention of the War Office post-Dunkirk as there was concern by July 1940 to ensure an uninterrupted supply of power units for the Vickers ‘Valentine’ Infantry Tank Mk. IIIA, orders for which had been placed in Canada. The Valentine was a 1938 design that initially used AEC petrol or diesel engines. The W.O. became interested in the Detroit-Diesel design in its six-cylinder form as an alternative power unit and so Limited worked with the Detroit Technical Staff in procuring a 6-71 engine which was then redesigned for the tank and to be interchangeable with British power units. Field tests carried on by the W.O. and presumably Ministry of Supply in collaboration with GM Overseas Operations and Limited resulted in the first application of GM Diesel engines to tank usage, as the Model 6-71S. This was later superseded by the more powerful 6-71A. The alterations and design called for the changing of the fuel, water and exhaust connections, mounting brackets and clutch and gear controls. The MofS forwarded complete drawings of the modifications to GM Overseas Operations in New York in order to determine whether GM would supply the 6-71 in quantity. Negotiations then took place over five months between GMOO, the Detroit-Diesel Division, Canadian Pacific Railroad who had been commissioned to build the Canadian Valentines, and British officials. This culminated in an initial order from the British Purchasing Commission on 27th September 1940 for 250 engines. The GMC 6004 diesels were used it seems in production Mks IV, V, VII-XI.

It seems that twin 6-71s were fitted in the M3A3 (Lee IV/Lee V) as well but none would have come here.

[Lynn Eades]

I dont know what it means, but the 6-71 as used in the Mk4 and mk5 Valentine is/was refferred to as a "6-71 low head". (at least here in N.Z.)
For those that are interested and dont already know, Detroit Diesels have been built in many configurations. the first digit refers to the number of cylinders, and the following 2 digits refer to the cubic capacity of the cylinder in cubic inches.
They were built in 3 sizes (that I know of) 53cu.in., 71cu.in., or 92 cu.in. So the 6 -71 was a 6 cylinder (in inline motor with a swept volume of 71 cubic inches per cylinder. In the case of the "V" motors, the "v" followed the number of cylinders. So for example, an engine could be an "8V92" or a "6V53".

[Paul Singleton]

Here is some interesting history with a couple of photographs from the war!

http://www.detroitdiesel.com/about/history.aspx

[Chris Camfield]

Hello,

I know I'm resurrecting an old thread (is that considered bad, here?) but I have some related questions/historical info.

I'm not sure of the whole sequence of events - did Canadians play a part in locating the 6-71 as a possible replacement engine for the Valentine? Or not?

Anyway I was just looking at a file I copied from LAC a while back and found this which might be of interest:


"The Canadian model [of Valentine] will be provided with a G.M.C. two-stroke C-I engine, the experimental development of which was carried out at the A.E.C. works under the supervision of the Directorate. After very satisfactory trials, a pilot vehicle with the G.M.C. engine was despatched to Canada towards the end of the year." - Directorate of Tank Design, First Progress Report, covering to Dec 31, 1940


"Some successful experimental trials have been completed with the C.I. engine adjusted to provide increased power and speed. With an output of 150 b.h.p at 2,000 r.p.m., reliability and cooling have not been adversely affected, and a market improvement in average speed across country has been obtained. The General Staff consented to trials in the Service, the results of which are awaited."

The first production G.M.C. two-stroke C.I. engine has reached this country and is being installed in a tank. In view of the successful trials referred to in the preceding paragraph, the second pilot engine is also being installed in a tank for trials at its maximum rating of 165 b.h.p. at 2,000 r.p.m. to ascertain reliability under these conditions."
- Directorate of Tank Design, 2nd Progress Report, covering to March 31, 1941


What I'm trying to get straight in my head is designations for the engine in the Valentine and the Valentine SP aka Archer and what were actually the differences between them.

Despite the above, according to Dick Taylor's book Into the Vally, all marks of Valentine up until late Mk IXs had the engine tuned to output just 138 BHP. And I've seen this first version referred to as a 6-71S which was replaced with a 6-71A (outputting 165 BHP). And in the Archer it was a 6-71M and it's also referred to as a Type 6062. Somehow, GMC (I presume) got it to produce 192 BHP but how they did it I have no idea.

S for Special makes as much sense as anything else... A? M? I haven't a clue.

[Lynn Eades]

I can't help you there Chris, but for the record:
The TANK INFANTRY MARK III* was powered by the AEC A.190 Comet Mark III* engine.
This tank appears to be an all British development and I am confused about the "*".
I thought all things suffixed by the "*" were Canadian (as in Carriers and Weaponry)
I am ready to be enlightened......

Wartime New Zealand had Mk IIs, MkIIIs and MkVs. The first two were AEC powered, and the MkV being powered by the said 6-71 Jimmies. Numbers totaled about 266 Valentines inclusive of the 11 bridge layers.

Now back to your questions Chris. (I'm waiting for Andrew's input)

[David Herbert]

Lynn,
The addition of a star to a WW2 British vehicle designation just indicates that it is a slightly different version of that vehicle, and in almost any way ! They really did get themselves into a bit of a mess with these designations so don't look for patterns, there aren't any !

The GM two stroke diesels in Valentines were, as mentioned above, of various different power outputs. These were standard variations available from GM from the start and basicly differed in the settings of the injectors and govenors. The M3 / M4 Medium tank twin 6-71 unit was the most powerfull available from the start but again was a standard variant, designed initially for generator and pump sets and even as quad sets. After the war these engines were offered with different cylinder liners with better gas flow and then four valve heads (all exhaust) and eventually with turbochargers as well as the superchargers. Finally they were killed off by emissions regulations.

It should be mentioned that the fitting of the GM engine instead of the AEC engine in the Valentine resulted in almost the entire instalation being redesigned, including a new (much better) gearbox. It was never possible to swap engines into an existing tank as is hinted at by a reference above.

David

[Chris Camfield]

Hi Lynn,

Thanks for your reply!

I am not sure about the "*" designation. I don't think it necessarily means Canadian - maybe it depends on the context? For instance, among unproduced British tanks were the TOG vehicles - designed by the men who designedthe tanks in WW1, hence The Old Gang or The Old Group - and there was a TOG 2 model and TOG 2* which different armament.

[Chris Camfield]

David, thanks for your reply also! I'm half asleep here.

Do you know what effects there were by changing the engine to produce more horsepower? Did it consume (proportionately?) more fuel?

[David Herbert]

Hi Chris,

Short answer is yes ! The different power outputs of these engines was done by effectively just opening the throttle more. More fuel in made more power and of course used more fuel.
This will have reduced the range but the extra mobility was well worth it. Remember that the Valentine was originally designed as an infantry tank and so did not need great range or speed (or firepower). Quite quickly it became necessary to improve the firepower and it then began to be used as a more general purpose tank but it was never going to be one to do long distances or high speeds so range was not too critical.

David

[Chris Camfield]

Brilliant, thank you!

[Chris Camfield]

Hmm, so I thought to check what information I have on the Archer vs Valentine engines.

According to the specs in the handbooks:

Valentine IX: "S" type, 130 BHP at 1850 RPM
"A" type, 165 at 1850
Fuel consumption(road): 2.5 MPG

Valentine X: 6-71A, 165 BHP, 2.5 MPG

Archer: 6-71M, 192 BHP at 1900 RPM, 2.9 MPG

More horsepower, and better fuel consumption. They must have done something to improve the engine, but I do not know what.

[David Herbert]

Remember that fuel consumption testing in those days was not the science that it is now. The tank was simply driven around a course and the fuel used measured. Speeds and rates of acceleration were left up to the driver. No attempt was made to allow for temperature or the condition of the course, though both would be recorded. An Archer is roughly the same weight as a Valentine but with the extra power is vastly nicer to drive and so the driver can be in the optimum gear much more easily and will need to change down less for heavy going. That in itself will make a significant improvement in consumption.

As I said the difference between the different versions of the WW2 6-71s is basicly that the more powerfull ones get more fuel and are allowed to rev harder.

David

[Chris Camfield]

Ah, interesting point, thanks David.

Chris

[Andrew Rowe]

When I have rebuilt Valentines, with the 671, you can indeed upgrade the injectors to the later "N" - series to increase the horsepower to 190 to 200.
This still uses the original 6004 engine block and 2-valve head and original governor, but you also do a change of the piston liners to the latter "slotted" version with a 17:1 compression ratio.
I would also state that it is entirely possible without too much problem to change out an AEC engine for a 671. The front engine and gearbox mount holes are identical, the only real difference in the engine compartment is the 2-lugs welded on the side for the oil cooler in front of the radiators and the main water pipe to the engine water pump is on a different side. Steering clutches and everything else will just line up.
There would be a couple of extra throttle linkage brackets to change and the gearbox gate shifter housing would have to be changed over as well, but all controls front to back remain the same, Cheers Andrew.

[John Mackie]

GM also made a 6/110 slightly bigger than a 6/71. they also made engines in sizes 149, 567, 645 and 710 mostly in V series up to 20 cylanders, and most likley other sizes in between.