L2`s to add a bit of variety

[scrumpylurcher]

My 1944 2L2 that was re-built by Danny Williamson in 1999, hence the backwards configuration.

 

[MtB]

Very nice...!

 

Looks the right way around to me, with the starter motor at the front. But then again it also looks as though there are two flywheels, and a possibly a transverse starter handle arrangement?

 

Look a lot more interesting than a LW. What are the main differences?

 

Be gentle, I know nothing about Gardners

 

Yet :-)

 

Mike

[scrumpylurcher]

Flywheel is to the right of the picture, against the bulkhead. The section to the left by the gearbox is a belt guard. So in fact the gearbox is located to the front of the engine. Danny, who is a L2 specialist, seems to build them this way. I have never worked out why but the flywheels on the L2`s are heavier than the LW, so it may be for weight distribution. The set up is inconvenient if a fan belt breaks, it requires the gearbox out but Danny tapes a spare set of belts to the bulkhead, so the first failure is not a problem.

LW reputedley stands for light weight, but a lot of the parts are not interchangable. Whereas LW engines still seem relatively easy (although expensive) to obtain the 2L series engines are now somewhat rare

[MtB]

Flywheel is to the right of the picture, against the bulkhead. The section to the left by the gearbox is a belt guard. So in fact the gearbox is located to the front of the engine. Danny, who is a L2 specialist, seems to build them this way. I have never worked out why but the flywheels on the L2`s are heavier than the LW, so it may be for weight distribution. The set up is inconvenient if a fan belt breaks, it requires the gearbox out but Danny tapes a spare set of belts to the bulkhead, so the first failure is not a problem.

LW reputedley stands for light weight, but a lot of the parts are not interchangable. Whereas LW engines still seem relatively easy (although expensive) to obtain the 2L series engines are now somewhat rare

 

Hmmm I see.

 

Alternator belt seems unnecessarily complicated when a belt around the flywheel works just as well.

 

When I was investigating getting a 2LW it became clear there are two versions, alloy crankcase and cast iron crankcase. The latter is substantially heavier, obviously! The enclosed flywheel on a LW detracts from the 'vintage-look-and-feel' for me though.

 

There was a very nice looking tug with a 2L2 for sale on apollo duck for ages when I was looking for a vintage engine. I was very tempted to buy it but I'd have had to sell my boat to fund it, and the Kelvin came along at the same time and I bought that instead... I still like the idea of a 2L2 though....

 

Mike

[Timleech]

Very nice...!

 

Looks the right way around to me, with the starter motor at the front. But then again it also looks as though there are two flywheels, and a possibly a transverse starter handle arrangement?

 

Look a lot more interesting than a LW. What are the main differences?

 

Be gentle, I know nothing about Gardners

 

Yet :-)

 

Mike

 

The L2 was the original version of the design, intended for marine and stationary use.

When people started converting petrol engined waggons to diesel with L2 engines, Garners spotted there was a market for something designed for that job and redesigned it in a LightWeight version (as scrumpy says), using the same combustion arrangements, same piston and same bore & stroke but most other parts are specific to one or the other.

L2 engines have individual heads, LW have them in twos and threes. L2 has crankcase doors and a two-piece crankcase.

The L2 more or less finished production around the end of WWII, apart from the 1L2 which had a specialised market.

 

Edit to add - the L2 was usually limited to 1200rpm, whereas the LW went up to 1700 (depending on application).

 

Tim

Edited June 1, 2011 by Timleech

[Old Son]

Very nice looking engine. A joy to behold.

[steamraiser2]

Not all LWs have enclosed flywheels. A lot of industrial or locomotive LWs are open heavy fly wheeled units which are way too large for an automotive bell housing. Its ok to fit the gearbox, particularly a PRM, at the "wrong end". We tend to mount the gearboxes at the flywheel end so that we can fit a shaft adapter to take a large taper lock pulley on the front to drive alternators and hydraulic pumps etc. The marinised automotive engines are shorter of course as the gearbox is closely coupled. They heavy industrial fly wheeled engines tend to have a better tick over of course.

 

The Kromhout LS variant of the LW is effectively an L2 bottom with an LW top fitted. Gorgeous engines indeed!

[LEO]

Hi,

 

Great picture of the engine, I was interested in the reverse fitting of the gearbox/flywheel.

 

Discussions with an experienced Engineer (who is a real Gardner 'fan' and user) indicated that he was not happy with this arrangement - his feelings were that if the engine stopped suddenly (say due to a badly fouled prop) the inertia shock could damage the crankshaft.

 

This, coupled with the problems if a fan belt has to be changed suggests reverse fitting may not be a good idea.

 

Leo.

[steamraiser2]

Its not ideal but there are lots set up like that. Its certainly a lot neater than some of the horrible gearbox mounted on a lump of plate set ups that a lot of Lister JP's get. The Dutch fit a lot of engines like that and I'm always struck at how long the installation is. While some may not like the automotive bellhousing set up it does provide for a neat and short installation.

[Timleech]

Its not ideal but there are lots set up like that. Its certainly a lot neater than some of the horrible gearbox mounted on a lump of plate set ups that a lot of Lister JP's get. The Dutch fit a lot of engines like that and I'm always struck at how long the installation is. While some may not like the automotive bellhousing set up it does provide for a neat and short installation.

 

Isn't it just a neater version of the same thing? The box must be in some way 'mounted on a lump of plate?

I don't understand the attraction of mounting the gearbox on the 'wrong' end. Yes it apparently works OK, but Gardners weren't AFAIK designed to take full power drive from the 'front', why do people do it? There must be a reason, I'm curious to know what it is.

The Dutch seem to have stuck with independent boxes for a long time, so I suppose it's 'traditional' for them to continue that way

Marine L2s were of course produced with independent boxes (on the flywheel end) as well as with the enclosed flywheel Unit Construction (2UC gearbox)arrangement.

I once had a 2L2 with an independent Gleniffer gearbox, which looked as though it had been an original factory fitment.

 

Tim

Edited June 2, 2011 by Timleech

[by'eck]

Its not ideal but there are lots set up like that. Its certainly a lot neater than some of the horrible gearbox mounted on a lump of plate set ups that a lot of Lister JP's get. The Dutch fit a lot of engines like that and I'm always struck at how long the installation is. While some may not like the automotive bellhousing set up it does provide for a neat and short installation

 

Isn't it just a neater version of the same thing? The box must be in some way 'mounted on a lump of plate?

 

 

The reference as I understood it, was for gearbox's mounted for example on a separate plate fixed to engine support rails. This rather than close coupled with adapter housing if necessary.

 

As you imply though, I'm equally at a loss as to why people do this when not necessary.

 

As a footnote I've seen a JP2(M?) with gearbox at front (fuel pump) end & flywheel at the back. Sort of double wrong way around installation.

Edited June 3, 2011 by richardhula

[steamraiser2]

Back in my RNR days we had a couple of motor boats with 2L2s installed. The gearboxes were both mounted at the "wrong" end. As the navy doesn't tend to cobble things up they would,most likely,have been supplied like that. I also fixed a BMC Captain in a crabbing boat that had the winch hydraulic pump at the bell housing end and a Newage gearbox driven through a cardan shaft at the crank pulley end. Worked ok looked dreadful. To be fair it worked for years like that. It just wasn't "right" somehow.

[dove]

Back in my RNR days we had a couple of motor boats with 2L2s installed. The gearboxes were both mounted at the "wrong" end. As the navy doesn't tend to cobble things up they would,most likely,have been supplied like that.

 

 

As supplied by Gardner

 

 

Andrew

[Timleech]

As supplied by Gardner

 

 

Andrew

 

I had a 3L2 like that, & the 2L2 I referred to with the Gleniffer box was done the same way.

 

Tim

[MtB]

My 1944 2L2 that was re-built by Danny Williamson in 1999, hence the backwards configuration.

 

And another question crosses my mind....

 

Which way do L2s rotate? Is the backwards configuration done so a 'standard' RH-rotating blade can be used? Or does backwards configuration demand a LH blade?

 

Mike

[Timleech]

And another question crosses my mind....

 

Which way do L2s rotate? Is the backwards configuration done so a 'standard' RH-rotating blade can be used? Or does backwards configuration demand a LH blade?

 

Mike

 

Normal L2 rotation with reduction gearing on the flywheel end requires a LH blade.

 

Tim

[larkshall]

Nice photo, but where is the egr plumbing, and for that matter, no turbo?

[steamraiser2]

Anyone know of a 3L2 cylinder block? Got one that is poorly bad sick

[Timleech]

Anyone know of a 3L2 cylinder block? Got one that is poorly bad sick

 

There was a 3L2 with broken crankcase sold on ebay a couple of weeks ago.

If the buyer didn't realise beforehand how fundamental the crankcase casting is, they might be open to a deal

 

Tim

[steamraiser2]

Any idea who it was?

[Timleech]

Any idea who it was?

 

Not a clue, it's disappeared from my ebay page.

 

Tim

 

Found it, ebay item 261061790373

 

 

Both front mounting feet broken off the lower crankcase.

 

Tim

Edited August 14, 2012 by Timleech

[steamraiser2]

Ta muchly