burlington crank

[M2M]

Originally Posted by BRENT in 10-uh-C

It is now only Bill Dubats out of Minnesota making a counterweighted crankshaft , --and Scat crank. Bill makes a great product however it is a ROI deal where I doubt he will make many more simply because of the economics. Feel free to do your homework about what I am saying!
As for other comments below yours above

Brent, thanks for your reply. I believe Bill stopped making cranks quite a while ago so as I said SCAT is only player for T cranks. Not good for consumers. So there is room for Burlington to enter that game; perhaps you can mention it when you talk to them.

By the way, this is what Bill had to say about closing down and SCAT cranks:

By Bill Dubats on Sunday, July 07, 2013 - 05:54 pm:I reluctantly closed my “Made in USA” crankshaft business over a year ago. I never heard of any breakage, and never grew tired of getting calls saying this crank “made the smoothest running T engine I have ever driven”. There were some negative and incorrect postings such as “a cast iron piece is likely to break…” No sense in trying to correct all the ignorance in the world, but heat treated ductile iron is very unlike cast grey iron in strength, E Modulus and toughness.
With the SCAT crank available, there was no need to continue my less cost efficient manufacturing plan. We did spectrometer testing on an early SCAT and found it was NOT the 4340 alloy claimed, but much closer to 4140. The Chinese only cut corners on one ingredient – the most expensive one, nickel. It has about ½ the amount to make it 4340, but that is moot, because to be stronger and tougher, 4340 would require a complex double heat treat process. As used, 4130 might have been a better material, less prone to stress hardening and embrittlment.
We also noted that the SCAT steel was the “dirtiest” steel I have ever seen. (sulfur and prosperous are “dirt”” in alloy steel.). Also did a hi-def. X ray of a new SCAT, and found it laced with tiny random spider web like inclusions. A metallurgist friend identified them as “sulfur strings” caused by excessive amorphous sulfur in a forging. Even so, and despite their high weight and over damping of cylinders 1 & 2, SCAT cranks seem to be working out OK.

Bill doesn't seem to be much of a fan of SCAT quality does he? Nor does he seem happy to have been taken down by the Chinese.
Bill's quote is from:
http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages...4134183http://


Have you contacted Mr. Doleshal to get his side of the story? No, I'm guessing. So why is SCAT's version of events automatically the "true story", as you put it? Without contacting Mr. Doleshal we/you cannot make a judgement.

I've met Bill Barth, he's a great guy. Friendly and goes out of his way to help others. He's done a lot for the Model T hobby.

As for Mr. Lieb, he should perhaps learn some common courtesy and reply to emails people send him.

That's all I'm going to say on the matter.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts when you have a SCAT and new Burlington side by side. If you could do the type of analysis that Bill Dubats carried out that would be also great. The "jewelry-like" finish (as you put it) of the SCAT is great but what's inside? I don't agree with you on everything but it's always interesting to hear your take on things.

Merry Christmas!