Bearing Packs

[Twentyover]

I realize I drifted away from performance cars for a few years, and perhaps I missed the memo, so I guess I'll ask the question that's been kind of puzzling me for a while.

I understand the attractiveness of bearing packs to automotive OEMs,they're easier to automate assembly (and improve consistency of assembly) and may speed production, but beyond improved manufacturability, what advantage does an upright with a bearing pack give over an upright with a spindle and separable hub/bearings? I do recognize there are applications where they may permit unique designs (I do like the Alston floater design using a bearing pack) Any functional improvement over a properly assembled conventional upright/spindle?

Or are people using them because they're the new deal?

[Coburn_Performance]

I realize I drifted away from performance cars for a few years, and perhaps I missed the memo, so I guess I'll ask the question that's been kind of puzzling me for a while.

I understand the attractiveness of bearing packs to automotive OEMs,they're easier to automate assembly (and improve consistency of assembly) and may speed production, but beyond improved manufacturability, what advantage does an upright with a bearing pack give over an upright with a spindle and separable hub/bearings? I do recognize there are applications where they may permit unique designs (I do like the Alston floater design using a bearing pack) Any functional improvement over a properly assembled conventional upright/spindle?

Or are people using them because they're the new deal?


As far as I know, the reason for using them is that they allow crazy things like all aluminum suspensions (uprights especially) keeping unsprung weight down. I think they also offer some gains for the service industry as the parts are disposable.

[Twentyover]

As, for example LHK is the latest to use an aluminum upright with a steel spindle, I'm not buying it being required for aluminum suspension uprights. I'm not hearing any reason they're an improvement over a regular bearing.

Not trying to be a smart a** here, but I'm curious the real advantage in aftermarket parts

[dontlifttoshift]

No maintenence.....until they wear out.

As you stated, in an OEM application it makes perfect sense. In my mind I will take tapered bearings and repack them once in a while over a ball bearing every time.

[marolf101x]

I think the big deal for the OE's is to have a complete "package" that includes the bearings, ABS parts, wheel flange, and studs that is easily attached on the assembly line.

[Twentyover]

Yeah, I get why the OEM's are embracing them, I'm trying to get my head around what performance advantage the aftermarket sees in them, or if they're more a 'me too' feature.

[bret]

This is a great question. I have no answer either.

[68sixspeed]

personally I'm not a fan of the sealed ball bearings... throw slicks on a corvette and you will start going through them. SKF makes an upgraded one but they still wear out like anything else and are not as serviceable as a taper bearing. From an engineering standpoint they also offer much less contact area but that may also give a lower rolling resistance which is good for auto mfg's mpg etc.

[CarlC]

There are multiple advantages and disadvantages to the integrated hub design. The type most here are familiar with is from the C6, known commonly as a Hub3. It has the ball bearing raceways in the forgings vs. earlier hub types, plus mounting provisions (flanges), wheel studs, tone ring and sensor, etc. Basically, bolt it on, plug in the ABS wiring, and it's done.

Ball bearings have an advantage in that they can be easily preloaded via fixed positioning (hard spacing, no springs.) By applying a preload, hence creating a negative clearance condition, the effective stiffness of the rotating system increases. For a fixed brake caliper car, preloading helps reduce piston knockback. Other advantages for Hub3/prelaoded design include better steering response, quieter operation, less friction, ease of maintenance, and many of the others mentioned earlier.

The primary drawback of the ball bearing design is that they do not have a high-load capacity. They are susceptible to shock loading damage that can occur during track days, big pot holes, curbs, etc. An example might be that during a track day a Hub3 equipped car takes a high-speed apex a bit early and dips the front wheel over the curbing. The tire hits the sharp backside of the curb as it comes back on-track. This may appear to the driver as being a minor incident, but if seen by an outside observer it's pretty violent. The damage is done but the car could act totally normal for the rest of the day. However, several months later the ball-spaced raceway brinnells have turned to spalls, the hub makes a bunch of noise, and it's time to replace it. The real cause of the damage may be long forgotten by that time.

Tapered roller bearings have a much higher load capacity for their size compared to a ball type. The line contact of a TRB vs. the point contact of a BB creates a much larger loading surface area. However, it is from a practical standpoint not possible to put a negative clearance preload into a TRB arrangement. BB designs can better deal with thermal expansion vs. a TRB. Small thermal growth preload increases in a BB angular contact design can be handled buy the slight change in contact angle and pressure. They do not have nearly the axial stiffness that a TRB does. On the other hand, the TRB is so stiff axially that once a negative clearance condition occurs the bearing is very likely doomed. Hence, all TRB systems in what we deal with have a clearance specification.

The TRB clearance specifications mean that there may be more caliper piston knockback and steering clearance. They also require proper lubrication and preload adjustment. This may sound easy, but it is very common, even for "experienced" mechanics, to improperly lubricate, mount, and set the preload in a TRB design. Bolting on a new Hub3 is often less expensive overall since there is no machine shop needed, no lubrication, no preload adjustment, etc.

From an OE standpoint it's a no-brainer decision. 99.9% of Corvette owners never take their cars to the track. Fewer still ever push them hard enough to dip a wheel off-track. The Hub3 is a disposable and sacrifical part. Adding ceramic rolling elements will have no effect except to quickly and drastically reduce the weight of your wallet.

Another thing to consider with Hub units of any type (Hub1, Hub2, and Hub3) is that there is a huge Chinese aftermarket and counterfeit marketplace. Almost all of the chain stores carry these "Value" lines. Often it is very, very difficult to tell the difference visually. The good knockoffs may even have the major manufacturers/OE name on the part. Sometimes the only way we have found to determine if the part is fake is by the packaging. Yes, it has become so bad that the big bearing manufacturers have turned to halograms, packaging details, etc. to try and easily identify knockoffs. So, if one wants to be sure to get the OE part, turn to a trusted source and not just the lowest price on ebay.

[The GMR]

There are multiple advantages and disadvantages to the integrated hub design. The type most here are familiar with is from the C6, known commonly as a Hub3. It has the ball bearing raceways in the forgings vs. earlier hub types, plus mounting provisions (flanges), wheel studs, tone ring and sensor, etc. Basically, bolt it on, plug in the ABS wiring, and it's done.

Ball bearings have an advantage in that they can be easily preloaded via fixed positioning (hard spacing, no springs.) By applying a preload, hence creating a negative clearance condition, the effective stiffness of the rotating system increases. For a fixed brake caliper car, preloading helps reduce piston knockback. Other advantages for Hub3/prelaoded design include better steering response, quieter operation, less friction, ease of maintenance, and many of the others mentioned earlier.

The primary drawback of the ball bearing design is that they do not have a high-load capacity. They are susceptible to shock loading damage that can occur during track days, big pot holes, curbs, etc. An example might be that during a track day a Hub3 equipped car takes a high-speed apex a bit early and dips the front wheel over the curbing. The tire hits the sharp backside of the curb as it comes back on-track. This may appear to the driver as being a minor incident, but if seen by an outside observer it's pretty violent. The damage is done but the car could act totally normal for the rest of the day. However, several months later the ball-spaced raceway brinnells have turned to spalls, the hub makes a bunch of noise, and it's time to replace it. The real cause of the damage may be long forgotten by that time.

Tapered roller bearings have a much higher load capacity for their size compared to a ball type. The line contact of a TRB vs. the point contact of a BB creates a much larger loading surface area. However, it is from a practical standpoint not possible to put a negative clearance preload into a TRB arrangement. BB designs can better deal with thermal expansion vs. a TRB. Small thermal growth preload increases in a BB angular contact design can be handled buy the slight change in contact angle and pressure. They do not have nearly the axial stiffness that a TRB does. On the other hand, the TRB is so stiff axially that once a negative clearance condition occurs the bearing is very likely doomed. Hence, all TRB systems in what we deal with have a clearance specification.

The TRB clearance specifications mean that there may be more caliper piston knockback and steering clearance. They also require proper lubrication and preload adjustment. This may sound easy, but it is very common, even for "experienced" mechanics, to improperly lubricate, mount, and set the preload in a TRB design. Bolting on a new Hub3 is often less expensive overall since there is no machine shop needed, no lubrication, no preload adjustment, etc.

From an OE standpoint it's a no-brainer decision. 99.9% of Corvette owners never take their cars to the track. Fewer still ever push them hard enough to dip a wheel off-track. The Hub3 is a disposable and sacrifical part. Adding ceramic rolling elements will have no effect except to quickly and drastically reduce the weight of your wallet.

Another thing to consider with Hub units of any type (Hub1, Hub2, and Hub3) is that there is a huge Chinese aftermarket and counterfeit marketplace. Almost all of the chain stores carry these "Value" lines. Often it is very, very difficult to tell the difference visually. The good knockoffs may even have the major manufacturers/OE name on the part. Sometimes the only way we have found to determine if the part is fake is by the packaging. Yes, it has become so bad that the big bearing manufacturers have turned to halograms, packaging details, etc. to try and easily identify knockoffs. So, if one wants to be sure to get the OE part, turn to a trusted source and not just the lowest price on ebay.


Dont forget the two main issues of the unit-bearing... Microwelding and manufacturing tolerance.
Microwelding and heat are the #1 cause of premature hub unit failure, period. Sure the impact you are referring to is a factor, but only one of several. That impact you are talking about actually will have more to deal with the center-line of the wheel (where the vehicle weight is) in relation to the rollers in the hub and internal bearing spread (leverage on the rollers). I can go into depth, but I do not have time for that.

With manufacturing, well its a OEM part so its only so good. We machined specific tooling to take apart and put together these hubs and I constantly see up to 8-10 thousands difference in the bearing race width, so the factory pre-load is drastically inconsistent. Its a mas manufactured part and inexpensive so its hard to complain with that.

AS for the ceramics, your wrong. Ceramics will have NO microwelding and a reduction of up to 40% in operating temperature along with lowered rolling resistance. Properly installed ceramics and pre-loaded with internal shims the ceramics will work better then the stock steel rollers. The ceramics we use are so precise that they will literally "wear" the bearing races into a perfect circle, thus possibly requiring you to double check the pre-load after about 15 or so minutes of operation. Ceramics are expensive, but look at it like this. The balls we use will outlast the hubs so we can literally use the same balls in new hubs should they wear out past the point of shimming the pre-load we desire. The expensive part are the balls, but they last a lifetime (the quality ones, there are also cheap Chinese units on the market just like everything).

Carry on.
Jason

[The GMR]

I realize I drifted away from performance cars for a few years, and perhaps I missed the memo, so I guess I'll ask the question that's been kind of puzzling me for a while.

I understand the attractiveness of bearing packs to automotive OEMs,they're easier to automate assembly (and improve consistency of assembly) and may speed production, but beyond improved manufacturability, what advantage does an upright with a bearing pack give over an upright with a spindle and separable hub/bearings? I do recognize there are applications where they may permit unique designs (I do like the Alston floater design using a bearing pack) Any functional improvement over a properly assembled conventional upright/spindle?

Or are people using them because they're the new deal?


check this out, testing is in progress and we will officially release them soon.

http://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=38539

Jason

[Twentyover]

There are multiple advantages and disadvantages to the integrated hub design. The type most here are familiar with is from the C6, known commonly as a Hub3. It has the ball bearing raceways in the forgings vs. earlier hub types, plus mounting provisions (flanges), wheel studs, tone ring and sensor, etc. Basically, bolt it on, plug in the ABS wiring, and it's done.

Ball bearings have an advantage in that they can be easily preloaded via fixed positioning (hard spacing, no springs.) By applying a preload, hence creating a negative clearance condition, the effective stiffness of the rotating system increases. For a fixed brake caliper car, preloading helps reduce piston knockback. Other advantages for Hub3/prelaoded design include better steering response, quieter operation, less friction, ease of maintenance, and many of the others mentioned earlier.

The primary drawback of the ball bearing design is that they do not have a high-load capacity. They are susceptible to shock loading damage that can occur during track days, big pot holes, curbs, etc. An example might be that during a track day a Hub3 equipped car takes a high-speed apex a bit early and dips the front wheel over the curbing. The tire hits the sharp backside of the curb as it comes back on-track. This may appear to the driver as being a minor incident, but if seen by an outside observer it's pretty violent. The damage is done but the car could act totally normal for the rest of the day. However, several months later the ball-spaced raceway brinnells have turned to spalls, the hub makes a bunch of noise, and it's time to replace it. The real cause of the damage may be long forgotten by that time.

Tapered roller bearings have a much higher load capacity for their size compared to a ball type. The line contact of a TRB vs. the point contact of a BB creates a much larger loading surface area. However, it is from a practical standpoint not possible to put a negative clearance preload into a TRB arrangement. BB designs can better deal with thermal expansion vs. a TRB. Small thermal growth preload increases in a BB angular contact design can be handled buy the slight change in contact angle and pressure. They do not have nearly the axial stiffness that a TRB does. On the other hand, the TRB is so stiff axially that once a negative clearance condition occurs the bearing is very likely doomed. Hence, all TRB systems in what we deal with have a clearance specification.

The TRB clearance specifications mean that there may be more caliper piston knockback and steering clearance. They also require proper lubrication and preload adjustment. This may sound easy, but it is very common, even for "experienced" mechanics, to improperly lubricate, mount, and set the preload in a TRB design. Bolting on a new Hub3 is often less expensive overall since there is no machine shop needed, no lubrication, no preload adjustment, etc.

From an OE standpoint it's a no-brainer decision....

Should have qualified my request- I'm more interested as this applied to independent suspensions, less so solid axles, and also want to clarify I'm interested in performance improvement, not improved manufacturability of the bearing pack or subsequent assemblies

So the answer I get so far is the only significant performance advantages are elimination of pad knockback and improved steering response. To be honest Carl, I'm having trouble buying into the steering response argument- seems to me that the greater difference in distance between an inner and outer bearing in a conventional spindle, along with the greater contact area of a taper bearing, if adjusted correctly, would provide at least as precise of steering response. If you can provide a better argument or reference material I'd be interested in doing more reading.

Regarding TRB's on the MG a solid spacer is used between the inner and outer bearing races to adjust preload.You install the bearings, shim for clearance, lubricate, and torque the spindle nut to 70 ft-lb (that's correct,70 ft-lb, the clearance is provided by the shimmed spacer.) Takes the guesswork out of preload.

[CarlC]

When you say that the raceway widths are off by 0.008", what exactly is off by 0.008"?

Micro-welding occurs when the lubricant EHL (Elasto Hydrodynamic Layer) has been eliminated due to improper lubricant or excessive loading. Changing to a silicon nitride ball does not change the elimination of the EHL unless an impractically high base oil viscosity is used. Hence, the raceway will still experience premature failure given similar excessive loading scenarios. Raceway asperities will still be crushed or knocked off, hence creating hard particle contamination. The failure may have been pushed back a bit, but a ceramic rolling element won't fix an overload condition. The example I used was just one of several that could occur when a bearing design may be inadequate for the application.

As far as a temperature reduction of 40% goes, do you have any testing/validation/proof of this in this application?

From a practical standpoint the lower rolling resistance of a ceramic ball in this application is a non-issue. The grease and seal friction is far, far greater than any friction difference between a steel and ceramic rolling element will produce. As far as a ceramic rolling element wearing in, how is that measured and where do the wear particles go?

The two primary advantages for using ceramics in rolling element bearings are for high-speed and electrical insulation applications. A Hub3 is not high-speed, and electrical current is a non-issue. Sure there are other applications for them, but for this type the use of ceramic rolling elements may not be the answer.

I agree on the use of solid spacers for TRB's, but there is still an after-mounted clearance. With the tire/wheel off the ground one can feel this by moving the top/bottom of the tire in and out. That clearance must be overcome by a steering wheel input before a change in the road wheel direction can occur. By applying a preload to the bearing the steering input is reduced. This is most apparent by the on-center steering wheel feel when driving the car in a straight line. The use of solid spacers is definitely not the normal practice as I am not familiar with any front axle OE design from our vehicles that use them. That's why there is a castle nut and two cotter key holes in the axle. It gets the clearance adjustment close enough for most applications, but for us the use of a spacer will be an advantage if the user knows how to properly set up the axial clearance. The increased system stiffness due to the wider bearing spacing on traditional TRB arrangements may be better than the modern Hub3, but that is a different condition. Overcoming clearance vs. system stiffness/axle-hub flex are two different animals. If one wants to have immediate steering response to the smallest wheel inputs then every component that can affect steering mechanism movement must have their respective clearances minimized.

[Tyler Beauregard]

The reason my team decided to go with a C5 bearing pack over a traditional spindle is for the following:

Bearing failure will not cause any issue or damage to the upright forging
Easy way to use built in VSS for ABS or traction control retrofit
Ability to use a rear C5 hub to convert to AWD application
Ease of available aftermarket replacements from local auto parts store or dealer
Simpler machining and manufacturing of forging vs steel spindle pin

GMR boys-

Before you go down this path with Carl realize that his main day job is working for a bearing manufacturer and he knows more about them than anyone I've ever spoken with. Better bring hard technical evidence to back up any claim you make for once, or this will get ugly quickly. If you are just making guesses based off what you think is correct, say so. Do not try to pass your statements off as technical facts, especially when it comes to bearings, and Carl.

Good luck.

Tyler

[The GMR]

The reason my team decided to go with a C5 bearing pack over a traditional spindle is for the following:

Bearing failure will not cause any issue or damage to the upright forging
Easy way to use built in VSS for ABS or traction control retrofit
Ability to use a rear C5 hub to convert to AWD application
Ease of available aftermarket replacements from local auto parts store or dealer
Simpler machining and manufacturing of forging vs steel spindle pin

GMR boys-

Before you go down this path with Carl realize that his main day job is working for a bearing manufacturer and he knows more about them than anyone I've ever spoken with. Better bring hard technical evidence to back up any claim you make for once, or this will get ugly quickly. If you are just making guesses based off what you think is correct, say so. Do not try to pass your statements off as technical facts, especially when it comes to bearings, and Carl.

Good luck.

Tyler


Well I was not even going to post, but since Tyler has decided to grace us with his "creator" presence I will give it one more.... I will get to you in a second, first carl.

I do not disagree with most of what he was stating. My grandfather was an engineer for Timken for 40 plus years but you don't see me waiving that flag tyler. There will be parts I / we disagree on and thats fine with me. ITs also perfectly ok that carl does not see eye to eye with me, not going to change a thing.

as for the .008, what I was referring to was the difference from hub to hub. Some are literally .008 to .010 different in the bearing race dimension thus the pre-load difference. The units we have torn apart are OEM, so it could be a simple manufacturing tolerance, these are cheap units so its hardly a serious issue per say. As for the 40%, I said "up to" as a general statement about the ceramics, If I was going to be specific I would have said "exactly 40%", this taken from many top level racers using ceramics. If you have questions on ceramics, call performance bearing and talk to Jack. Ceramics are his deal and he directly works with many top cup, nhra, scca, nasa, ..... you get the idea.

Carl makes good points, I agree with most of what he is explaining. I did however come across as a **** with being short on my original post, sorry about that carl.


Now for tyler....

Its no surprise that you jump in being the uneducated arrogant jackass that you are... As "the Creator" you should know better. Due to your last tangent I have decided to STOP paying to sponsor PT.com, so your actions are directly responsible for this site loosing a sponsor. Well, actually it could be passed off to the moderators that let you completely F-up sponsors threads. Why would I want to pay to sponsor when they allow you to come in and muck everything up?

As for your knowledge, YOU are still FAR from knowing enough to even be considered an expert let alone a "creator"... Your general lack of knowledge about material properties at non-ambient temperatures speaks volumes at how uneducated you really are. Here is your lesson for the day... 7075 will loose up to 70% of its strength as it approaches 400deg, dont believe me? Thats fine, but Warren from brake man agrees along with this little document ... http://thegmr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/NACA-6061-vs.-7075.pdf
What this means is that 7075 should not be used for ANYTHING that will see operating temperatures above 212 degrees... unless you never plan on actually driving your car and it sits in the garage...

Like I have told you MANY times before I do not want to argue with you tyler, your very stubborn and will never listen to anyone other then yourself... besides unlike you I'm still in business and have better things to do.

If ANY moderator or Larry himself wants to Gain my respect and sponsorship back then please EMAIL me [email protected] ... I understand that our sponsorship is not huge so I will not be surprised if I never hear from anyone.... this is MY last post on PT.com

Jason

[Tyler Beauregard]

Now for tyler....

Its no surprise that you jump in being the uneducated arrogant jackass that you are... As "the Creator" you should know better. Due to your last tangent I have decided to STOP paying to sponsor PT.com, so your actions are directly responsible for this site loosing a sponsor. Well, actually it could be passed off to the moderators that let you completely F-up sponsors threads. Why would I want to pay to sponsor when they allow you to come in and muck everything up?

As for your knowledge, YOU are still FAR from knowing enough to even be considered an expert let alone a "creator"... Your general lack of knowledge about material properties at non-ambient temperatures speaks volumes at how uneducated you really are. Here is your lesson for the day... 7075 will loose up to 70% of its strength as it approaches 400deg, dont believe me? Thats fine, but Warren from brake man agrees along with this little document ... http://thegmr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/NACA-6061-vs.-7075.pdf
What this means is that 7075 should not be used for ANYTHING that will see operating temperatures above 212 degrees... unless you never plan on actually driving your car and it sits in the garage...

Like I have told you MANY times before I do not want to argue with you tyler, your very stubborn and will never listen to anyone other then yourself... besides unlike you I'm still in business and have better things to do.

If ANY moderator or Larry himself wants to Gain my respect and sponsorship back then please EMAIL me [email protected] ... I understand that our sponsorship is not huge so I will not be surprised if I never hear from anyone.... this is MY last post on PT.com

Jason

With respect Jason, that material change was made by the owners of SpeedTech Performance and the degree holding mechanical engineer who designed the AFX spindle while under my employment. I'll side with them on making the right call on that over you any day. They have proven themselves in this industry for well over a decade. I don't know you from Adam, and from what you told me about your lack of engineering background, I take every post you throw up at these boards with about as much weight as a paperclip.

The boards are here for the users, not the sponsors. This is not a site to spam your wares every 2 days with look at me posts. It's also not for you to spout off bullsh*t claims which you cannot back up up with factual technical provable data. Saying that Bobby at 'Bearings and Brakes R Us' says so means d*ck here.

I speak for myself only when I say your contributions to this board haven't eaxctly been stellar. I'd also say that you're going to need a thicker skin, or much more restraint when repping a company on the internet. I've made the mistakes you're making right now when I was younger, and still do some of them to this day. Difference is that I don't have a company or products to sell, so I don't need to watch myself or play the politics game as heavily as you should.

PS-

Your is reffering to ownership.
You're is a contraction of you are.
It makes a big difference when trying to scold someone on the internet.

Tyler

[Twentyover]

C'mon Carl, Tyler, , I started to pretty much ignore most every GMR post since Ron Schwarz and Jason or Jay went Man-a-Mano and later Jay (I think) bragged about either being a high school dropout or just barely finishing high school (no links to the threads because I don't care enough to spend the time.). Went to LinkedIn and found that Jason H. claims a degree in business from Loyola Marymount, that sealed it for me. These guys may be brilliant designers, but have been two of the most devisive posters on the forum. Lots of claims, usually no data to back it up the claims. Ignore them, I do, it cuts your blood pressure way down.

Carl- I guess I understand that axial clearance on a Taper Roller requires some take-up in turning and may result in a small wheel directional wobble on center. I cant say I've ever felt it except in one case where an assembly error (my fault) had the spindle nut a couple flats from snug (wife's daily driver) Guess I'm too ham-fisted to notice the condition.

Tyler-

I'm still reading reasons you gave as manufacturing/service criteria..

So the performance benefit suggested thus far is pad knockback and improved steering precision.

[Jay@GMR]

With respect Jason, that material change was made by the owners of SpeedTech Performance and the degree holding mechanical engineer who designed the AFX spindle while under my employment. I'll side with them on making the right call on that over you any day. They have proven themselves in this industry for well over a decade. I don't know you from Adam, and from what you told me about your lack of engineering background, I take every post you throw up at these boards with about as much weight as a paperclip.

I speak for myself only when I say your contributions to this board haven't eaxctly been stellar. I'd also say that you're going to need a thicker skin, or much more restraint when repping a company on the internet. I've made the mistakes you're making right now when I was younger, and still do some of them to this day. Difference is that I don't have a company or products to sell, so I don't need to watch myself or play the politics game as heavily as you should.


Tyler

You knew I had to get in on this..........

tyler (aka - one hit wonder)

Perhaps you or your mechanical engineer can explain the picture below. Your design may have been adequit prior to Pro Touring actually being pushed..... but once pushed...... your design deflects big time (in this case approx 3/8")! And now your new answer is forging in 7075 in lieu of 6061? Ha Ha what a complete fail! Even a non-engineer knows that 7075 would be a complete fail at temperature. If your highly credentialed engineer had done some thermal engineering he would have seen that this new 7075 design "at temperature" will deflect even worse! Are you going to now actually try to argue 7075 properties at temp, please? Go ahead and amuse us all with your BS.

So let me recap: Original ATS "tall design" deflects with the use of 6061 in performance conditions (as seen below). ATS engineer scrambles with some fancy foot work to compensate for engineering inadequacies. Engineer recommends upgrading to 7075 without any regard for what happens to 7075 at temps over 212 degrees (you know.... temps that the upright will actually see). So as you will see, while your team was designing....... and you running your mouth, you/your team should have paid more attention to temperatures and accounted for this in the design. So if this is just me running my mouth..... perhaps you can post up all your testing done at 200-400 degrees....... come on smart guy, you did test at temperature right?

This posting was not meant to offend others, unfortuanately it was needed to illustrate my above verbiage for the super smart tyler (one hit wonder). This is a "tall ATS Upright" of 6061. The new 7075 ones in theory would take care of this issue (if the vehichle never left the garage), but for those that will push their car and put some heat into the brakes/hubs/uprights....... 7075 is the WRONG material to use in heated conditions (not opinion but fact). Enjoy tyler!

Now that's DEFLECTION! Good job tyler...... 500K and this? You may want to crawl back in that hole you came from.....

http://ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/860901-1967-camaro-katech-street-attack-427-a-19.html (http://ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/860901-1967-camaro-katech-street-attack-427-a-19.html)


67236

[dontlifttoshift]

.....

[TitoJones]

Jay/Jason/GMR-

I'll be happy to send a link to this thread over to Shane, the engineer that made those calls. But before you start stuffing words and claims in my mouth that I didn't make nor even hint at let me break this down like you're five years old-

Speedtech Performance and Shane, the engineer that I employed to engineer the AFX spindle, made all the calls on the material change and specifications. I only said that what ever they decided was looked into and I trust them and their decision.

Note the differences between your tone and mine when I get into a technical discussion; You can call me anything you wish but you have yet to provide any factual evidence of your claim. You have a picture. You are making wild actuations off a 2 year old picture from a car that not only entered, but won the One Lap vintage class.

Prove to me that the spindle was the ONLY part deflecting, and that it deflected over 3/8 of an inch. You must have been there to measure the parts on Shipka's car to make that claim. Since the burden of proof lies on the accuser, I'll sit back and wait for you to come up with some sort of data to prove your point, which you have yet to do.

In the mean time, I'll send a link that was supposed to be about bearing packs and why people use them (which I added my reasons for using them) and have Shane decide if he would like to post his reasons for the material change. I'm sure even Speedtech can answer that. I haven't been involved with these decisions or reasons behind them since 2009, when I sold the company. Attacking me for something I wasn't even privy to is pretty retarded and shows your character.

My dogs in this fight are long gone.

Hope your night is as pleasant as you are.

Tyler

[dontlifttoshift]

Tyler, will you be apologizing for crapping up this thread as well?

The site is here for the members, not the sponsors, where do either one of your usernames fall? You still spam us with your accomplishments but as a member you haven't brought much to the table aside from arguments. Things are getting better here. For a while, almost every tech question was anwered with "I can get you the best price on that". Most of those guys are gone for the moment and there has been some good technical information floating around lately.

What you don't seem to understand is that the rest of world is capable of conversation. When conversation happens, we, the collective membership of this forum, all win. This was a constructive thread that would have been full of great tech info for us all to use until you came in with your little aggravated jab at GMR. If your opinions of Jay or Jason are true then the right play would have been to let Carl and Jason bring forth the information that they have and we all could have learned something in the process. Jason, (according to some ignorant opinions) being young and uneducated, would have hung himself eventually right?......Isn't that what you want? But you had to take a shot at them and that is what set this super****storm in motion, again.

I have read most of your posts on here, lat-g, and cc and find you to be an angry person. Maybe in real life you're great, but your negative energy on this forum is a detriment to every thread you post on regardless of what name you post under.

[Jay@GMR]

Jay/Jason/GMR-


Note the differences between your tone and mine when I get into a technical discussion; You can call me anything you wish but you have yet to provide any factual evidence of your claim. You have a picture. You are making wild actuations off a 2 year old picture from a car that not only entered, but won the One Lap vintage class.

Sorry if "one hit wonder" struck a nerve, but figured I would engage after you opened in your earlier post with "GMR boys". You can call me a boy when alligators are called lizards!

2 years old yes...... but is the physical design the same today? Are others to believe this would not happen to them in an aggressive corner?

Prove to me that the spindle was the ONLY part deflecting, and that it deflected over 3/8 of an inch. You must have been there to measure the parts on Shipka's car to make that claim. Since the burden of proof lies on the accuser, I'll sit back and wait for you to come up with some sort of data to prove your point, which you have yet to do.

Really? Are you passing some blame off on the (new) bearing packs,that are part of your system..... I mean you did "create" your upright to be run with this bearing pack correct? OK so lets agree that the upright and bearing packs are contributing factors, of which both make up your product offering as a whole.

Oh, and the 3/8" I was referring to came from the link that I posted...... click the link again and read post #363 and secnd paragraph. You will see this is no guess, but actual info given. So between the confirmed 3/8" gap AND the aluminum shaving from the wheel...... I hope this will suffice you.


My dogs in this fight are long gone.

Apparently not, you tend to surface on our and others threads whenever any related conversation arise.


Tyler

tyler/tito


So what IS your take on the usage of 7075 given the fact that it exponentially loses strength when approaching temps over 212 degrees? You seem to have an opinion on everyone elses product, so only seems appropriate that you comment on yours that you created? Here is a helpful link http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=7cfbf804afc0478a813594482008cf3b&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pro-touring.com%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dpostreply%26t%3D 94075&v=1&libid=1352382965119&out=http%3A%2F%2Fthegmr.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F10%2FNACA-6061-vs.-7075.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pro-touring.com%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dnewreply%26p%3D9 48386&title=Bearing Packs - Reply to Topic&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fthegmr.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads...1-vs.-7075.pdf&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13523831013992

The way I see it, unless actual design changes have been made in the upright to account for the loss of strength at temperature in 7075, the product that you created will see similar deflection issues as your original design at temp. Now of course this will be more prevalent in the "tall" design that is most likely to see agressive driving.

Cheers!

[Jay@GMR]

Donny is right, I was writing as he was posting.

Tyler, do not feel you have to respond or if you do just shoot me a PM and we can continue to piss.

Jay

[Steve1968LS2]

Now for tyler....

Its no surprise that you jump in being the uneducated arrogant jackass that you are... As "the Creator" you should know better. Jason

Wow.. way to be professional..

Talk to people like that again and I will give you a vacation from the site.. You can argue without turning into a first grader..


Tyler, will you be apologizing for crapping up this thread as well?


I didn't see Tyler result to name calling.. could you point that out for me? Thanks :)

[dontlifttoshift]

Nope, didn't say anyone was name calling. My comment was in reference to this thread where Tyler jumped the gun and flew off the handle. https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?92895-New-GMR-AFX-Upright-Packages/page3 Tyler apologized when he realized that no one was stealing his design and had started an argument for no reason. I thought that was pretty cool, he really didn't have to do that.

This drama, BS, garbage, is the problem. Very rarely does anything good come from it. Heated discussions are good and everyone should feel free to question products and ideas but taking 5 minutes to make sure they way things are stated sounds less argumentative prevents most of this. Here is an extreme example, I can type FU! and 100 people will take it several different ways but if I say FU! to a real person tone and inflection make a huge difference as to how it may be interpreted.

I met Jason and Jay at SEMA, the way Jay types and the way it reads usually, is not at all the way he is. Most guys arguing in most cases could sit back with a case of Corona and some limes and likely get along quite well......despite the apparent differences on the fourms.

[Tyler Beauregard]

Tyler, will you be apologizing for crapping up this thread as well?

The site is here for the members, not the sponsors, where do either one of your usernames fall? You still spam us with your accomplishments but as a member you haven't brought much to the table aside from arguments. Things are getting better here. For a while, almost every tech question was anwered with "I can get you the best price on that". Most of those guys are gone for the moment and there has been some good technical information floating around lately.

What you don't seem to understand is that the rest of world is capable of conversation. When conversation happens, we, the collective membership of this forum, all win. This was a constructive thread that would have been full of great tech info for us all to use until you came in with your little aggravated jab at GMR. If your opinions of Jay or Jason are true then the right play would have been to let Carl and Jason bring forth the information that they have and we all could have learned something in the process. Jason, (according to some ignorant opinions) being young and uneducated, would have hung himself eventually right?......Isn't that what you want? But you had to take a shot at them and that is what set this super****storm in motion, again.

I have read most of your posts on here, lat-g, and cc and find you to be an angry person. Maybe in real life you're great, but your negative energy on this forum is a detriment to every thread you post on regardless of what name you post under.

Donny-

I will not be apologizing for this one.

You see it as me provoking GMR; I liken it to guys standing around bragging about doing illegal things and your buddy doesn't realize he is talking to an offduty cop. Not really a warning, but more of a heads up. I really don't want to see GMR get destroyed in a thread if it can be avoided. I have said it before, I really like thier products. They are well built and high end. The floater rear is killer and would be perfect on a Lateral-Dynamics 3 link. I also don't recall ever calling Jay or Jason names or ripping on either one for thier education levels. I mearly asked what thier background was so I didn't end up assumming something. I don't know these two gentlemen. They might be geniuses for all I know. They are way better in solidworks CAD programs than I'll ever be. I had to hire that stuff out my entire life.

As for the signal to noise ratio on the boards-
It has decreased by about 5% since Frank was booted from the boards. Admittedly he was the most persistant one at coming into a thread and giving a non technical 40% off pitch.
But the board is still struggling to have good discussions with actual data vs opinion stuff into it. I'm fine with people giving thier views on subjects as long as they don't represent them as a hard fact. That is where I butt heads with GMR. They are very opinionated, very defensive, and don't back up thier claims with any data other than I said so.

So if you view me as an angry person, then that's because it's all I've shown of me recently. I've been getting angry with the industry and the shipping of the USA's manufacturing to overseas. I've been angry with sponsors that only come to the boards to hock thier wares and not provide input to discussions. I've been angry with members that vote with thier wallet and buy the knock off crap vs the orginal. I took a long break from the boards and only recently became active again. Perhaps it was too soon.

This thread was staying on topic, and I even added to it siting my reasons for using the C5 bearing over a traditional spindle; I tried to give a stern heads up to GMR and they flipped on me. They deralied the thread, started name calling and bringing up design changes on a company and product I no longer have input on and act like I am the one responsible for it. The go on to call me a one hit wonder without realizing that while I owned ATS we:
Had the first bolt in T56 kit
Has the first weld in coil over shock kit that could be adjusted without removal
Had the first LS7 oil pan for a retrofit
Had the first ever forged aluminum spindle to correct many shortcomings of a factory frame
Has the the first compact LSX accessory drive, beating Vintage Air, March, and Billet Specialties to the market by over a full year
Had the only equal length tri-y LSX header for a factory frame
Had the first ever splined sway bar for factory frames (which sadly never made production due to costs)

I've been on these boards since the very begining. I've tried to help weed out the fluff from the facts, and I've tried to bring sound advice where I could. For every vocal member who dislikes my tactics, there are 2 more who PM privately to tell me they love it but don't want to named or associated to it due to politics or company affiliations.

I'm going to keep on being me.

Tyler

[Steve1968LS2]

Nope, didn't say anyone was name calling. My comment was in reference to this thread where Tyler jumped the gun and flew off the handle. https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?92895-New-GMR-AFX-Upright-Packages/page3 Tyler apologized when he realized that no one was stealing his design and had started an argument for no reason. I thought that was pretty cool, he really didn't have to do that.

This drama, BS, garbage, is the problem. Very rarely does anything good come from it. Heated discussions are good and everyone should feel free to question products and ideas but taking 5 minutes to make sure they way things are stated sounds less argumentative prevents most of this. Here is an extreme example, I can type FU! and 100 people will take it several different ways but if I say FU! to a real person tone and inflection make a huge difference as to how it may be interpreted.

I met Jason and Jay at SEMA, the way Jay types and the way it reads usually, is not at all the way he is. Most guys arguing in most cases could sit back with a case of Corona and some limes and likely get along quite well......despite the apparent differences on the fourms.

Let's just stick with one thread at a time.. lol

When you run a company you need to be aware of how your posts "sound".. perception is reality.. do you ever see DSE having this issue?

So, ANYONE who resorts to insults or name calling will be sent to the cool down corner.. myself included.. actually, I could use a time out.. ;)

[Steve1968LS2]

Oh, and for the record, given what he does for a living.. I will take what Carl C say over anyone else on this board in regards to bearings..

[Nessumsar]

You three guys need to stop this crap. Tyler, we understand that you are irritated by the GMR guys; and Jason and Jay, we understand that you can't stand the sight of Tyler. We (the commentary body) don't give 2 sh*ts what you guys think of eachother; and I for one am getting VERY tired of seeing you guys compare your manhood.

This is the internet, if you see something you don't like, go to the next page; there are billions of them...

[Twentyover]

I think what Donny is referring to is my ignorant opinion for implying that Jason is young and uneducated . Just parroting what Jason said in post 45 on https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?92895-New-GMR-AFX-Upright-Packages/page3. Later the thread (post 61) infers that GMR uses trial and error, rather than engineering practice, to develop products. While I may be ignorant of who they are, the opinion is informed, based on claims GMR has made. I concede that my opinion may be inaccurate, being based only on incorrect information GMR has provided and general tenor of their posts.

Context was me suggesting Tyler and Carl ignore GMR posts as I do. I don't care for the way they (GMR) respond to people who don't fall over themselves drooling over their (GMR) product line in their (individual) posts. They've pretty much shot any credibility as a supplier they may have ever had with me (absence of technial data and general tenor of posts.). I think the entire thread on the introduction of the GMR bearing pack displayed attitude at it's worst. While other posters in the thread I had less than stellar posts, none targeted as broad an audience for ridicule as GMR's.

But I'm just an old man who remembers back when people could disagree and still remain civil to each other.

[dontlifttoshift]

You see it as me provoking GMR; I liken it to guys standing around bragging about doing illegal things and your buddy doesn't realize he is talking to an offduty cop. Not really a warning, but more of a heads up. I really don't want to see GMR get destroyed in a thread if it can be avoided. I have said it before, I really like thier products. They are well built and high end. The floater rear is killer and would be perfect on a Lateral-Dynamics 3 link. I also don't recall ever calling Jay or Jason names or ripping on either one for thier education levels. I mearly asked what thier background was so I didn't end up assumming something. I don't know these two gentlemen. They might be geniuses for all I know. They are way better in solidworks CAD programs than I'll ever be. I had to hire that stuff out my entire life.

There is that perception thing again. I think you would be defensive as well given your history together if you were on the other side of it. Everyone thinks their product is the best in the world, if anyone opted not to defend it that way, I would question that. Oh, so I don't forget *their*:slap: Iused a smiley, its a joke.



So if you view me as an angry person, then that's because it's all I've shown of me recently. I've been getting angry with the industry and the shipping of the USA's manufacturing to overseas. I've been angry with sponsors that only come to the boards to hock thier wares and not provide input to discussions. I've been angry with members that vote with thier wallet and buy the knock off crap vs the orginal.

Everyone in this thread agrees with this!!


This thread was staying on topic, and I even added to it siting my reasons for using the C5 bearing over a traditional spindle; I tried to give a stern heads up to GMR and they flipped on me.

Thank you that part was useful. The heads up?, see perception above.


I've been on these boards since the very begining. I've tried to help weed out the fluff from the facts, and I've tried to bring sound advice where I could. For every vocal member who dislikes my tactics, there are 2 more who PM privately to tell me they love it but don't want to named or associated to it due to politics or company affiliations.

I'm going to keep on being me.

Tyler

I would expect nothing less......I am not trying to change the world, the forum, or you. I just wanted to learn about bearings, I think ceramics are for ashtrays and I don't like things I can't take apart and fix......Clearly I could use some learning on the subject.

[dontlifttoshift]

I think I may have salvaged the useful parts of this thread. I hope that EVERYONE (caps lock on so you know I am serious) can cotinue this bearing discussion with civility. I don't believe we have totally answered Greg's question.


I think the big deal for the OE's is to have a complete "package" that includes the bearings, ABS parts, wheel flange, and studs that is easily attached on the assembly line.


There are multiple advantages and disadvantages to the integrated hub design. The type most here are familiar with is from the C6, known commonly as a Hub3. It has the ball bearing raceways in the forgings vs. earlier hub types, plus mounting provisions (flanges), wheel studs, tone ring and sensor, etc. Basically, bolt it on, plug in the ABS wiring, and it's done.

Ball bearings have an advantage in that they can be easily preloaded via fixed positioning (hard spacing, no springs.) By applying a preload, hence creating a negative clearance condition, the effective stiffness of the rotating system increases. For a fixed brake caliper car, preloading helps reduce piston knockback. Other advantages for Hub3/prelaoded design include better steering response, quieter operation, less friction, ease of maintenance, and many of the others mentioned earlier.

The primary drawback of the ball bearing design is that they do not have a high-load capacity. They are susceptible to shock loading damage that can occur during track days, big pot holes, curbs, etc. An example might be that during a track day a Hub3 equipped car takes a high-speed apex a bit early and dips the front wheel over the curbing. The tire hits the sharp backside of the curb as it comes back on-track. This may appear to the driver as being a minor incident, but if seen by an outside observer it's pretty violent. The damage is done but the car could act totally normal for the rest of the day. However, several months later the ball-spaced raceway brinnells have turned to spalls, the hub makes a bunch of noise, and it's time to replace it. The real cause of the damage may be long forgotten by that time.

Tapered roller bearings have a much higher load capacity for their size compared to a ball type. The line contact of a TRB vs. the point contact of a BB creates a much larger loading surface area. However, it is from a practical standpoint not possible to put a negative clearance preload into a TRB arrangement. BB designs can better deal with thermal expansion vs. a TRB. Small thermal growth preload increases in a BB angular contact design can be handled buy the slight change in contact angle and pressure. They do not have nearly the axial stiffness that a TRB does. On the other hand, the TRB is so stiff axially that once a negative clearance condition occurs the bearing is very likely doomed. Hence, all TRB systems in what we deal with have a clearance specification.

The TRB clearance specifications mean that there may be more caliper piston knockback and steering clearance. They also require proper lubrication and preload adjustment. This may sound easy, but it is very common, even for "experienced" mechanics, to improperly lubricate, mount, and set the preload in a TRB design. Bolting on a new Hub3 is often less expensive overall since there is no machine shop needed, no lubrication, no preload adjustment, etc.

From an OE standpoint it's a no-brainer decision. 99.9% of Corvette owners never take their cars to the track. Fewer still ever push them hard enough to dip a wheel off-track. The Hub3 is a disposable and sacrifical part. Adding ceramic rolling elements will have no effect except to quickly and drastically reduce the weight of your wallet.

Another thing to consider with Hub units of any type (Hub1, Hub2, and Hub3) is that there is a huge Chinese aftermarket and counterfeit marketplace. Almost all of the chain stores carry these "Value" lines. Often it is very, very difficult to tell the difference visually. The good knockoffs may even have the major manufacturers/OE name on the part. Sometimes the only way we have found to determine if the part is fake is by the packaging. Yes, it has become so bad that the big bearing manufacturers have turned to halograms, packaging details, etc. to try and easily identify knockoffs. So, if one wants to be sure to get the OE part, turn to a trusted source and not just the lowest price on ebay.


Dont forget the two main issues of the unit-bearing... Microwelding and manufacturing tolerance.
Microwelding and heat are the #1 cause of premature hub unit failure, period. Sure the impact you are referring to is a factor, but only one of several. That impact you are talking about actually will have more to deal with the center-line of the wheel (where the vehicle weight is) in relation to the rollers in the hub and internal bearing spread (leverage on the rollers). I can go into depth, but I do not have time for that.

With manufacturing, well its a OEM part so its only so good. We machined specific tooling to take apart and put together these hubs and I constantly see up to 8-10 thousands difference in the bearing race width, so the factory pre-load is drastically inconsistent. Its a mas manufactured part and inexpensive so its hard to complain with that.

AS for the ceramics, your wrong. Ceramics will have NO microwelding and a reduction of up to 40% in operating temperature along with lowered rolling resistance. Properly installed ceramics and pre-loaded with internal shims the ceramics will work better then the stock steel rollers. The ceramics we use are so precise that they will literally "wear" the bearing races into a perfect circle, thus possibly requiring you to double check the pre-load after about 15 or so minutes of operation. Ceramics are expensive, but look at it like this. The balls we use will outlast the hubs so we can literally use the same balls in new hubs should they wear out past the point of shimming the pre-load we desire. The expensive part are the balls, but they last a lifetime (the quality ones, there are also cheap Chinese units on the market just like everything).




When you say that the raceway widths are off by 0.008", what exactly is off by 0.008"?

Micro-welding occurs when the lubricant EHL (Elasto Hydrodynamic Layer) has been eliminated due to improper lubricant or excessive loading. Changing to a silicon nitride ball does not change the elimination of the EHL unless an impractically high base oil viscosity is used. Hence, the raceway will still experience premature failure given similar excessive loading scenarios. Raceway asperities will still be crushed or knocked off, hence creating hard particle contamination. The failure may have been pushed back a bit, but a ceramic rolling element won't fix an overload condition. The example I used was just one of several that could occur when a bearing design may be inadequate for the application.

As far as a temperature reduction of 40% goes, do you have any testing/validation/proof of this in this application?

From a practical standpoint the lower rolling resistance of a ceramic ball in this application is a non-issue. The grease and seal friction is far, far greater than any friction difference between a steel and ceramic rolling element will produce. As far as a ceramic rolling element wearing in, how is that measured and where do the wear particles go?

The two primary advantages for using ceramics in rolling element bearings are for high-speed and electrical insulation applications. A Hub3 is not high-speed, and electrical current is a non-issue. Sure there are other applications for them, but for this type the use of ceramic rolling elements may not be the answer.

I agree on the use of solid spacers for TRB's, but there is still an after-mounted clearance. With the tire/wheel off the ground one can feel this by moving the top/bottom of the tire in and out. That clearance must be overcome by a steering wheel input before a change in the road wheel direction can occur. By applying a preload to the bearing the steering input is reduced. This is most apparent by the on-center steering wheel feel when driving the car in a straight line. The use of solid spacers is definitely not the normal practice as I am not familiar with any front axle OE design from our vehicles that use them. That's why there is a castle nut and two cotter key holes in the axle. It gets the clearance adjustment close enough for most applications, but for us the use of a spacer will be an advantage if the user knows how to properly set up the axial clearance. The increased system stiffness due to the wider bearing spacing on traditional TRB arrangements may be better than the modern Hub3, but that is a different condition. Overcoming clearance vs. system stiffness/axle-hub flex are two different animals. If one wants to have immediate steering response to the smallest wheel inputs then every component that can affect steering mechanism movement must have their respective clearances minimized.


The reason my team decided to go with a C5 bearing pack over a traditional spindle is for the following:

Bearing failure will not cause any issue or damage to the upright forging
Easy way to use built in VSS for ABS or traction control retrofit
Ability to use a rear C5 hub to convert to AWD application
Ease of available aftermarket replacements from local auto parts store or dealer
Simpler machining and manufacturing of forging vs steel spindle pin





I do not disagree with most of what he [carlc]was stating. My grandfather was an engineer for Timken for 40 plus years but you don't see me waiving that flag tyler. There will be parts I / we disagree on and thats fine with me. ITs also perfectly ok that carl does not see eye to eye with me, not going to change a thing.

as for the .008, what I was referring to was the difference from hub to hub. Some are literally .008 to .010 different in the bearing race dimension thus the pre-load difference. The units we have torn apart are OEM, so it could be a simple manufacturing tolerance, these are cheap units so its hardly a serious issue per say. As for the 40%, I said "up to" as a general statement about the ceramics, If I was going to be specific I would have said "exactly 40%", this taken from many top level racers using ceramics. If you have questions on ceramics, call performance bearing and talk to Jack. Ceramics are his deal and he directly works with many top cup, nhra, scca, nasa, ..... you get the idea.

Carl makes good points, I agree with most of what he is explaining. I did however come across as a **** with being short on my original post, sorry about that carl.



Carl- I guess I understand that axial clearance on a Taper Roller requires some take-up in turning and may result in a small wheel directional wobble on center. I cant say I've ever felt it except in one case where an assembly error (my fault) had the spindle nut a couple flats from snug (wife's daily driver) Guess I'm too ham-fisted to notice the condition.

Tyler-

I'm still reading reasons you gave as manufacturing/service criteria..

So the performance benefit suggested thus far is pad knockback and improved steering precision.

[Steve1968LS2]

You three guys need to stop this crap. Tyler, we understand that you are irritated by the GMR guys; and Jason and Jay, we understand that you can't stand the sight of Tyler. We (the commentary body) don't give 2 sh*ts what you guys think of eachother; and I for one am getting VERY tired of seeing you guys compare your manhood.

This is the internet, if you see something you don't like, go to the next page; there are billions of them...

I love you man... ;)

[CarlC]

No more bearing babble from me. I've already done enough to mess up this thread.

[Nessumsar]

Carl points out that RTBs aren't very good at running in under than optimal conditions (loose preload), but for the majority of the time they are actually superior to BBs (contact surface, impact); would there be a way to maybe use a spring or very high durometer rubber to act as a preload element on a RTB?

Now that I think about it though, it doesn't sound very likely; seeing as how any force exerted on the wheel goes directly to bearings. Whatever material would have to be so stiff that it probably wouldn't deflect under normal bearing preload...

[67zo6Camaro]

You three guys need to stop this crap. Tyler, we understand that you are irritated by the GMR guys; and Jason and Jay, we understand that you can't stand the sight of Tyler. We (the commentary body) don't give 2 sh*ts what you guys think of eachother; and I for one am getting VERY tired of seeing you guys compare your manhood.

This is the internet, if you see something you don't like, go to the next page; there are billions of them...

agreed, the only thing proven here is attitude. Move one guys. Find another vinue.

Edit, my bad... we are back on the bearing issue. Good Im still listening.

[MIKE67]

Carl, don't give up on us. Your insite into bearings helped clarify a couple of things for me. I know bearing design/selection is complex and part science, part art. I look forward to your further input.