- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,557
Nice bearing but as posted before go roller for same price. 
Hemmings Layshaft bearing
- Thread starter DogT
- Start date
- Status
Fast Eddie
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 22,696
If we apply evolutionary theory to the internet, I suggest it will evolve to a state where there is no need for humans to interact via forums.
Inputs will reach a saturation point, at which time, debates and exchanges can simply roll on forever.
Chaos theory and human needs will be aligned.
Some say this has already begun...
Inputs will reach a saturation point, at which time, debates and exchanges can simply roll on forever.
Chaos theory and human needs will be aligned.
Some say this has already begun...
- Joined
- May 28, 2003
- Messages
- 2,591
Torontonian said:Nice bearing but as posted before go roller for same price.
If you watch the NOC/Hemmings video he says 'the bearing is a slip/sliding fit on the shaft' .....functional quote only. This was discussed at the group viewing and critique of the video. So I'm not the only one :!:
Testing against a whole pile of shafts (I own 23 gearboxes).
1. Some are definite press fit and a few are sliding.
2. There is over 1/2 thou tolerance on these shafts.
3. The older shafts seem to be the smaller ones. Late ones have the central groove on the splines.
Shaft evidence shows the ball bearing shafts are NOT guaranteed to hold the shaft in place. How many times has anyone dismantled the box only to have the shaft come out in your hand and the bearing stays in the box :?:Onder said:
Where I diverge from mick's experience....
4. I use the roller bearing.
5. I never shim the layshaft...never felt the need...and my gearboxes don't jump out of gear
also
contrary to Mick statement about reverse cut dogs on first, My position is 1st gear is straight cut dogs and only 2,3 &4 have the self holding angle dogs.
- Joined
- May 28, 2003
- Messages
- 2,591
L.A.B. said:
I would have taken notes if I knew there was a quiz. :roll:
I watched it twice by myself, then a third time with the NENO group.
It must have been somewhere around the layshaft/bearing discussion. :lol:
IS it then that any lay shaft pulled that is securely a press fit to the bearing and the bearing comes out with the shaft is defective?
My experience says both conditions would be considered normal. And a press fit is to be expected with the 1/2 thou fatter late shafts.
On disassembly, many times I have to press the shaft out of the bearing.
While I have not yet played with all 23 gearboxes, I do try and pay attention to what I am doing and try to note the variation through the age progression of them. A lot of what I have learned I have NEVER seen in print anywhere in the last 25 years.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 21,110
dynodave said:
Might have been useful. :roll: :roll:
dynodave said:
You basically quoted Mick as saying 'the bearing is a slip/sliding fit on the shaft' as if he was stating all bearings were normally a sliding fit on the shaft, and you then said the following, which I can only assume was an attempt to discredit what Mick is 'supposed' to have said. :?
...Which no doubt Mick would be aware of, as what he actually says (@49:30) is"....and make sure that your layshaft is not too-tight a fit in the bearing, if it is just ease it with Emery cloth, as it should be just a nice push fit..."
- Joined
- May 28, 2003
- Messages
- 2,591
The interpretation of a nice push fit sound fine. nice push fit nice push fit
However if interpreted as being able to push the bearing on with your thumb IIRC like in the video , then it might lack the interference fit spelled out in the SKF fit charts for a loaded inner race. Which seems to be as much as 20uM.
The old early shafts are usually undersized from bearing creep. I contend that norton tried to fix this problem with a 20uM size increase. These are the shafts with the central grove on the splines. This would need superman's thumb to push the bearing on cause I sure can't.
I did learn two little tidbits from the video that I now use. thank you Mick. The video is generally good for what you can observe.especially for beginners.
Sometimes you can learn what not to do....How many people know what size will still stop shaft ruining bearing creep for this application, I don't.
It seems to me the bearing creep issue also came up when crankshafts would easily slip out of the ball bearings on early engines being disassembled. They then grew the crank a half thou for the same reason. All simultaneous with the bearing change.
However if interpreted as being able to push the bearing on with your thumb IIRC like in the video , then it might lack the interference fit spelled out in the SKF fit charts for a loaded inner race. Which seems to be as much as 20uM.
The old early shafts are usually undersized from bearing creep. I contend that norton tried to fix this problem with a 20uM size increase. These are the shafts with the central grove on the splines. This would need superman's thumb to push the bearing on cause I sure can't.
I did learn two little tidbits from the video that I now use. thank you Mick. The video is generally good for what you can observe.especially for beginners.
Sometimes you can learn what not to do....How many people know what size will still stop shaft ruining bearing creep for this application, I don't.
It seems to me the bearing creep issue also came up when crankshafts would easily slip out of the ball bearings on early engines being disassembled. They then grew the crank a half thou for the same reason. All simultaneous with the bearing change.
- Status
