Maney gearbox outrigger bearing: help please...
- Thread starter Fast Eddie
- Start date
- Status
Fast Eddie
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 20,642
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
No SteveA I have NOT ordered a TTi box!
And thanks for the offer Chris.
But, I spoke to Steve today and one will be in the post to me tomorrow.
I'm now busy sharpening my axe to hack out the back of the chaincase !!
No SteveA I have NOT ordered a TTi box!
And thanks for the offer Chris.
But, I spoke to Steve today and one will be in the post to me tomorrow.
I'm now busy sharpening my axe to hack out the back of the chaincase !!
Fast Eddie
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 20,642
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
The extra, thin, alloy plate stuck in to keep out the crap is an excellent idea Steve. Where there any clearance issues you had to resolve to fit that?
hobot said:I used a series of small drill holes outlining cut out then connected the dots with hacksaw blade and ground edges some for artistic taste before covered up.
The extra, thin, alloy plate stuck in to keep out the crap is an excellent idea Steve. Where there any clearance issues you had to resolve to fit that?
Chris
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2008
- Messages
- 1,630
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
Hi Eddie
That's not bad. In stock & on its way.
Steve this was going to be fitted to the MK4 but the alloy plates are thicker than steel ones & I would have to relieve the engine plates or thin the outrigger mounting points, to get the bearing to sit in the right place on the mainshaft. Niether choice appealed. The gearbox sits higher in the engine plates on the MK3
Still have the MK3 big bore to complete but seem to be trying to save the chaincases at the moment. It will get used
Chris
Hi Eddie
That's not bad. In stock & on its way.
Steve this was going to be fitted to the MK4 but the alloy plates are thicker than steel ones & I would have to relieve the engine plates or thin the outrigger mounting points, to get the bearing to sit in the right place on the mainshaft. Niether choice appealed. The gearbox sits higher in the engine plates on the MK3
Still have the MK3 big bore to complete but seem to be trying to save the chaincases at the moment. It will get used
Chris
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 56
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
I really do like the idea of the outrigger bearing, and Hobots, Steve?, addition of the alloy plate to keep the muck out is very good, would it be possible to use the outrigger bearing whilst retaining the primary chain?, I am talking pre mark 3 here, so the gearbox would have to move to tension the chain.
I guess there is enough clearance to run the chain?, the problem being sealing the chain case up after cutting to fit the out rigger?,
Just a thought....
John
I really do like the idea of the outrigger bearing, and Hobots, Steve?, addition of the alloy plate to keep the muck out is very good, would it be possible to use the outrigger bearing whilst retaining the primary chain?, I am talking pre mark 3 here, so the gearbox would have to move to tension the chain.
I guess there is enough clearance to run the chain?, the problem being sealing the chain case up after cutting to fit the out rigger?,
Just a thought....
John
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 18,978
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
Ms Peel cradle is 5/16" 6061 TS so took up some width i had to compensate for thinning out rigger flats. Also had to space out the SS dual adjuster on DS. I had to diddle basket clearance a toosh not to rub the back plate and part of how much I trail-error had taken off out rigger flats. With AMC guts good to go it would run belt w/o pulley plates on though after getting bored and making force air vents dusty grit took off side plate anodizing and showed belt edge abrasion, which never got me that time but side abrasion on a belt can too soon let one unravel. I then put thin but dense filter element behind holes just clearing the front of the belt.
Ms Peel cradle is 5/16" 6061 TS so took up some width i had to compensate for thinning out rigger flats. Also had to space out the SS dual adjuster on DS. I had to diddle basket clearance a toosh not to rub the back plate and part of how much I trail-error had taken off out rigger flats. With AMC guts good to go it would run belt w/o pulley plates on though after getting bored and making force air vents dusty grit took off side plate anodizing and showed belt edge abrasion, which never got me that time but side abrasion on a belt can too soon let one unravel. I then put thin but dense filter element behind holes just clearing the front of the belt.
SteveA
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
Only if you use a sealed bearig in the clutch and find some othe way of lubricating the chain. I ran a standard set up with no covers for race use; I used to boil the triplex in Linklife and pour some of the molten lube into the ball race between every race meeting! Jeez, how did I have the time for all that stuff....
The outrigger works easier if you go to fixed centres and don't need to keep oil in! I recon it could be done, but there is probably more engineering to it than it is worth considering the ready availability of belt set ups.
Time Warp said:
Only if you use a sealed bearig in the clutch and find some othe way of lubricating the chain. I ran a standard set up with no covers for race use; I used to boil the triplex in Linklife and pour some of the molten lube into the ball race between every race meeting! Jeez, how did I have the time for all that stuff....
The outrigger works easier if you go to fixed centres and don't need to keep oil in! I recon it could be done, but there is probably more engineering to it than it is worth considering the ready availability of belt set ups.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 18,978
Re: Maney gearbox outrigger bearing
About impossible to seal in oil for chain around out rigger as gear box must move to deal with chains so extra space needed around out rigger hole to seal with primary case on and clutch in the way. Road going chain gain pretty much stuck with sealed stock set up. I'm long delayed on my custom project because each extra feature requires modifying a few other thing to compensate for. Peel's gleaming primary is one my favorite views after not knowing if I could pull it off.
About impossible to seal in oil for chain around out rigger as gear box must move to deal with chains so extra space needed around out rigger hole to seal with primary case on and clutch in the way. Road going chain gain pretty much stuck with sealed stock set up. I'm long delayed on my custom project because each extra feature requires modifying a few other thing to compensate for. Peel's gleaming primary is one my favorite views after not knowing if I could pull it off.
Fast Eddie
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 20,642
Chaps, the outrigger arrived, nice looking thing too.
But, the bearing is a very loose fit on the output shaft.
What's going on here?
Are there different diameters of shaft?
Or has mine been ground down by a PO?
Or are they supposed to be loose (I can't see this being the case as the shaft would most likely spin within the bearing)?
Any comments from outrigger users gratefully received....
But, the bearing is a very loose fit on the output shaft.
What's going on here?
Are there different diameters of shaft?
Or has mine been ground down by a PO?
Or are they supposed to be loose (I can't see this being the case as the shaft would most likely spin within the bearing)?
Any comments from outrigger users gratefully received....
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2007
- Messages
- 1,362
Hi , I have two outrigger , both with std sleeve gear and main shaft , and they are a slide fit on........not loose , neither tight.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 18,978
I just test fitted Peel's out rigger on Trixie's exposed main shaft to find its a pretty sloppy fit that slides on easy but allows a good bit of wiggle room moving the unfastened mount. I'd say there is a handful of .1000th's clearance. You should fee more confident wearing out rear tires faster with this new addition.
Fast Eddie
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 20,642
I've got approx 0.060" clearance... Is that right??
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 5,193
Do you mean .1" = 100/1000 = 10/100 = 1/10 = .1000" = .10000000000000000000000000000000000000?hobot said:
If so, that waaaaaayyyyyyyy too sloppy.
That is more in the ball park but should be around .010". Maybe you meant .006" which may be a little tight but might be ok.Fast Eddie said:
Fast Eddie
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 20,642
pete.v said:
I'd be very happy indeed with .006" Pete.
Sadly I do mean .060".
I can't see how that can work, surely the shaft is just going to spin in the bearing, causing chatter, scoring, etc?
Plus there's going to be .060" of flex before the outrigger even gets chance to do its job?
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,784
RIGHT . Someone measure the fandangle where the kaboodle goes on . DIMENSIONS PLEASE . Overall - not Clearance , would assume a light interfearance fit - firm push fit . :?
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 5,193
Eddie,
My old main shaft that I replaced measures .809" it the area of the outrigger bearing. It is in good condition there. I do not know what the id of the bearing is supposed to be. What does yours measure? I believe a slip fit standard is .014" by google, so a little inside that would be good in my mind.
My old main shaft that I replaced measures .809" it the area of the outrigger bearing. It is in good condition there. I do not know what the id of the bearing is supposed to be. What does yours measure? I believe a slip fit standard is .014" by google, so a little inside that would be good in my mind.
- Status