Wheel bearing question

I've replaced my rear wheel bearings with sealed units, and am wondering about the need for the felt seal and retainer on the left hand side. I ask because the outer retainer does not want to stay in the hub since it was removed, and I really don't want to try staking it in as it originally was, I think all that would do is make unnecessary marks and gouges in the hub. Any thoughts on why or why not to??
Thanks

You have two choices:

1). leave the felt and retainer off, trusting the sealed bearing will not get infiltrated with dirt. Do you so trust? I would feel better with the felt seal.

2) put the seal and retainer back and secure with three 4-40 pan head screws. You will have to drill and tap the hub. This would be my approach.

Slick

I've recently been through this and you don't need them. They're incompatible with the sealed bearings and could do damage.

agree, modern automobiles have sealed bearings just like the one you have used.

Snorton74 said:

I've recently been through this and you don't need them. They're incompatible with the sealed bearings and could do damage.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how the sealed bearing, if it is impervious to dirt, could be damaged by the felt! Certainly, the unsealed bearing was not so damaged!

The only way I can conjure a damage scenario is if the felt seal were installed dry, in which case it becomes a magnet and retainer for water, and may rust the inner and outer races of the bearing. I would soak the felt in 50W oil or saturate it with wheel bearing grease, to exclude water, lubricate the inner race, and be a magnet for dust and grit, thereby becoming a shield for the bearing.

If the sealed bearing is positively, absolutely, incontrovertibly, impervious to dirt, water splash, and whatever, then how can a piece of felt laying against it cause damage, other than rust as explained above? But if the sealed bearing is NOT positively, absolutely, incontrovertibly, impervious to the elements, then the felt cannot hurt, but help.

The automotive environment is rather severe. An extra shield against dust, grit, and water is welcome in my mind. I would keep the felt. But if you can tell me how the felt can cause damage, I will give it consideration, and if your facts have merit, I may restate my position.

Slick

I wouldn't be too worried about the felt but the bearing retainer on the inboard side of the felt sits against the casing on the sealed bearing. It's probably not a big deal but it seemed redundant to add those parts and my wheel builder agreed.

@Snorton74

By "casing" do you mean the man made material that forms the seal in the sealed bearing, or the race faces?

I agree that the felt seal is redundant if the sealed bearing is infallibly impervious to the elements. I have in my lifetime seen two or three sealed bearings with splits in the man made seal material. That may not seem to be very many, but on the other hand, I have not made it a practice to go around inspecting bearings, thus the few I have encountered may represent a significant failure rate....what is the failure rate of the seals? I don't know that number, but as long as a redundant shield is available, I prefer to use it.

If your concern is the inside of the felt retainer may press on the sealed bearing seal, thereby causing some internal damage to the bearings....that is a valid point. I can imagine the seal wearing by touching the internal balls and delivering seal material into the races. Staking the retainer to the hub cannot control such pressure, but my suggestion to use screws can limit such pressure. My "gut" feeling is the man made seal can take light pressure before it contacts the balls. I would have to have a bearing in my hand and a Norton hub on my bench before I can comment further on the issue. Perhaps an "O" ring could be inserted over the outer race of the bearing (and inside the hub) to limit the depth the felt retainer will enter the hub. Then we can have the best of everything.....double seal protection and no worries of over pressure on the seal of the sealed bearing.

If by "casing", you mean the felt retainer presses on the metallic shell of the outer race, then I would not at all be concerned by pressure....the races can take quite a bit.

Thanks for the wheel assembly diagram, and the explanation of your concerns.

Slick

Update - 08/11/14

I have examined my wheel hub. The felt retainer plate seats on its own shoulder in the hub, and the double row bearing should be seated flush with this shoulder. Thus, there is no way the retainer can apply undue pressure to the bearing. The installation of the bearing would probably apply 100 times more force, thus if such force is a factor, then the bearing is toast from the git go. The retainer plate cannot, due to its shape, apply pressure to the bearing shield (I think shield is the terminology used to describe the seal on a sealed bearing).

I also found in my shop, some cam followers with steel shields. If steel shields are on the sealed bearings, I would be more inclined to leave off the felt seals, as steel eliminates my concerns for splits in shields made with man made materials.

IMHO, there is no right or wrong to this issue, just the difference between complete redundancy, and a possible modicum of additional protection.

BTW.....I like the idea of retaining the retainer plate with screws so much, that I will be adding this mod to my hub. I will use 6-32 screws rather than 4-40 as I previously suggested. That way I can repack my bearings whenever the urge strikes me!

I am reburbishing my rear brake/wheel hub and have replaced the bearing in the brake drum - machined it deeper to take the longer double row bearing (done before I found that you can now get the original length bearing). I was looking at the felt seal and retainer that was destroyed during removal and have measured where it seats, above the circlip. I can buy a modern rubber and garter oil seal that fits. Has anyone tried this or can tell me why it is a bad idea (other than its not original Norton).
Cheers
Bert

tyborg15 said:

I am reburbishing my rear brake/wheel hub and have replaced the bearing in the brake drum - machined it deeper to take the longer double row bearing (done before I found that you can now get the original length bearing). I was looking at the felt seal and retainer that was destroyed during removal and have measured where it seats, above the circlip. I can buy a modern rubber and garter oil seal that fits. Has anyone tried this or can tell me why it is a bad idea (other than its not original Norton).
Cheers
Bert

Click to expand...

A modern seal may over time IMHO eat a small groove into the axle that may act as a stress raiser with disastrous results. For example the gearbox sleeve gear seal runs on a hardened surface and manages to ware it away and I believe the axle is not hardened. I for many years owned Landrovers and modern seals and leather seals of earlier types will eat into hardened spacer on their axle such that it needs replacing and they didn't travel at the speeds hence wheel RPM of even your average gently ridern Commando.

It seems that people here have been referring to a rubber-sealed double-row bearing - if this is, indeed, the case, I'd be most grateful for the make/ part number, as I haven't managed to find such a thing!

Paddy_SP said:

It seems that people here have been referring to a rubber-sealed double-row bearing - if this is, indeed, the case, I'd be most grateful for the make/ part number, as I haven't managed to find such a thing!

Click to expand...

4203-2RS (40 x 17 x 16)

http://simplybearings.co.uk/shop/p50026 ... _info.html
http://www.feked.com/ball-bearing-4203-2rs.html

old-britts-front-double-row-sealed-bearing-adapted-spacer-t18716.html#p236669

As far as damage to the seal of a sealed bearing goes in my experience this usually that either the bearing or its seal material are not suitable or of good enough quality for the particular application. Or that it may have been damaged during installation (or storage since manufacturer) which can all to easily happen and sometimes the damage may go unnoticed until it fails.

L.A.B. said:

Paddy_SP said:

It seems that people here have been referring to a rubber-sealed double-row bearing - if this is, indeed, the case, I'd be most grateful for the make/ part number, as I haven't managed to find such a thing!

Click to expand...

4203-2RS (40 x 17 x 16)

http://simplybearings.co.uk/shop/p50026 ... _info.html
http://www.feked.com/ball-bearing-4203-2rs.html

old-britts-front-double-row-sealed-bearing-adapted-spacer-t18716.html#p236669

Click to expand...

Thank you - I don't know why I didn't find that myself - I've used Simply Bearings for years, but for some reason it eluded me!

toppy said:

tyborg15 said:

I am reburbishing my rear brake/wheel hub and have replaced the bearing in the brake drum - machined it deeper to take the longer double row bearing (done before I found that you can now get the original length bearing). I was looking at the felt seal and retainer that was destroyed during removal and have measured where it seats, above the circlip. I can buy a modern rubber and garter oil seal that fits. Has anyone tried this or can tell me why it is a bad idea (other than its not original Norton).
Cheers
Bert

Click to expand...

A modern seal may over time IMHO eat a small groove into the axle that may act as a stress raiser with disastrous results. For example the gearbox sleeve gear seal runs on a hardened surface and manages to ware it away and I believe the axle is not hardened. I for many years owned Landrovers and modern seals and leather seals of earlier types will eat into hardened spacer on their axle such that it needs replacing and they didn't travel at the speeds hence wheel RPM of even your average gently ridern Commando.

Click to expand...

The seal doesn't come into contact with the axle though does it? It is contained within the bearing...

L.A.B. said:

4203-2RS (40 x 17 x 16)

Click to expand...

AFAIK the situation hasn't changed yet and this type of bearing is only available from no-name manufatcurers (which is also reflected by the price tag).


Tim

Tintin said:

L.A.B. said:

4203-2RS (40 x 17 x 16)

Click to expand...

AFAIK the situation hasn't changed yet and this type of bearing is only available from no-name manufatcurers (which is also reflected by the price tag).
Tim

Click to expand...

No-name manufacturer bearing quality doesn't necessarily have to be poor. As a matter of fact I just bought a new no-name gearbox sleeve gear bearing (only marked 1654DS on the inner ring). This bearing was in a sealed plastic bag from Andover Norton. The reputable A.N. dealer told me this bearing is no longer produced in the U.K. so obviously A.N. got another source now and I assume A.N. will not be offering poor quality bearings :wink:

Fast Eddie said:

toppy said:

tyborg15 said:

I am reburbishing my rear brake/wheel hub and have replaced the bearing in the brake drum - machined it deeper to take the longer double row bearing (done before I found that you can now get the original length bearing). I was looking at the felt seal and retainer that was destroyed during removal and have measured where it seats, above the circlip. I can buy a modern rubber and garter oil seal that fits. Has anyone tried this or can tell me why it is a bad idea (other than its not original Norton).
Cheers
Bert

Click to expand...

A modern seal may over time IMHO eat a small groove into the axle that may act as a stress raiser with disastrous results. For example the gearbox sleeve gear seal runs on a hardened surface and manages to ware it away and I believe the axle is not hardened. I for many years owned Landrovers and modern seals and leather seals of earlier types will eat into hardened spacer on their axle such that it needs replacing and they didn't travel at the speeds hence wheel RPM of even your average gently ridern Commando.

Click to expand...

The seal doesn't come into contact with the axle though does it? It is contained within the bearing...

Click to expand...

As I read his post he talks of using a garter seal instead of a felt type seal

A modern seal may over time IMHO eat a small groove into the axle that may act as a stress raiser with disastrous results. For example the gearbox sleeve gear seal runs on a hardened surface and manages to ware it away and I believe the axle is not hardened. I for many years owned Landrovers and modern seals and leather seals of earlier types will eat into hardened spacer on their axle such that it needs replacing and they didn't travel at the speeds hence wheel RPM of even your average gently ridern Commando.[/quote]

The seal doesn't come into contact with the axle though does it? It is contained within the bearing...[/quote]

As I read his post he talks of using a garter seal instead of a felt type seal[/quote]

Ahhh, indeed he was, my mistake, I was in the sealed bearing discussion!

Gearbox sleeve gear ring for the big seal is not hardened , and that's why a groove wears into it at the seal lip. It should be hardened. I'm going to be installing double row sealed into my MK111 hubs soon . Already have them from Walridge , will see if there is a cover plate or cap or felt to deal with , would rather leave redundancy out on reassembly time.

As many have already stated - the sealed bearing is not actually fully sealed. It is a general shield to prevent mostrubbish getting to the bearing. My garter seal runs on the top hat style spacer that fits into the inner surface of the bearing. It would have to cut through a sizeable amount of metal before it got to the axle itself - by then it would be running on thin air. My thinking is that felt washers don't exist in modern motorcycling so why not replace the felt with what is used universally in modern motorcycles. Isn't this why people use shielded bearings instead of the open bearings of old?