Peter,
Thanks for the information. I have done this before, that is, gone
through the mental gymnastics of figuring out exactly what forces are
on the bearings and hence how they should be installed - and of
course this included cross-checking the Haynes with the Clymer, the
Bentley, and the Moss information. You are quite right to point out
that I may have them facing the wrong way, though I really thought I
had them correct.
Is it possible to get the bearings out without destroying the hub
seal? Are there any tricks? I'd just as soon not have to buy all new
when there is a new set in the hubs right now.
Finally, are the plastic cages as good as the older style cages, in
your experience? Are there alternatives?
Thanks as always,
Jeff
At 9:33 AM -0500 10/10/01, Peter C. wrote:
>Jeff, and others,
> First thing in the morning, so forgive my tone, but there is
>a lot of WRONG info being passed out on this subject so far.
> This concerns the ORIGINAL BALL BEARINGS only.
>
> The plastic that Jeff refers to is NOT A SEAL, it is a
>retainer or cage.
> There is NO CLEARANCE SETTING (unlike MGBs which uses shims)
> There is NO Preloading like some other cars use.
> You MUST use the spacer for these Ball Bearings.
>
> The Haynes manual gives a GOOD description of installation.
>Moss' catalog is VAGUE. The original BMC or Bentley publication will
>MISLEAD you.
> The problem arises from there being several brands of ball
>bearing sold and there has been a change made by the original
>bearing manufacturer. The current OUTER bearing supplied by Moss,
>Unipart, QH and packed in a kit is made by the original manufacturer
>in England, RHP, but is different than what they supplied from the
>outset of the car's production. The original number was 3MJT17
>(stamped on outer race); it is now 11MJT17. The current has an outer
>race about 1/2 the width of the earlier and uses a plastic cage as
>opposed to the original brass cage or ball retainer. (I try to keep
>original examples of these kinds of things for just such
>occurrences.)
> Pay careful attention to where the marking "THRUST" is and
>use the HAYNES manual for the correct orientation of the bearings.
>
>Jeff, I suggest that you fell victim to the vagaries of these
>bearing markings. I believe you'll find that one or both of the
>bearings was installed backwards. I've done it, and others have too.
>By all means, check the spindle nut torque. But 25-65 lbs is a
>pretty wide range.
>
>Now, the ROLLER bearing thread has been on-going for years on this
>list. Some have had success. Some use the spacer, some don't. Some
>use one brand, some another. That is a different discussion, and the
>efficacy of using roller bearings vs. ball bearings hasn't been
>settled, to my mind.
>
>Hope this helps. This is a safety issue. We all should take care
>when making statements that may affect someone's safety.
> Good luck. Peter C
_____________________________________________________________
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
Assistant Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA
Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis
mailto:jboatri@emory.edu
|