What's new
What's new
By:
Advanced search…

A Bearing Fit Question

9

99Panhard

Stainless
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Location
Smithfield, Rhode Island
This the the full-floating rear axle from my 1910 Mitchell. The portion at the rear held the original bearing...one of those "balls in a cage" bicycle bearings. Not only were they not very good but in this case both of the cups that are pressed into the hub are broken. My goal is to fit new bearings but I've come up against a problem. The diameter of the bearing seat is 2.503, about .003 larger than 2.5". The original rear bearing race measures 2.502 or thereabout in as much as I'm able to tell with my telescoping gauges. I've read over the threads here on using those and I have been able to get a repeatable measurement but in all cases it is slightly larger than 2.5".

I'd like to use the bearings below...but, being modern the ID is a real 2.5". My question is...does anyone have an idea how I can reduce the OD of the bearing seat by .002? I was thinking of making a fixture to hold a piece of abrasive material - maybe 120 grit - that would clamp onto the seat and could be tightened gradually. It would work but might take a long time to remove that much material... So I thought I'd ask the experts before doing anything.

The pictures are the rear spindle...the original rear bearing race and the new bearing.

PM 2.jpg

PM 1.jpg
 
Can send my Sunnen Hone that you can open up the bore in the taper roller bearing if you like Joe - custom fit so to speak. You drive such things with a good heavy "electric" drill

Then give the bearing a trip thru the dishwasher before re-lubing
 
If your bearing seats are round as-is, hone the bore of the new cone for a tight slip fit on the housing. If you are doing both sides even better- hone them both back to back, as the length to diameter ratio is not ideal for honing a single cone. I would make a spacer to go between the cones to space them out from each other and make a simple fixture out of a piece of tubing with end caps to clamp the cones. A sunnen hone would remove the material pretty quickly, or make a fixture and take it to a shop for honing. Of course they could also be ground on an ID grinder as well.
 
Here's the patent drawing...

Sunnen External Home.jpg

Ironically, it's a much more sophisticated version of the tool I'd thought of. But still, I like John's solution better. These bearings are 2-1/2ID, 4-1/4 OD. Because the originals were not very good they tended to make them as big as they could. When you replace them with modern ones they are invariably huge for the application. The car doesn't weigh very much and they aren't spinning at anything like the maximum RPM so it's hard to think of how you could wear them out unless you left the grease out. But, being a little odd in that way, I will probably make 2 sets...just in case. (This has to do with my sole superstition...that only things you haven't thought of happen.)

What would be an appropriate press fit allowance? I was thinking of .0005 to .001.
 
Fine for bearing cup in hub. Cone (that needs honing) needs to be slip fit on axle housing (exactly as in the front wheels)

What would be an appropriate press fit allowance? I was thinking of .0005 to .001.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks John...I wondered about that. A slip fit is very much preferable, otherwise there is no good way to take it off and grease it. The original was very tight but it was never intended to come off - the balls would have come off with the hub.

I'm also making sleeves to hold the cup in the hub since the actual OD is 4.75 or there about. I'm dealing with a manufacturer that did pretty sloppy work, and I don't think it has much to do with the fact that it was 110 years ago. Plenty of very high quality work was done then, just not by the Mitchell-Lewis company.
 
The Forum don't like me today. It won't let me post a link to a portable hone that I use. Made by Lisle model 16000. Much cheaper than a Sunnen.
 
Last edited:
Yes John...I'll be glad to buy new stones. I may have done that anyway.

After John answered last night I did a search on "cylinder hones" and found the Lisle models. Do they work well? If so, I'll look into that solution as I think this might be a good way to fit several other parts and I'll want to get one. I want to try it first and see if I can master it. I don't have a problem with using techniques that are slow if they get me to the right place...everything in the shop is antique so I'm accustomed to that.
 
I have the impression from your comments about the cars quality that you may have already considered this ,but perhaps checking both spindles to be sure they are in fact both exactly the same and hone the pair to a slip fit on the smaller one first if there is a measurable difference and then opening the remaining one the last 10th or two if needed.
If you made spares you would need to indicate what side they are for on the bearing or the box.
Jim
 
99Panhard said:
After John answered last night I did a search on "cylinder hones" and found the Lisle models. Do they work well?
Click to expand...

I have the Lisle hones and they've always worked well for me. It's difficult to get over both the Sunnen and Lisle hones looking more like something that Sears would sell than a precision tool that would let you take off the tenth of your choice.

That said... I've tried to hone surfaces (like a bearing race) that are shorter than the stones. I find it difficult to feed the hone in straight enough, plus maybe the stones wear a little bit concave, and I wind up with a very slightly convex surface. Is there a trick to honing a short ID or is this why the rod honing machines exist?
 
I did plan to do that despite the fact that the quality of the machine work is spotty. I suspect that many of the components came from specialty manufacturers. Needless to say, they claimed they made everything but I take that with a grain of salt. Actually, most of the basic work on the rear axle is quite good. I will check it but so far the worst component has been the engine. I do think they made that and their notion of precision left a lot to be desired. There were also a lot of short-cuts taken. The basic design is fine albeit pretty commonplace for the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Finishing Babbitt Bearings
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
jeff10049
J
G
VOLMAN S28 (tos s28) spindle bearings
Replies
5
Views
462
gustimusti
G
M
Grinding Sliding Bearing Holder
Replies
0
Views
84
majohnson
M
E
Bearing/shaft interference
2
Replies
22
Views
951
Gearclash
G
N
Cat40 spindle rebuild: Thoughts on floating bearings outer races spinning in housing
2 3
Replies
48
Views
2K
Stirling
S








 

ABOUT PRACTICAL MACHINIST

With more than 10.6 million unique visitors over the last year, Practical Machinist is the most visited site for metalworking professionals. Practical Machinist is the easiest way to learn new techniques, get answers quickly and discuss common challenges with your peers. Register for the world’s largest manufacturing technology forum for free today to stay in the know.

Learn more about us.

STAY CONNECTED

Facebook Instagram YouTube LinkedIn Pinterest Twitter Tiktok

Register Become a forum member. Register today.

Sign Up Sign up for our e-newsletter.

© 2024 Copyright Practicalmachinist.com. All Rights reserved.

Back
Top