Recent Topics
2014 Ford Fusion - tall folks need not apply?
by LoneRanger
03/06/15 09:52 AM
My Mos2 story.
by Bigsyke
03/06/15 09:50 AM
Seat repair
by redhat
03/06/15 09:42 AM
Can't delete responses.
by mrsilv04
03/06/15 09:33 AM
Dealership Using Different Oil Viscosities
by Gebo
03/06/15 09:18 AM
On Hazet Superiority
by Y_K
03/06/15 09:18 AM
Cartridge filter designs
by dlundblad
03/06/15 09:09 AM
MC and Longer OCIs
by RAK
03/06/15 09:02 AM
Catalytic converter removal
by SteveSRT8
03/06/15 08:50 AM
New here and need some input on oil being odd
by Scoott
03/06/15 07:49 AM
torque wrench
by mobilaltima
03/06/15 07:09 AM
Apparently you *can* sue a dead person . . .
by LoneRanger
03/06/15 06:55 AM
Newest Members
Frot, Scoott, krower77, Fizz1, Smashmouth
53056 Registered Users
Who's Online
105 registered (badtlc, Andrei, Al, AandPDan, alarmguy, 11 invisible), 1560 Guests and 231 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
53056 Members
66 Forums
227617 Topics
3631606 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG
Topic Options
#2510026 - 01/30/12 03:21 AM Automotive Bearing Parameters
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 28068
Loc: a prisoner island
600+ pages of bearing sizes and clearances, from ACL, who make stuff for just about everyone.

General information

http://www.acl.com.au/web/acl00056.nsf/a...37?OpenDocument

The good guts

http://www.acl.com.au/web/aclwebsite.nsf...cb?OpenDocument
_________________________
2003 Nissan ZD30 TD, 4L Penrite R 5W30, 3L M1 5W50, Nulon 5W20
1997 Caprice, L67, Castrol Magnatec SP 5W40 A3/B4
B&S Quantum, Chief 10W30 semi.



Top
#2533373 - 02/11/12 09:43 PM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: Shannow]
GMorg Offline


Registered: 01/29/06
Posts: 2405
Loc: Mizzou-land
My question is a little off topic, but I don't know of better place in the formum to ask it. Are clearances now as tight as they can get for any of the bearing in an ICE? It seems that the machining has gotten to the point where clearances that account for thermal expansion are easily within the capabilities of mass production.

Top
#2533459 - 02/11/12 11:19 PM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: Shannow]
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 28068
Loc: a prisoner island
Always have been.

GM, and Rolls Royce used "select" fit for more than half a century.

Acknowledging that there are tolerances in manufacturing, manufacturers used to pick/make not quite to spec equipment, and assemble it to get the clearances that they were after.

There were bearings over and under dimension, 1/4 thou, 1/2 thou, 0.75, 1, 1.5 and 2, so the machining of the crank and bores could me matched exactly to the right bearing or piston to get exactly the clearance that was specified...and engine could have 8 different over/undersizes, and be "perfect".

Makes remanufacturing an engine difficult, when you have to "fit" parts together to get the best, or the best compromise.

The old ways delivered precision fit, at loose tolerances.

Japanese expect that parts are manufactured such that every piston can go into every block, way more expensive set-up,and it works most of the time in modern times.

I'd be surprised if clearances were that much better controlled than in the past...the SBC in my brother's 1969 Holden Premier still called for 5W-20, even 'thought there was no such available in Oz at the time.

Top
#2533673 - 02/12/12 09:03 AM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: Shannow]
GMorg Offline


Registered: 01/29/06
Posts: 2405
Loc: Mizzou-land
From this perspective, the idea that tolerances are getting "tighter" has to end. You just aren't allowed to break the laws of physics.

Unless we find a way to formulate alloys that allow for compensatory thermal expansion that maintains a fixed distance between rings/races, then bearing "fit" cannot get any tighter.

If this is the case, bearing tolerances cannot continue to be used as an excuse for lower KV oils. I can accept that thinner can be "better", but I am having difficulty accepting that bearing clearances has anything to do with the "thin is in" trend.

Top
#2533685 - 02/12/12 09:23 AM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: GMorg]
d00df00d Online   content


Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 9556
Loc: PA
Clearances and tolerances are two different things. wink
_________________________
2011 Mazda RX-8 R3
Castrol GTX 5w-20

Top
#2533713 - 02/12/12 10:18 AM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: Shannow]
GMorg Offline


Registered: 01/29/06
Posts: 2405
Loc: Mizzou-land
Agreed. But in the context of this forum, where "tolerances" is often used incorrectly, I tried to use the word as it is often used here. The two words, although not strictly interchangeable, are related. As tolerances decrease, or become tighter (as often referenced here), the range of clearances decreases (not the clearance, but the range). As the range decreases, the target specification for clearances can be decreased. In other words, if the tolerances are made tighter, the engines can be built tighter (smaller clearances).

Tolerance is a quality control description that uses dimensions to set limits.
Clearance is a dimension, the range of which can be set by tolerances.

Top
#2533788 - 02/12/12 11:24 AM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: GMorg]
SteveSRT8 Offline


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 15821
Loc: Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: GMorg
From this perspective, the idea that tolerances are getting "tighter" has to end. You just aren't allowed to break the laws of physics.

Unless we find a way to formulate alloys that allow for compensatory thermal expansion that maintains a fixed distance between rings/races, then bearing "fit" cannot get any tighter.

If this is the case, bearing tolerances cannot continue to be used as an excuse for lower KV oils. I can accept that thinner can be "better", but I am having difficulty accepting that bearing clearances has anything to do with the "thin is in" trend.


X2. No significant reduction in clearances, just tolerances are better managed.
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#2533914 - 02/12/12 12:55 PM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: Shannow]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 15054
Loc: Iowegia - USA
Quote:
...bearing tolerances cannot continue to be used as an excuse for lower KV oils.


Where, here in Bitog and similar sites, or in automotive industry publications?

I agree, even with laser machining you will reach a limit on toleraces.

As for clearances I do think the clearances have decreased somewhat, but not to the point that lower KV oils could be used as a sole reason,

I think there have been three factors for the use of lower KV oils:

1. government mandates for better mpg,

2. better surface finishing resulting in less contact friction,

3. and the fact the lubrcants industry has met the challenge with lubricants that have better AW components, better friction modifiers, better anti-oxidants, better HTHS, and better base oils.


As a reminder, my dad's 1951 Buick straight-eight engine used 20W20 until it had to be rebuilt at 175,000 miles due to a failure unrelated to lubrication. And at that time, the science of oil formulation was only beginning; the quality of base oils was realtively poor, and additive technology was still in its infancy.
_________________________
I may not be that funny or smart or good looking or athletic or talented but..., I sure forgot where I was going with this. smile

Top
#2534142 - 02/12/12 04:22 PM Re: Automotive Bearing Parameters [Re: Shannow]
GMorg Offline


Registered: 01/29/06
Posts: 2405
Loc: Mizzou-land
The core of my question is related to the fact that the bearing must be able to contract and expand with temperature change. How much tighter can a bearing really get (clearances) and still be able to survive a Montana winter. It seems that tighter clearances will result in damaged bearings upon cool down.

Or, am I wrong. Are there alloys or bearing designs that can compensate for temperature effects on clearances.

Similarly, even if a bearing can be designed to compensate for temperature, at some point internal fluid friction would have to get fairly large. I am guessing that we still have wiggle room from a fluid friction point of view.

Top