bearing disaster

Unknown
Unknown
edited August 2011 in HUDSON
what do folks think of this apalling attempt at putting in the oil grooves on a main bearing?All 3 mains,and the cams ,have been done like this.Why on earth have an extra hole,especially as it goes nowhere?The chamfer on the ends is almost non exsistent as well.Seems to have been done with a Dremel. Its a long story(more on this at a later date)but i wanted to see what the accumulated wisdom was.Cheers,skip
ps,photo of 3 caps shows one original,one modern remetal,and the disaster.


[attachment:2]DSCN3885.JPG[/attachment]

Comments

  • Terraplane33
    Terraplane33 Expert Adviser
    It looks like an oil accumulation area, a kind of chinese 'improvement' ?
    With the original design, there is a more even oil layer dispatched all around from center to outside. Further, the oil pressure applies a centering effort to the crankshaft wich is not the case with this groove.
    I don't like it...
  • Huddy42
    Huddy42 Senior Contributor
    Aren't you lucky you called me yesterday eh.????
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    edited August 2011
    Its actually a lot worse than just the bearing shells.This engine was machined and assembled by a "reputable"engine shop.I had had the bearings remetalled in the USA by Terry Harkin,very nice job,but the Aussie "engineer" informed me that in order to set the crush,he HAD to remetal(which i payed for!)Then he assembled it,which i payed for,but the cam bearings(which were visible)tipped me off that something wasnt right when i got the engine home.The shop is 4hrs drive from where i live,so it was difficult to check every step of the process,and he assembled it before i could check his work.Last night i pulled the engine down to check the mains and the rods,all of which are machined by chinese worms,and probably useless.I wont name the machine shop just yet,as i am going to give him a chance to repay the money($3900 aud)but then its in the hands of the legal system,and i think i have a good chance of winning,as the evidence is pretty clearcut.However,if there is no resolution,im happy to let people know who to avoid.
    This old car game is too hard,think i might start collecting stamps,or renovating cardboard boxes!
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    yes ,its the complexity of the forensics that is the most difficult to sort out.Its amazing how vague a previously on the ball engineer can become once he has the $ in hand."I dont recall you asking for original style bearing troughs..."etc
  • hudsontech
    hudsontech Senior Contributor
    edited August 2011
    Hudson308 wrote:
    I believe our HET club president may have a similar story with some variation in the details, once he gets all the forensics sorted. I'm puzzled by how frequent these problems are becoming. Careful engine machining and assembly isn't some black art lost in the mists of time. With the possible exception of rebabbited bearings and pinned piston rings, most of the tools and techniques used to rebuild modern engines should be transferrable to the old ones. Our grandfathers kept these engines running with bread wrappers, black pepper and bailing wire.

    You forgot the leather belts for temporary main bearings - but that was done mostly on Model T Fords, so far as I know.

    I used a cut up coke can as a temporary shim on a Rambler front wheel bearing once - last about 400 miles, then replace it. And then there was the time I used the bottom of a kleenex box (with an Essex picture on the box, beleive it or not) as a temporary gasket.

    Hudsonly,
    Alex Burr
    Memphis, TN
  • SuperDave
    SuperDave Senior Contributor
    Model A fords have gotten the benefit of some creative engineering along the way. they too have poured bearings and dippers. The "best" I ever encountered was the one with 1/4" holes drilled in each dipper tray trough! The reason i was given, was to "allow a more thorough oil drain at oil change time".. guess why I had it apart? 1,200 miles and the rods were knocking..I was amazed that it ran that long. Probably because it was low RPM engine not stressed much... Maybe top speed on occasion of 40 MPH.I brazed the holes shut, and since the bearings hadn't fractured, took all the shims out .. it is still running..Amazing...:ohmy:
  • Geoff
    Geoff Senior Contributor
    Sorry to deflate anybody's balloon, but those grooves are pretty close to the original, and are necessary in a splash-fed bearing to distribute oil right across the bearing surface. Those are the top bearing shells, and the holes will match up to the holes in the crankcase. The bottom shells should have no grooves in them but even if they do it will not be detrimental.
  • Geoff
    Geoff Senior Contributor
    Oops, forgot the old adage, "put brain in gear before engaging mouth (or keyboard). Had another look at the pics. Simon, the two bearings on the left are as per original in the Terraplane, but the one on the right is the latest version, correct? In this case, it will be fine to use the bearing, but cut a new radial groove from the hole as in the original. The chamfer is not necessary, but you can skim a bit out with a scraper if you find it is tight here. The longitudinal groove was common practice to spread the oil right across the bearing, but it does definitely need the radial groove to get the oil to the bottom half.
    Geoff
  • Terraplane33
    Terraplane33 Expert Adviser
    edited August 2011
    Splash-fed bearing on main bearings (thus crankshaft, isn't ?)??:unsure:

    At least, I understood the pictures were representing main bearings ('All 3 mains,and the cams ,have been done like this')
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    The real issue is not really whether these sideways troughs will work or not(im betting not)but that when you pay through the nose for an engine engineered to original specs,and the 'engineer"has all the technical specs AND several original bearings to copy,you dont expect some sort of Grandpa in the shed effort that then requires further tinkering on behalf of the customer.I have had a discussion with the guy and it looks like this one is going to court.
  • TwinH
    TwinH Senior Contributor
    I'm with you Skip,I'd be upset too,BUT,I also agree with Geoff. The only issue I see
    is the lack of a radial groove to feed the bottom bearing half. What is the problem
    with the cam bearings?
  • Browniepetersen
    Browniepetersen Senior Contributor
    Six Cyl Chevrolet engines have been a long time play ground for creative engineering in an attempt to get more oil to the various parts of the engine. I disassembled a 1932 Chevy six some time ago just because I felt it was time for a rebuild. The engine was running fine but was real weak on power.) There were "trails" cut in a number of places on the old engine (some like what you have here.) Took a lot more to rebuild that engine than most I have played with.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    TwinH wrote:
    I'm with you Skip,I'd be upset too,BUT,I also agree with Geoff. The only issue I see
    is the lack of a radial groove to feed the bottom bearing half. What is the problem
    with the cam bearings?
    the cam bearings have the same inadequate groove across the bearing and no groove lengthways,as in the original.Its fortunate that they were also bad,as their visibility alerted me to the poor work on the mains.Huddy42 gave me some good info that started the investigative process.
    With all due respect,I would have thought that the lack of oil getting to the bottom bearing half would be a serious issue.
    another point would be that on the outside edge of the groove,there is virtually no bearing surface for the crank to ride on.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories

In this Discussion