Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Donations
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Minitrail Talk
Tech Area
Source for quality wheel bearings
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Miniac" data-source="post: 33928" data-attributes="member: 2442"><p>Since my humble post is the object of such adversarial scrutiny I feel obliged to respond point by point:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Uuuuuhh, actually that's Annular Bearing Engineers Committee. As in "shaped like a ring", not as in "meeting once a year".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorry, it's easy to drop terms one is used to using without thinking twice. I'll try to do better from now on, but I may occasionally err. At least I can depend on there being good folks here who will let me know when I slip up. (Whew, . . . I was worried about that!)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Everything is still buyer beware, but since you brought it up, ABEC ratings do address most pertinent bearing tolerance issues that I face with any regularity when specifying bearings, and I think that you give the wrong impression when you start quoting a punch list of things that are not covered by the ABEC. For instance, "Radial Runout" is a value specified by the ABEC, "Radial Play" is not, and they are not the same thing, at least not exactly. But if you build a bearing that meets rigid Radial Runout specs, by default the Radial Play is drastically minimized. You can't have one without the other, and it's that way with most specs. When manufacturing an item you don't typically get to select the specifications that you want to meet, . . . they are defined by your industry, and you use the testing methods and standards that are recognized and approved by your industry (like the ABEC scale), or your competition will certainly point out to all of your customers that you don't.</p><p></p><p>Re: ISO ratings, from what I can see, all that ISO guarantees is that if you make junk you will have a record of how you did it and make it the same way every time. But please don't tell my corporate ISO officer that I said that. <HA></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Static and dynamic loading are vastly different. I work with engineers who specialize in static loading and with engineers who specialize in dynamic loading, and often when hashing out new designs we have to put our heads together to insure that we don't focus on one loading problem to the neglect of the other. (Or other<u><em><strong>s</strong></em></u>, as the case may be.) The static load ratings and dynamic load and RPM ratings have enormous meaning to the designers who develop them, . . . and to the attorneys who represent them if, in fact, their ratings turn out to be pure b/s. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Stated that way, I think it gives the wrong impression. The ABEC scale is a rating of degrees of precision. Many radial ball bearings do not meet any of the ABEC scale ratings. ABEC-1 is the scale with the "loosest" specifications, and is the specification that the vast majority of ABEC rated bearings meet, but you can be sure that an ABEC-1 bearing is superior to any non-ABEC bearing, unless, perhaps, the non-ABEC bearing is some sort of specialized, one off part. Also, as the ABEC rating goes up, the price goes up dramatically, and, typically, either the load rating or the max RPM rating will go down. </p><p></p><p>Consider this, . . . in bearings sized for a 12mm axle, like our minis have, the allowable radial runout in the ABEC-1 rating is 0.0003", or roughly 1/10th the thickness of a human hair. I suspect that the runout in hubs, wheels, and tires of most of our 30+ year old minis is enough to make 0.0003" pretty darned insignificant. So for wheel bearing applications on Honda MiniTrails an ABEC-1 bearing with a 2200 pound dynamic load rating, and a 13000 max RPM rating, is clearly overkill, but you've made a strong case for a little overkill being a good thing, and I'd have to agree. </p><p></p><p>(Also, FWIW, I think that the ABEC-1 rating is part of the specification for the 6301 bearings used in our minis, since I cannot find an unrated 6301 in any of my catalogs.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ya think??</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Look, all I hoped to do with my post was offer a source of excellent quality bearings that haven't had their prices jacked by a seller who wants you to think that they are something more than what they are. All of the bearings that I have purchased from McMaster-Carr have been from respected manufacturers, like SKF, Fafnir, NTN, FAG (side note - it's actually pronounced "fog"), Timken, NSK, etc. I think that anyone who has hung around and endured this thread is now drowning in other people's opinions, and has probably been able to form their own opinion on the matter.</p><p></p><p>. . . . but what do I know, . . . I buy new seals and clean and repack the original factory bearings every few years, and they seem to be lasting forever. </p><p></p><p>-kevin</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Miniac, post: 33928, member: 2442"] Since my humble post is the object of such adversarial scrutiny I feel obliged to respond point by point: Uuuuuhh, actually that's Annular Bearing Engineers Committee. As in "shaped like a ring", not as in "meeting once a year". Sorry, it's easy to drop terms one is used to using without thinking twice. I'll try to do better from now on, but I may occasionally err. At least I can depend on there being good folks here who will let me know when I slip up. (Whew, . . . I was worried about that!) Everything is still buyer beware, but since you brought it up, ABEC ratings do address most pertinent bearing tolerance issues that I face with any regularity when specifying bearings, and I think that you give the wrong impression when you start quoting a punch list of things that are not covered by the ABEC. For instance, "Radial Runout" is a value specified by the ABEC, "Radial Play" is not, and they are not the same thing, at least not exactly. But if you build a bearing that meets rigid Radial Runout specs, by default the Radial Play is drastically minimized. You can't have one without the other, and it's that way with most specs. When manufacturing an item you don't typically get to select the specifications that you want to meet, . . . they are defined by your industry, and you use the testing methods and standards that are recognized and approved by your industry (like the ABEC scale), or your competition will certainly point out to all of your customers that you don't. Re: ISO ratings, from what I can see, all that ISO guarantees is that if you make junk you will have a record of how you did it and make it the same way every time. But please don't tell my corporate ISO officer that I said that. <HA> Static and dynamic loading are vastly different. I work with engineers who specialize in static loading and with engineers who specialize in dynamic loading, and often when hashing out new designs we have to put our heads together to insure that we don't focus on one loading problem to the neglect of the other. (Or other[U][I][B]s[/B][/I][/U], as the case may be.) The static load ratings and dynamic load and RPM ratings have enormous meaning to the designers who develop them, . . . and to the attorneys who represent them if, in fact, their ratings turn out to be pure b/s. Stated that way, I think it gives the wrong impression. The ABEC scale is a rating of degrees of precision. Many radial ball bearings do not meet any of the ABEC scale ratings. ABEC-1 is the scale with the "loosest" specifications, and is the specification that the vast majority of ABEC rated bearings meet, but you can be sure that an ABEC-1 bearing is superior to any non-ABEC bearing, unless, perhaps, the non-ABEC bearing is some sort of specialized, one off part. Also, as the ABEC rating goes up, the price goes up dramatically, and, typically, either the load rating or the max RPM rating will go down. Consider this, . . . in bearings sized for a 12mm axle, like our minis have, the allowable radial runout in the ABEC-1 rating is 0.0003", or roughly 1/10th the thickness of a human hair. I suspect that the runout in hubs, wheels, and tires of most of our 30+ year old minis is enough to make 0.0003" pretty darned insignificant. So for wheel bearing applications on Honda MiniTrails an ABEC-1 bearing with a 2200 pound dynamic load rating, and a 13000 max RPM rating, is clearly overkill, but you've made a strong case for a little overkill being a good thing, and I'd have to agree. (Also, FWIW, I think that the ABEC-1 rating is part of the specification for the 6301 bearings used in our minis, since I cannot find an unrated 6301 in any of my catalogs.) Ya think?? Look, all I hoped to do with my post was offer a source of excellent quality bearings that haven't had their prices jacked by a seller who wants you to think that they are something more than what they are. All of the bearings that I have purchased from McMaster-Carr have been from respected manufacturers, like SKF, Fafnir, NTN, FAG (side note - it's actually pronounced "fog"), Timken, NSK, etc. I think that anyone who has hung around and endured this thread is now drowning in other people's opinions, and has probably been able to form their own opinion on the matter. . . . . but what do I know, . . . I buy new seals and clean and repack the original factory bearings every few years, and they seem to be lasting forever. -kevin [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Minitrail Talk
Tech Area
Source for quality wheel bearings
Top