stub axle repair

[Sundbygt]

Well gang my quicky repair of my front end has grown. I originally planned to just change to roller bearings but found some not so nice previous repair work. So now I'm going to fix my front stubs with the help of Bob Grunau and his replacement stubs. I had planned on doing this job but not in the middle of the driving season!! Anyway my questions are: Any other good to do jobs while I've got the front end apart ? Has anyone purchased king pin bushings lately ? Moss or Abingdon ? Any suggestions would be welcomed. Greg TC8008 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[David & Joyce Edgar]

Greg, I just came across an article written 30 years ago that hit on this subject (king pin bushings) and have pasted below. Of course the bushings are available are available now but I found the part on the thrust washer interesting. There also was thread on this list awhile back on the thrust washer being replaced by a circular roller thrust bearing, possibly called a "Torkin" or something like that. The part number, ATB 4089, is the factory part number and not a Moss nubmer. My question is what does EMC stand for? -------------------------------- King pin bushings are NLS in England, and shortly will be elsewhere. However, this is a common size bushing, so it is likely to be available over the counter at industrial supply and ball bearing houses. Be certain to drill oil supply holes in these. The trust washer (ATB 4089) is fitted with .004 inches of end play, but by now all front axles and splines have been worn so that EMC-supplied washers are useless (too thin), so make them yourself, tailoring one for each side. Phospor-bronze is a good material. ----------------------------- David Egar, TC 5108 El Cajon, California At 12:19 PM -0400 7/20/02, Sundbygt wrote:

>Well gang my quicky repair of my front end has grown. I originally >planned to just change to roller bearings but found some not so nice >previous repair work. So now I'm going to fix my front stubs with >the help of Bob Grunau and his replacement stubs. I had planned on >doing this job but not in the middle of the driving season!! Anyway >my questions are: Any other good to do jobs while I've got the front >end apart ? Has anyone purchased king pin bushings lately ? Moss or >Abingdon ? > Any suggestions would be welcomed. Greg TC8008

[Stan Kurzet]

Hi: Had a severe fishtailing problem with a newly frame up restoration that I bought. It would start at 35, get bad at 50, worse at 60 and nearly unmanageable at 67. Problem turned out to be the kingpin bores which were egged out at both ends of the bore, allowing the wheel to wobble in the vertical axis. I had the parts bored and sleeved to the standard kingpin size and the fishtailing went almost completely away. I get about the same amount at 75 as I used to get at 35. I think the remainder is play in all of the steering system components combined. As for replacing the bearings, personally, I consider the use of ball bearings instead of at least one tapered roller in an automobile wheel to be sheer stupidity. The axial thrust loads in a turn are quite high and ball bearing do not like loads out of the radial axis. How the MG engineers arrived at that decision to use ball bearings is a mater of great fascination for me. Good luck with your toy. Stan Kurzet 47 & 48 TC's

----- Original Message ----- From: "Sundbygt" sundbygt@csource.net> To: mg-tabc@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 9:19 AM Subject: [mg-tabc] stub axle repair > Well gang my quicky repair of my front end has grown. I originally planned to just change to roller bearings but found some not so nice previous repair work. So now I'm going to fix my front stubs with the help of Bob Grunau and his replacement stubs. I had planned on doing this job but not in the middle of the driving season!! Anyway my questions are: Any other good to do jobs while I've got the front end apart ? Has anyone purchased king pin bushings lately ? Moss or Abingdon ? > Any suggestions would be welcomed. Greg TC8008 > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > >

[Chip Old]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2002, Stan Kurzet wrote:

> As for replacing the bearings, personally, I consider the use of ball > bearings instead of at least one tapered roller in an automobile wheel > to be sheer stupidity. The axial thrust loads in a turn are quite high > and ball bearing do not like loads out of the radial axis. How the MG > engineers arrived at that decision to use ball bearings is a mater of > great fascination for me.

They arrived at that decision because the use of ball bearings was common practice when the TC was designed (meaning early 1930s). A ball bearing is perfectrly capable of handling sideways loads if it is designed to do so. The bearings specified by MG's engineers were designed to do so. -- Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 XPAG7430 NEMGTR #2271 Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO CT3479E fold@bcpl.net

[CFritz7001@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/20/2002 10:40:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, fold@bcpl.net writes:

> The bearings specified by MG's engineers were designed to do so.

Absolutely correct! HOWEVER, there are ball bearings out there which are a perfect fit, BUT NOT DESIGNED FOR ANY AXIAL LOADS Fit these, and you WILL have a disaster within a few hundred miles. I know this from sad personal experience. Regards, Carl Fritz TC # 6756 (Betsy) VA # 2009 S (Abigail) Gainesville, Florida

[Chip Old]

On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, CFritz7001@aol.com wrote:

> > The bearings specified by MG's engineers were designed to do so. > > Absolutely correct! HOWEVER, there are ball bearings out there which > are a perfect fit, BUT NOT DESIGNED FOR ANY AXIAL LOADS > Fit these, and you WILL have a disaster within a few hundred miles. I > know this from sad personal experience.

Yes, but the same is true if you use tapered roller bearings that fit but are not rated for the load. -- Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 XPAG7430 NEMGTR #2271 Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO CT3479E fold@bcpl.net

[Frank O_ The Mountain]

In a message dated 7/21/02 08:57:20 Pacific Daylight Time, CFritz7001@aol.com writes: > The bearings specified by MG's engineers were designed to do so.

[R. Zwart]

When the bottom of a message says: "Non-text portions of this message have been removed"........ I get an uneasy feeling. Have I missed the most important part of the text, a drawing or a copied article????? Thanks for writing out the article. BOB David & Joyce Edgar wrote:

> Greg, > > I just came across an article written 30 years ago that hit on this > subject (king pin bushings) and have pasted below. Of course the > bushings are available are available now but I found the part on the > thrust washer interesting. There also was thread on this list awhile > back on the thrust washer being replaced by a circular roller thrust > bearing, possibly called a "Torkin" or something like that. > > The part number, ATB 4089, is the factory part number and not a Moss > nubmer. My question is what does EMC stand for? > -------------------------------- > > King pin bushings are NLS in England, and shortly will be elsewhere. > However, this is a common size bushing, so it is likely to be > available over the counter at industrial supply and ball bearing > houses. Be certain to drill oil supply holes in these. The trust > washer (ATB 4089) is fitted with .004 inches of end play, but by now > all front axles and splines have been worn so that EMC-supplied > washers are useless (too thin), so make them yourself, tailoring one > for each side. Phospor-bronze is a good material. > > ----------------------------- > David Egar, TC 5108 > El Cajon, California > > At 12:19 PM -0400 7/20/02, Sundbygt wrote: > >Well gang my quicky repair of my front end has grown. I originally > >planned to just change to roller bearings but found some not so nice > >previous repair work. So now I'm going to fix my front stubs with > >the help of Bob Grunau and his replacement stubs. I had planned on > >doing this job but not in the middle of the driving season!! Anyway > >my questions are: Any other good to do jobs while I've got the front > >end apart ? Has anyone purchased king pin bushings lately ? Moss or > >Abingdon ? > > Any suggestions would be welcomed. Greg TC8008 > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Roger Furneaux]

I'm slightly mystified by the recent reference by Chip to "inapproriate bearings". there are basically only two types of single row ball bearings to consider, the "radial" or the "thrust". The pre-war Morris designers (M.G.s used off-the-shelf components) chose the former, which are not really intended to take axial loads, maybe to eliminate the hassle of setting up with shims. For the record, the ball brgs are 6205/6304, Timken type taper rollers are 30205/30304 I have all these, plus shims for stting up the tapers, and will shortly write up the set-up for these. ocTagonally TCRoger

> > The bearings specified by MG's engineers were designed to do so. > > Absolutely correct! HOWEVER, there are ball bearings out there which > are a perfect fit, BUT NOT DESIGNED FOR ANY AXIAL LOADS > Fit these, and you WILL have a disaster within a few hundred miles. I > know this from sad personal experience. >> > >Carl, do you have the part numbers for the inappropriate bearings? >I've put 35,000 miles on the TA's ball bearings with no problems. They are >SKF 6025/6304.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Chip Old]

I'm not the one who described the correct ball bearings as being designed to resist axial loads. They aren't. However that doesn't mean any old ball bearing of the correct size is appropriate. Ball bearings come in a variety of speed and load ratings. If you use bearings with too low a rating in the hubs, they won't last long. On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Roger Furneaux wrote to .T-ABCs:

> I'm slightly mystified by the recent reference by Chip to "inapproriate > bearings". there are basically only two types of single row ball bearings to > consider, the "radial" or the "thrust". The pre-war Morris designers (M.G.s > used off-the-shelf components) chose the former, which are not really > intended to take axial loads, maybe to eliminate the hassle of setting up > with shims. > > For the record, the ball brgs are 6205/6304, Timken type taper rollers are > 30205/30304 > > I have all these, plus shims for stting up the tapers, and will shortly > write up the set-up for these. > > ocTagonally > > TCRoger > > > > The bearings specified by MG's engineers were designed to do so. > > > > Absolutely correct! HOWEVER, there are ball bearings out there which > > are a perfect fit, BUT NOT DESIGNED FOR ANY AXIAL LOADS > > Fit these, and you WILL have a disaster within a few hundred miles. I > > know this from sad personal experience. >> > > > >Carl, do you have the part numbers for the inappropriate bearings? > >I've put 35,000 miles on the TA's ball bearings with no problems. They are > >SKF 6025/6304.

-- Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 XPAG7430 NEMGTR #2271 Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO CT3479E fold@bcpl.net