New Rod Bearings while apart - What is readily available at this time?

[fairlaniac]

Thank you.

Can you explain how you got 2.2025-2.2027?

Tough to call and talk here at work. Easier on the phone.

I measured the journals at 2.1995. I then set my bore gauge to 2.1995. then set up the new bearings in the rods and measured them. The difference was .003 - .0032. Add both of them to the measured journal size of 2.1995 and you get 2.2025-2.2027 maximum I.D. of the bearings. That is the "range" I mentioned.

thanks,

[blykins]

Thank you.

Can you explain how you got 2.2025-2.2027?

Tough to call and talk here at work. Easier on the phone.

I measured the journals at 2.1995. I then set my bore gauge to 2.1995. then set up the new bearings in the rods and measured them. The difference was .003 - .0032. Add both of them to the measured journal size of 2.1995 and you get 2.2025-2.2027 maximum I.D. of the bearings. That is the "range" I mentioned.

thanks,

Gotcha.

The reason I asked is because we normally don't care what the ID is, we are just looking for a differential measurement.  To accurately measure the ID of a bore requires a ring fixture or similar, so I was just making sure you weren't measuring the OD of your journal, then attempting to measure the ID of the rod housing and subtract the two. 

Sounds like you just need some .001" bearings. 

[fairlaniac]

Thank you.

Can you explain how you got 2.2025-2.2027?

Tough to call and talk here at work. Easier on the phone.

I measured the journals at 2.1995. I then set my bore gauge to 2.1995. then set up the new bearings in the rods and measured them. The difference was .003 - .0032. Add both of them to the measured journal size of 2.1995 and you get 2.2025-2.2027 maximum I.D. of the bearings. That is the "range" I mentioned.

thanks,

Gotcha.

The reason I asked is because we normally don't care what the ID is, we are just looking for a differential measurement.  To accurately measure the ID of a bore requires a ring fixture or similar, so I was just making sure you weren't measuring the OD of your journal, then attempting to measure the ID of the rod housing and subtract the two. 

Sounds like you just need some .001" bearings.

I agree, I pretty much added useless information with those totals.

thank for all of your assistance.

[My427stang]

Everything here is spot on as expected, but I can tell you, I am not pleased with FM/Speedpro bearings anymore.  Don't get me wrong, I trust the bearing if the numbers come in, but I haven't seen it recently.  I have seen it with FE mains, BBC rods, and even my most recent SBC. 

I see excess clearance on almost every set.  In fact I have a set of .001 and STD rod bearings that measure exactly the same, with excess clearance like you.  I keep mocking them up in new builds, hoping to clear stock off the shelf and it's a fool's errand, but I keep trying LOL

My favorite narrow BBC bearing is an ACL now, but Clevite is close (or equal) second and easier4 to get.  They are both always spot on, and the .001s are really .001

[Barry_R]

I still use the F-M stuff for 90% of my builds - especially the mains.  Something to consider is that (at least F-M bearings) are sized to a "mean" thickness dimension, with acceptance within a specified deviation from that mean.  It's been long time now, but they used to have a +/-.0002" acceptable range, which means that an acceptable standard bearings and an acceptable +.001 or -.001 could be damn near the same size.  Throw in variance for shell length and O.D. tolerances and you can have assembled dimensional overlap with different parts.  Not an ideal situation by any measure, and parts that drift out of spec without being caught are probably more likely than they were back in the proverbial "day".

[frnkeore]

When you are in a situation like this, you can't take anything for granted.

I think you have the rod journals covered but, you need to bore gauge the rod housing and keep track of each measurement then, get your machinist friend over and use a ball mic on each bearing shell and record that.

Then juggle all those numbers, to get even ID numbers for each rod. Torque them and then bore gauge, the bearing ID. If they still don't add up, re-juggle them, based on the shell thickness.

It's long, frustrating process but, it may be needed in this case.