2509/2509B AXLE BEARING SLEEVES

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2017: 2509/2509B AXLE BEARING SLEEVES
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 02:47 pm:

2509 AXLE BEARING CLEARANCE

THE PROBLEM
There have been numerous complaints about insufficient 2509 Axle Bearing clearance. Some have blamed the new 2509/9B Axle sleeves and others have blamed the new 2508 solid roller Bearings. Our investigation has revealed that it is Fordís fault. The new sleeves and bearings are made to the original Ford spec, so they are not at fault. The problem is Ford held tight specs on the Sleeves and Bearings but had a very loose tolerance on the ID of the Axle housing. I do not have the drawing for the Axle Housing so I measured 24 separate housings. The measurement varied between 2.201 and 2.219. or 0.018 variance. This is a huge tolerance.
The Ford specs are as follows
2509 Sleeve thickness 0.068-0.071
0.071 X2 = 0.142
2508 Bearing 0.50 nominal
0.050 X2 = 1.000
2505 Axle 1.062-1.064
2501/2502 Axle Tube ID = Measured 2.201-2.219
Clearance
Axle, sleeve & bearing 1.064+0.142+1.000 =2.206
Housing 2.201 Minimum
Clearance -0.005
Obviously Ford screwed up here, we have no idea how he made production work except with a big sledge hammer.

THE SOLUTION
We are in the process of making new 2509/2509B Axle Sleeves. We plan to solve two problems. The sleeves currently available are too soft. Fords spec for hardness was C20-C26. The current production sleeves measure C18. We plan to increase the life expectancy of the sleeve by making them C35-40. The original Hyatt sleeves measure C35.
The clearance problem can be solved by making the sleeve wall thickness smaller. By reducing the wall thickness to 0.065 you can provide 0.007 minimum clearance under the worse case conditions.
Your comments and suggestions would be appreciated.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Zibell, Huntsville, AL on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 03:39 pm:

Glenn thanks for researching this and coming up with a solution.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Martin on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 04:01 pm:

Glen,

I believe the axle housing bore is specified as 2.208 - 2.211".

However, one more minor detail, the original Hyatt bearings have a diameter spec up to .5005", taking away another .001" from the minimum clearance. Pretty tight for a 3" long bearing in a housing that flexes!

Thanks for all you do for the hobby.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Norman T. Kling on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 04:05 pm:

What are the possibilities of someone manufacturing bearings to meet Hyatt specifications?
Norm


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Allan Bennett - Australia on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 04:19 pm:

Glen, the variation in the axle housings became evident to me when making floating bearing kits. When I first made them the fit was OK but then some buyers had difficulty fitting them in housings at the lower end specs., so I had to make the spiggots that much smaller. The long length in the tube and the use of flexible flange sealant still allows a good result.

Allan from down under.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 05:38 pm:

Thanks for the inputs. It appears that Ford did not adhere to his own spec as there is a 0.015 in disparity between the spec and what I actually measured and 4 out of the 24 measured were on the low side. 2,001-2.003. I do not believe that anyone makes a flexible bearing today like Hyatt did back then. So don't get your hopes up, it would be terribly expensive today.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Larry Smith, Lomita, California on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 06:06 pm:

I have used the new sleeves that Steve Coniff originally made a few years back. They are exactly as Ford made them, and have them in one of my cars with no problems. I understand Steve turned the project over to another fellow in Colorado Springs, and he has been making them ever since. I don't see the necessity of making something that is already being made, unless the quality has taken a dump since Steve made them.
It is my understanding too that Langs, and Bobs are selling them. Have they had issues?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By john kuehn on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 07:28 pm:

Thanks Glen for doing the research about the axle bearing and sleeve information. Again its an eye opener that Ford didn't always make things as perfect as we would like them to be.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 07:47 pm:

Larry, There is nothing wrong with the sleeves currently available except they do not meet Fords hardness test. I tested about a dozen and they all tested near C18. Fords spec was C20-26. I don't think Steve knows this. I, like Steve have the original Ford Drawing. I called the Manufacturer and he refused to correct this problem. His sleeves will work just fine, they just wont last as long. Hyatts C35 Sleeves never wore out.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Sean Butler Huntington Beach, CA on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 08:02 pm:

Nice piece of work, Glen. Thanks for your efforts.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 08:39 pm:

Glen,
Is there any problem with brittleness going to C40? Nowadays, think I'd rather wear the sleeves than original Hyatt bearings.
At one time that spring roller was pretty common, but everyone says it would be "too expensive" to make now. Hmmm.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Strange - Hillsboro, MO on Friday, February 17, 2017 - 09:05 pm:

David's point makes some sense to me, sleeves are pretty easy to change. :-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Saturday, February 18, 2017 - 02:46 pm:

The Hyatt/Ford bearings are C50. Making the sleeves C35-40 just extends their life with no bad side effects. We had a lot of Snyder's sleeves hardened to C45-50 a few years ago and everyone loved them. No problems. But I think that was overkill so we plan to make our new ones C35-40. This is not brittle and will not cause undue wear on the bearing.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Saturday, February 18, 2017 - 06:28 pm:

Cool, I hope to do Barney's rear axle this summer, maybe they will be available by then!
That is, if they can keep Oroville Dam together. . .


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Sunday, February 19, 2017 - 03:27 pm:

Governor Brown blew all the money allocated to the Oroville Dam on his bullet train fiasco. He now has asked Trump for funds to fix the dam. Hope he tells Brown and his sanctuary state to shove it you know where.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Sunday, February 19, 2017 - 07:38 pm:

Aw, c'mon Glen, I was making a joke (perhaps in poor taste), no need to get this thread political and possibly deleted!
We (the folks living in my area) have been pretty steamed about the Dam before this mess. Analysis now tells us that the loss of property taxes from the lands under the lake is much larger than any monetary benefits the county has received from the dam and involved facilities. We pay more for water than most cities, and yet here's all this water--that is sent to Southern California, also our electric rates do not show any benefit to being next to the generating source. I don't think those complaints are political in nature, but I suppose they could be. We're just claiming we were sold a bill of goods back in the 1960s!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Sunday, February 19, 2017 - 09:06 pm:

That's all Brown has. A bill of goods. Mostly bills and no goods. Worse governor we ever had. And now he has made it illegal for employers to use the E-verify system to verify and make sure that potential employees are citizens. How wrong is that? I hope Trump cuts off all funds to California.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Sunday, February 19, 2017 - 11:25 pm:

Well, the bill of goods was under his Dad, Pat, good ol' Moonbeam had little to do with it then!
BTW, worst Governor we've had TWICE!!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Monday, February 20, 2017 - 11:02 am:

Just shows the stupidity of California voters. California is the only reason Hillary won the popular vote. Stupid California voters. The Golden state has become severely tarnished.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By bob middleton on Monday, February 20, 2017 - 11:57 am:

Glen & David
From this side of the mountains califunny has been tarnished for years


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Monday, February 20, 2017 - 01:02 pm:

Well, in MY defense, I was born and raised in the Great State of Jefferson, and still live within its very southern border area.
However, I am outnumbered by the rest of my siblings (3) who live in the center of Jefferson, but really belong in Hollywood. I love them, but I don't understand them.
Now back to "what's up Glen's sleeve?" (Rocky (Squirrel) wants to know!)
:-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary Blake, Kansas City on Monday, February 20, 2017 - 01:22 pm:

Um, well back to the sleeves

I tore down a 26/7 rear axle Saturday and found both Hyatt sleeves to be severely worn. In fact if there isn't a "Two Piece Hyatt Sleeve Club" I guess I'll be the charter member.

The lube in this axle was good, neither milky or rusty. The Hyatt roller bearings were intact, except for one cage starting to loosen.

I took photos with an IPad but was unable to figure out how to reduce then to an acceptable size. I no longer have my work, Windows based computer. If I still had it the photos would not have been a problem. So I shot a video and uploaded it to YouTube at the following link. Comments?

https://youtu.be/NGKuC-oU0xw


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary Blake, Kansas City on Monday, February 20, 2017 - 05:55 pm:

I think after this thread went OT to gov moonbeam people stopped checking for new comments. I tried to get it back on track!!!!!!!!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Monday, February 20, 2017 - 07:06 pm:

Thanks Gary, That's really unusual for a Hyatt sleeve to be worn out. Must have had a lot of miles.Keep on track.


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Username:  
Password:

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration