I need clarification about the new "shell" rod bearings

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: I need clarification about the new "shell" rod bearings
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Thursday, June 22, 2017 - 07:21 pm:

I realize there are now available shell style rod bearings and I'm sure some of you have used them, so I have a question as to the construction of these specific shells
Most engine bearing shells have very thin (perhaps less than.005") layer of babbit material over a copper (or similar material) onto a steel backing material. This type of construction provides superior load bearing and life to pressurized applications.
I presume that the bearing shells provided for splash oiled T engines are NOT of this type of construction, but have a MUCH thicker layer of babbit.
Not having had a chance to examine these shells personally, perhaps some knowledgeable person could educate me
Thank you


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Gregush Portland Oregon on Thursday, June 22, 2017 - 07:43 pm:

Les as far as I know they are the thin shell bearings. (subject to someone that has used them saying different). I used the new type babbitt rods in an engine because of cost shipping both ways and finding light type rods to replace the old style heavy rods for cores that were in the engine. The new rods from Snyder's were very nice in both construction and weight. My OP and others; I would stick to babbitt rods in a system without pressure lube and filtering system. the plus side is that they should be quicker to install and change as they ware out. :-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Sullivan on Thursday, June 22, 2017 - 10:49 pm:

Les, through the 60's, I worked in an engine shop. During that time, came available insert bearings for 216 Chev motors, I don't remember the part number, but they were very thin, maybe.050" as opposed to .061" for normal rod bearings, and had a very thin babbit coating. Those, and aluminum pistons really toughen those Chevys up, Remember they didn't have a very good oil filter either, well it was a bypass probably optional. Are you at Lincoln? Dave in Bellingham,WA


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Corey Walker, Brownsboro TX on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 01:18 am:

I had a 38 Chevrolet with a 216 and the oil wasn't pressure fed through the crankshaft but there were troughs in the oil pan and a tube in each one that squirted oil that would hit the dipper on the rod on its way around. Did later 216s have pressure fed cranks, or how did the oil get into the inserts? Would have to be the same as for a T motor since no drilled crank.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey, Hayward Ca. on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 02:07 am:

The 216 Chev had an oil pump that gave the mains 14 lbs. of oil pressure.
On the insert conversion the main bearing Babbitt was removed and inserts were in stalled in place of the poured Babbitt.
I think the rods remained Babbitt. I may be wrong about he rods.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kevin Matthiesen on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 02:14 am:

The 216, and 235 truck, 6 cylinder Chevy engines made from 1937 to 1953 used a oil stream lube to the rods. There was a oil tube fed off the oil pump, that shot oil aimed at each rod, which had a dipper. The oil stream would hit the dipper before the dipper entered a oil dip tray, forcing more oil into the rod bearing area. The early engine rods were poured Babbitt but the later engines from after the war had shelled inserts with Babbitt that is thicker than modern shell bearings. These engines still used the oil stream lube on the 1953 Chevy that came with the standard 3 speed transmission, the Power Glide's had full pressure oiling. These engines would run 2500 RPM with no problem if the oil was kept changed and the oil stream tube was reaimed after a rebuild. There were Chevy's with this oiling and a Wayne head that raced successfully against Ford V8's.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kevin Matthiesen on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 02:25 am:

The 216 main bearings were pressure fed oil with passages in the block along with the cam being fed oil. The over head rockers got oil from a oil tube running up to the head. This tube runs in the water jacket up to the head, making for interesting problems if it breaks.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Roger Karlsson, southern Sweden on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 06:12 am:

Mark: Did you have oil pump and a drilled crank in the engine you put the new rods with the thin shell bearings?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Gregush Portland Oregon on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 09:58 am:

We used the new pored babbitt rods not the shell type.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By keith g barrier Savannah Tn. on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 11:11 am:

1953 chevy cars had inserted and full pressure oiling only in the powerglide cars.54 all were inserted. KGB


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 01:12 pm:

The Chevy mains were babbitted shells, fitted.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Sullivan on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 01:55 pm:

Federal Mogul says rod bearings for Chevs 216, 224, 235, 1940 to 1953 is 1415SB, to use these, the rod must be bored to 2.4030- 2.4040. D.D. and others are correct, the main bearing shim set is FSM104S, I have assembled many of these engines, way more than my Model T experience. Thank you, Dave in Bellingham,WA


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 02:30 pm:

Hey Dave, do you have the oil squirter target fixture for the rods' oil supply? Back (1970s) when I was rebuilding my '39's engine I asked around and one dealer said, "wish you'd asked a month ago, we just threw it out!" Augh!! I just ran a hose into the line and evened up where they sprayed.
And now that you mention it, I did have a set of rods that had been machined for the inserts--I'd forgotten.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dave Eddie on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 02:32 pm:

I believe what Les is asking is, is there a special insert bearing for a splash oil system?
Or do you use the same bearing insert as a pressurized oil system.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Chris Brancaccio - Calgary Alberta on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 03:15 pm:

I am just putting my engine back together with a Scat crank & these inserted bearing rods.

I'm not sure who told me but he had run them for a while with splash only with no problems. Time will tell.

I did have a problem though, 2 of the rods had the indexing groove for the bearing stop too close to the edge so I filed the tabs a bit.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 03:29 pm:

Dave
Thank you for trying to get this thread back on track!!
I know there is no problem running a bearing designed for splash oil with pressure oiling.
The reverse is not generally a good idea. I presume that the shells sold for the T are in fact specially designed for a splash oil system.
Having had custom bearing shells made in the course of my professional career, I know that the usual manufacturers are quite open to making a shell with significantly thicker layer of babbit than the ones made for "modern " pressure oiled engines. I was simply trying to get some clarification!!
I talked to a friend last night who has some of these shells in his possession and he is planning to examine them to try to answer my question
Thank you all for your participation


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Mazza on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 03:53 pm:

Didn't that guy over seas break a scat crank using insert bearing rods? Even though we never got the truth about how the engine was assembled (unstraighted pan, he broke 3 standard cranks from what I remember) I think the only person with the answer is scat itself, they build the crank and I think snyders makes the rods.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 04:21 pm:

Please shut this thread down. I do NOT want to get this into a discussion about Scat cranks. Please please please!!!!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Mazza on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 04:30 pm:

Oh no, I did not mean that, I just remembered that man had an issue, and that the only people who know if these rods will work is scat and snyders.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Roger Karlsson, southern Sweden on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 06:55 pm:

It's interesting that Lang's has a text with the rods for insert bearings that they have to be used together with a drilled crank and an oil pump, while Snyder's doesn't have any such instructions..?

https://www.modeltford.com/item/3024FSTD.aspx
http://www.snydersantiqueauto.com/rod-bearings-insert-set

On traditionally babbitted T rods there's chamfers at the split for the cap where oil enters, no such on the inserts - only enter (without oil pressure ) at the small hole in the oil scoop in the cap.

I wouldn't like to drill a thin T crank for pressure - too advanced for me, so I think it would be interesting to try setting up a pre powerglide style Chexxy oil system in a T engine, with oil pipes directing oil towards oil scoops on the rods. Don't know if that would be enough for the new Snyder's rods?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Schubert on Friday, June 23, 2017 - 08:03 pm:

Roger
I've drilled a stock T crank. Yes more tricky than the A crank. I used a 5" long 1/8" drill bit


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Sullivan on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 11:22 am:

David Dewey I do not, or never had that fixture. When I worked for that shop, the Chevy dealer was across the street, they did it. Sorry, Dave in Bellingham, WA


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kohnke Rebabbitting, Clare, Iowa on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 01:47 pm:

4 Cylinder Chevy mains had poured solid babbitt mains, front, and rear, that were removable. The center was a Bronze, babbitt lined shell. The 4 Cylinder rods were all poured, and smooth bore, except in 1928, had an X groove on some rods that were bored for it.

1929 to 1931 6 cylinder Rods were X grooved, and much larger. The mains were all bronze, and Babbitt lined.

1932 to 1936 were X grooved rods, and the main shells were tin like, and made of steel, babbitt lined.

1937 first year of the 216. Main shells again were tin, and Babbitt lined, and that went all the way through 1953. The 216 rods here also poured Babbitt from 1937, through, 1953, the last year. After that was inserts, and many rods were changed over.

There are 3 different widths of 216 rods, so you have to make sure that they fit the crank you have.

Herm.

1. First pictures of Chevy 4

2. 1929 to 1931

3. one of out 216 Rods













Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey, N. California on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 02:23 pm:

David S.
I just wondered since it sounded like you'd done quite a few of those engines. I've only seen the fixture in the service manual pics.
For those who might not be familiar with the system, the Ch**y oiling system had somewhat pressurized mains and the rods were "pressurized by an oil distribution system that sprayed oil into the rod dippers as they passed through oiling troughs suspended in the bottom oil pan. This somewhat pressurized the rod bearings.
Herm, looking at all your work, do you have one of these target fixture? I'm thinking they're kinda rare nowadays.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Chadwick Azevedo on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 02:28 pm:

Bump to get rid of the spam


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bob Coiro on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 03:16 pm:

anti-spam bump


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Greenlees on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 05:19 pm:

I recently purchased an early 1913 "T" racing car chassis with a 1913 racing engine and a transmission w/a cutdown flywheel and was updated as needed to stay competitive. It first used a Roof 16-valve racing head that was later updated to a Fronty SR dual port racing head. The later style heavy counter-balanced racing crankshaft w/all the main and rod journals sized 1 5/8" in dia. is drilled for full oil pressure supplied by a front mounted camshaft driven two stage oil pump w/scavenge and pressure sections.

The rods appear to be bored out 4-cyl. Chevrolet w/the dippers cut off and the bearings re-babbitted and bored w/NO oil grooves like modern bearings are because they are not needed due to the oil pressure. The only grooves necessary are front to back in the mains which do not go out to the ends and are only necessary to distribute oil due to the long bearing width; a straight single round oil groove is also needed where the oil enters the main bearing so it will also be fed to the rod bearings.

The best place to introduce the oil is two the top of the mains, not the bottom as was done early on, so a proper oil wedge will build up before it gets to the bottom of the bearing where the load is higher.

I have a second racing engine from a different application w/sleeved down 3-7/16" bores which would rev higher than a standard bore 3- 3/4" "T" engines at the time. It is fitted an earlier racing crankshaft w/full cylindrical counter weights that uses bored out and balanced "T" rods. The rod bearings once again have no grooves because they are not needed and the mains again only have simple long and cylindrical grooving.

If you use these new inserted rods, just as the Lang's states, you need an oil pump that delivers at least 20 psi (rule of thumb is 10 psi for every 1000 rpm over 1000) 30 psi for 2000 rpm and 40 psi for 3000 rpm) to the drilled crank and this oil should be filtered. The oil should be run thru the filter first and then directly to the mains so it is clean oil w/out any dirt in it it which will wear the rod insert bearings and the crankshaft as it cannot embed itself into the harder bearing. Softer and thicker babbitt bearings will allow larger dirt and debris particles to embed themself into the bearing and do less harm than it would w/inserts.

Learn all about the "oil wedge" seen below at: http://kingbearings.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Engine-Bearings-and-how-they-work.pdf



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon, Grass Valley, CA on Saturday, June 24, 2017 - 06:57 pm:

David Greenlees, As always, good to see your comments and information here!

For whatever it is worth, my dad was an old world Ch### man. I have worked on almost as many 216 and 235 motors as I have model T engines. I also have a bunch of leftover stuff from them, including maybe two sets of NORS Babbitted rod sets.

Based upon things I learned many years ago, and think maybe I know. My concern with the idea of inserts in general for model Ts and other cars not designed for them, is heat transfer. Babbitt directly on the rod transfers heat much better directly to the rod, which is then cooled by the oil splashing onto it. Inserts do not transfer heat as well, so therefore the bearing itself runs hotter.

The other issue that 216s had that may not apply to a modified T engine, was rpm. There was a saying well known during the 216 era. Not entirely accurate, as certain variables changed the actual numbers. "You can run a 216 Chevy all day every day forever at 59 mph. At 60 mph, you will blow it up in a day. " The truth was in the rpm. The higher the rpm was, the faster the beatings and pressures on the rod pushed the oil out of the running bearing. That spray stream oil to the rods would provide plenty of oil at below 59 mph (standard car gearing etc). But at higher speeds, the restrictions in the oil lines did not allow more oil actually in the bearing, so it began to run short on adequate oil right around 60 mph.


I would love to hear some really good personal experiences from a few people that have put some hard driving on these bearings in a T.


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