Landcruiser 60 - Swivel Hub Bearing Problem
Just hoping one of you can confirm my suspisions.
I've just pulled the front axle apart to sort a leaky seal and noticed the swivel hubs felt notchy on both sides.
I've stripped them down and sure enough, they look like this
IMG_0881 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
IMG_0882 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
I've obviously done something wrong.
Both sides are roughly the same. Far worse on the upper bearings than on the lowers, but evident on both (upper pictured)
Too much pre-load?
I was mindfull and aware of this when fitting them, but seems the most likely culprit.
Or could too little pre-load also give similar results?
They felt lovely when I fitted them about 2 years ago.
They've done about 6k hard miles in Africa and about 4k pottering about in UK.
No way that's 'fair wear and tear' on genuine Koyo bearings, is it?
Any thoughts appreciated
you say they felt lovely when you did the fit , did you test for torque required to move them ?
Yeah, used a spring gague in the hole for the rod end, as per haynes manual.
Can't for the life of me remember where in the 25 - 44 Nm range i set them, but would've been aiming for 34 - 35.
That wear couldn't be due to being laid up quite a lot since they were fitted, could it?
When i swiveled them by hand the hubs wanted to 'notch in' in the straight ahead position, and i can be a bit ocd with parking it that way!
Thanks for the reply. Any other thoughts appreciated
Its more likely to be caused by overtightening than being loose as if loose I would expect to see the lower bearing damaged as this is where the hammering would take part . I have seen something similar on lower bearing in old landrover , but that had been stood unmoved in a barn for more than 20years !! and had been caused by rust . HTSH
Thanks for your input, i absolutely agree with what you're saying.
I think i'm formulating a theory......could the problem be in the wording of the Haynes manual??
They say 25 - 44 Nm. Do they actually mean 25 - 44 N measured at the rod end hole?
As that point is only 0. not very much meters from the pivot, i probably applied a multiplication to the Nm figure i was aiming for.
Does 34N on a spring gague in the rod end hole sound like a reasonable number?
I'm no expert on apposed taper bearings, but it doesn't sound crazy to me.
Much more does start to sound like too much the more i think about it.
I suggest too much pre-load.
With 80s when replacing like for like bearings I find that we don't normally have to mess with the shims, however with the 60s it is a little different.
I would ignore the Nm pre-load settings and use a traditional fishing scales on the steering arm measuring between 6-10lbs.
If you email me I can mail you the correct bits from the factory manual, it is a lot more informative :-)
Thanks very much Julian, i really appreciate it.
6 - 10lbs it is then & may the sun shine this weekend!
I'll send you a mail now, i certainly wouldn't turn down any 60 infobier
Just to wrap this up for anyone in the same boat.
It was the wording in the Haynes manual that did cause me to set too much pre-load.
25 - 44N = 5.6 - 9.9lbs
So they said Newton Meters, but meant Newtons measured at the end of the steering arm.
I had the same with my Hilux, though quite a bit worse. I think they were the original ones, so we're talking over 400,000 km.
Still not clear about the figures you used..
Lets assume the moment at the eye on the steering arm is 33 cm from the centre of the bearings, just for ease of mental arithmetic.
If the Haynes manual says give it 36 Nm, then you should apply 12 N on the spring balance..
Putting 36 Nm on the balance would be applying over 100 Nm of preload to the bearings.
So what did you use?? Surely you have put as least as much on this time, so not solved the issue which caused the problems... Unless of course they were not genuine Koyo bearings??
|All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:17.|