Good information, a + for you! Thanks for the post.
Nolan

I must have missed it - what and where, exactly, IS the source for the OEM duplicate replacement 88 hubs? I'll need some someday.

quote Originally posted by John W. Tilford: I must have missed it - what and where, exactly, IS the source for the OEM duplicate replacement 88 hubs? I'll need some someday.

http://www.fierostore.com/P...px?s=58503&d=329&p=1

http://www.ebearing.com/rarebearings/fiero.htm

E bearing thank you so much for a great explanation on the bearing!

Thanks eBearing for the explanation. Plus for you

[This message has been edited by LZeppelin513 (edited 06-03-2010).]

>>On this thread some people are talking about the failures of the ebearing hub.
>>They kind of come to a conclusion that good quality grease may help the problem...?

No, the grease in the hub is the best bearing grease you can never buy.
It's formulated and manufactured for that specific application, and too much to go into beyond that.
The greases you can buy commercially, even the best stuff from Mobil and so on, is nothing like the grease that world class bearing manufacturers use. Commercially available greases must cover a wide range of applications; no one is going to carry a line of 1,000 different greases for every specific application. But bearing manufacturers produce tens of thousands of one specific type of bearing, so the grease is specifically designed for that application, bearing type, load, geometry, operating environment, and so on. The reason we put a lot of R&D into grease is that, after operating environment issues, grease is the most important contributor to in-service bearing life. We all want our bearings to last longer than the other guy's, and having a better grease goes a long way toward that goal.


>>Someone's experience: [link to vindcraft]

Frankly, I consider getting that many track days on the Fiero hub assembly as a considerable success.

That's exactly the failure mode for most GM hub assemblies of the era on track days and/or sticky tires, all right, and why we strongly recommend against tracking the car. Nothing to be done about that, I'm afraid. The culprit is the hub assembly's operating and installation dimensions ... the need to machine the mounting area where the rotor hat seats, with a sharper radius on the tool path than would be optimal, and a thinner flange than would be optimal ... for today's demands, not 1980's demands. That particular design, because of the tight packaging, causes a stress riser. GM was able to better understand and deal with that issue in hub/rotor designs that came a few years later, but it was a steep learning curve for them. We can't change the thickness, chamfer, radius, or other critical dimensions or the hub won't fit.

A better idea is to rotate them side-to-side after each track day. For example, I usually run at Mid-Ohio, which is very hard on left front tires and wheel bearings. We'll often swap the spindles and/or whole assemblies left-to-right so the stresses are spread and the failures are less frequent. Then when one fails, you know the other is close to failure, and you simply replace both at the same time. Replacing just one is false economy, and then you'll be back and forth, back and forth, chasing failures instead of being out on the track.

I know it's a message a lot of people don't want to hear, but it bears repeating -- the GM suspension designs, components, and geometry of the 70's/80's era are now operating well out of their designed range on modern tires and/or track situations.

This evening, I dug up my old Auto-X magazine (now Grassroots Motorsports) review of the 88 Fiero. On BFG Comp T/A R1s, the hottest autocross tire of the day, they got a whopping 0.86g on the skidpad. Today, if you pulled just 0.86 on sticky tires, you'd go home in tears. A lot of us were running R1s in those days, so I can tell you with certainty that any decent street tire today will put the old R1 on the trailer. Stock tires were Goodyear Eagle GT+4, 205/60/15 and 215/60/15, and those were greasy, rock hard beasts; I'm going to guess that real-world numbers for a stock 88 on those GT+4's was around 0.8g. And even that is probably beyond the design spec for the Fiero hub when it was conceived back in '86 / '87. Not to mention the forces now put on the suspension under braking due to the better tires and even pad compounds.

So there is a yawning chasm of demand and suspension loading from yesteryear design and performace to what we can see today, just from street tire technology alone. And is anyone still running greasy, rock-hard 205/215 tires, most especially now that the 215/60/15 is getting very hard to find?

My own situation is similar; I have an early X1/9 that will do just a handful of laps on wide, sticky tires before the bearings fail...or as many laps as you like on the original 165/13 size tires, as long as you don't mind sliding around and being painfully slow. My '88 944 on modern wheels and tires has already wiped out the front wheel bearings twice, along with the ball joints and control arm mounts, just from the performance bump from running modern tires and brakes.

In the end, those of us who are attached to our 20+ year-old cars with 25-30 year-old suspension designs, have to sit back and resign ourselves to the fact that there are limitations to what we can expect from our cars before things start to break.

Hope that helps.

Thank you for the insite.

I guess one does fail to take into account the other advances made in tire technologies and others (like brakes) that now can take all the other original parts beyond their original design specs to the point of failure.

Good information.

Cheers,

quote Originally posted by eBearing: ... the GM suspension designs, components, and geometry of the 70's/80's era are now operating well out of their designed range on modern tires and/or track situations.

I know nothing about the design constraints imposed upon the engineers, but the load margins allowed must have ranged from very low to nonexistent. Even an increase in lateral acceleration or braking (due to better tires, etc.) from 0.8 g to 1.0 g would only represent a ~25% increase in the load seen by the bearing assembly. (If all else were equal ... admittedly a big "if.") Even aircraft, where excess weight is simply not allowed, are designed with a minimum of 50% load margin. Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe we're just back to ...

quote Originally posted by eBearing: The problem isn't so much the hub assembly itself, but its engineering era ... long, long before anyone at GM knew what they were doing.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 06-03-2010).]

Sorry, I didn't mean to confuse things.

That example of .8g on street tires or .86g on 1988-era race tires only represents the steady-state lateral load measured for the vehicle as a whole, at their skidpad test speed of, I believe, in the 40-50mph range. Auto-X ran those numbers, always using the same skidpad and tires, so their car-to-car tests would be comparable.

I only used that example to illustrate the dramatic advancements in tire technology and suspension developments in the 30 years since the cars were engineered. I didn't mean for it to misinterpret that as indicating suspension loads.

It takes a gaggle of PhD physicists, materials engineers and mathemeticians to get to the bottom of suspension component design and operation. For example, 0.8g at 40mph is not even in the same universe as 1g at 100mph. Or on a 1,000 lb. car vs. a 5,000 lb. car. The tire and wheel also act as a lever against the bearing races, so the forces transferred are multiplied many times over. Think about the leverage from a 10" wheel vs. a 22" wheel. Similarly with alignment, wheel offset, etc., etc., etc. Then there are brake force multipliers, more massive loads imposed through the suspension. Another big one is impact loading, anything other than a theoretical glass-smooth surface. And don't even think about calculating the load from cornering at 1g on 17" 45 series tires, hard on the brakes, clipping the inside curb after the brakes have had a dozen laps to heat everything up.

Street car suspensions are already designed with massive safety margins. But remember that engineers can only design for what we know today, they can't design for situations that might theoretically exist 30 years from now.

Sticky street-legal tires were only invented in the early 1980's (I credit the Yokohama A001R). Most SCCA regions didn't even have an autocross program. Track days were for race cars, race teams and licensed racing drivers. The Fiero was supposed to be a sporty 4-cylinder commuter runabout chassis. And so on.

So, what's the risk of bearing failure on a typical 88 with decent (stock sized) street tires, fresh bushings & shocks, on a spirited ride through the mountains? Do we need to be worried? A failure on a mountain road could have some disastrous consequences, and that's where I get my greatest enjoyment from my Fiero.

Just being honest here -- anyone who says they can correctly answer that or any other any question about the specific condition of any mechanical component on any vehicle at any time anywhere in the world under an infinite number of operating conditions is a fool or a liar.

I think what you need to know is that wheel bearing failures, in any vehicle, tend to develop over time and you have a good bit of notice. Often, they're even hard to diagnose for a while, especially vs. a CV joint failure, tire problem, wheel problem, alignment problem, loose mounting hardware, and/or other suspension issues. Everyone I've ever interviewed who had a "catastrophic" wheel bearing failure also admitted, well, it had been making this loud noise for the past couple months, and the steering was a little loopy, and the tires are wearing funny, and the brakes were dragging, but I just figured everything would be OK until I had time to get it fixed.

I don't know that I have much more to contribute to this thread (I'm with you guys; my newest car is 20 years old, and I do have an X1/9 which also falls into the Fiero's category of front-drive-moved-to-the-middle). Stay safe and enjoy your cars.

quote Originally posted by eBearing: Just being honest here -- anyone who says they can correctly answer that or any other any question about the specific condition of any mechanical component on any vehicle at any time anywhere in the world under an infinite number of operating conditions is a fool or a liar. I think what you need to know is that wheel bearing failures, in any vehicle, tend to develop over time and you have a good bit of notice. Often, they're even hard to diagnose for a while, especially vs. a CV joint failure, tire problem, wheel problem, alignment problem, loose mounting hardware, and/or other suspension issues. Everyone I've ever interviewed who had a "catastrophic" wheel bearing failure also admitted, well, it had been making this loud noise for the past couple months, and the steering was a little loopy, and the tires are wearing funny, and the brakes were dragging, but I just figured everything would be OK until I had time to get it fixed. I don't know that I have much more to contribute to this thread (I'm with you guys; my newest car is 20 years old, and I do have an X1/9 which also falls into the Fiero's category of front-drive-moved-to-the-middle). Stay safe and enjoy your cars.

Thanks for all the insight ..I have an x19 that is a joy to drive but I dont have sticky huge tires on it. I have checked out the Dallara race x19s and they are bad ass. I wonder what they are using for bearings

Out of all the threads about 88 front hub bearings, this is what I always wanted; some to talk technical about bearings and knows what they are talking about.

Mr. E-bearing is exactly right...no question. If I would of said this 2 years ago, nobody would of believed what I would of said. Now that we have a bearing company guy that has been doing this for many years, now people are listening.

First of all, the fiero isn't a race car...get this in your head. Its an old design and people are comparing / racing / sprinting the fiero to other cars to todays cars. Many people here in my neighborhood look at the fiero and say "wow", nice car...but once they see the capablites of the fiero to other new cars, they say its junk. Its normal, we're talking 20-25-plus engineering gap.

Now if you bought a new C6 Z06 Corvette (if you wanna talk GM), many or all folks see this car "shine" with todays cars. Why?? Because its a newly build / engineered sports car.

In any matter, racing a sports car...its not going to last forever. For those that have used their 88 fiero or have replaced their front bearing hubs and they failed is because again, they were racing. Probably sliding / spinning across the track. Right??

Look at the E-bearing web site, it mentions not warrantied due to use in racing applications. People, its very common in races for Nascar, Formula 1, etc, whatever, that parts will break. And those cars are made / designed for racing.

I'm very happy to see that a bearing vendor (E-bearing) has posted to notify folks about the 88 front bearing hubs. Thanks E-bearing...


------------------
fierogt28

88 GT, loaded, 5-speed

[This message has been edited by fierogt28 (edited 06-04-2010).]

eBearing,

I am building up an '88 for autocross. The wheels are already dual drilled for 5x100 and 5x120 (they are wide). Do you guys have a wheel bearing hub assembly that I might be able to adapt to the Fiero?

Primaris

------------------
My Car Site │ www.flexyourrights.com
Just say NO!! to Automatic Transmissions!!
DRAG RACING - So easy a Caveman can do it!

For those of us that want to clean out and repack the 88 bearings we have, what brand of grease do you recommend using?...since your the manufacturer privy to good bearing information.

[This message has been edited by IXSLR8 (edited 06-05-2010).]

quote Originally posted by fierogt28: Many people here in my neighborhood look at the fiero and say "wow", nice car...but once they see the capabilities of the fiero to other new cars, they say its junk. Its normal, we're talking 20-25-plus engineering gap.

The Fieros capabilities are limited in some regards, but just by design (mid engine, low CG, no power steering) it exceeds any affordable modern car in response, road feel, and especially fun, and without having huge sticky tires either.

Anyways, on topic now... When I first discovered the '88 bearing issue, it was because I had a seriously loose front bearing. Put in an e-bearings unit but decided that if I need to replace the other (likely an original 137K mile unit) then I will most likely put in uprights from another car. Something newer, with higher production volumes. Of course, that means a very custom front suspension, but for someone who wants to have a Fiero as a daily driver, that seems like the best route since it feels like a crime to drive this car gently around the corners. Probably roll in a few other changes to correct what I see as shortcomings in the '88 front, but bearings built for any modern car with big sticky tires and a bloated overweight body should surely hold up well on a Fiero

Another thought. I seem to recall someone in the Grassroots $2009 challenge making a hybrid Fiero and using Cavalier (?) front bearings. Had to machine the upright hole out a bit (hmmm) and use Subaru rotors to get the calipers to align, but perhaps this is a fix? Or might be trading one weak spot for another?

quote Originally posted by IXSLR8: For those of us that want to clean out and repack the 88 bearings we have, what brand of grease do you recommend using?...since your the manufacturer privy to good bearing information.

Bump, I have mine out ready to re-grease. Also, would it be advisable to rotate the bearings to opposite sides?

They sure look SHINY I need new ones on mine. Mine are rusted awfully. I really haven't inspected the whole car too much for rust but my bearing being as badly rusted as they are probably isn't a good sign :/

For those 88 owners that had to change 1 bearing hub up front, what side of the car was in need of replacement??

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: Thanks for taking the time to post some good, solid, authoritative technical information on the '88 hub assemblies. Do you have any recommendation for better alternatives to the 513011 "abomination" hubs?

Find a couple of old-style Green aftermarket hub assemblies, from when they were made with tapered roller bearings (usually Koyo but often Timken). Or find a pair of NOS OEM hubs. Unfortunately, the 513011 became a loss-leader very early in life (1985 or so) and the quality of those hubs fell off a cliff and never recovered. When they started coming out of China, the quality simply collapsed. I've seen low-volume WD pricing for the 513011 dip below $13, landed, duties paid, delivered (!!). With those prices out in the market, as a hub manufacturer, you'd have to have a death wish to try to compete with a quality product. So instead, it becomes a rush to the bottom, both price-wise and hence quality-wise. A really good idea would be to find a low-mileage X body car in a junkyard and pull the hub units from it. These hubs got a bad rap for their failure rate in the X cars, but that's because they were in the front with too much weight, poor steering geometry, and so on working them to an early grave. Used in the rear of the Fiero, OEM 513011 units will be fine. Or, like I said, try to find older Green aftermarket units from when they were made with tapered roller bearings.

quote Originally posted by HausFiero: They sure look SHINY I need new ones on mine. Mine are rusted awfully. I really haven't inspected the whole car too much for rust but my bearing being as badly rusted as they are probably isn't a good sign :/

They're exposed to heat, cold, water, grunge, you name it, so of course they rust on the outside. But don't sweat it, unless you're a concours freak. As long as they're not rusted on the insides, it really doesn't matter.

quote Originally posted by eBearing: (snip) I know it's a message a lot of people don't want to hear, but it bears repeating -- the GM suspension designs, components, and geometry of the 70's/80's era are now operating well out of their designed range on modern tires and/or track situations. (snip) In the end, those of us who are attached to our 20+ year-old cars with 25-30 year-old suspension designs, have to sit back and resign ourselves to the fact that there are limitations to what we can expect from our cars before things start to break. Hope that helps.

And yet all of the cars of the 60's & early 70's (which BTW have the shaft made on the spindle) have never had this problem. I guess someone needs to make a kit that changes out the spindle for something decent like a Plymouth Valiant spindle or Dodge Charger or something...
~ Paul
aka "Tha Driver"

Custom Fiberglass Parts

E-Bearing, are you the supplier to AutoZone for their 88 front hubs?

quote Originally posted by olejoedad: E-Bearing, are you the supplier to AutoZone for their 88 front hubs?

No, the DuraLast line is a second tier product line, the hubs are knockoffs from China.
I'm intimately familiar with the construction of the hubs, and the company making them; I've been in their factory in China.
The company importing them is an old competitor, so I know those folks well, too.
It's surprising to me that the new AZ line manager added the 513040, since I designed the last changeover bearing and seal stock-in for every AZ store, and even then the Fiero hub didn't have enough demand to justify carrying it, even on special order for the primary line. Theoretically, the DuraLast line is just supposed to cover the fastest-moving A popularity and some B items.
But all of that is none of my business, the glory of the U.S. is that we have a free market economy.
What I can tell you for sure is we've sold more hubs because the Chinese hubs are providing a nice 2nd replacement business.
Seems to me using cheap parts is ultimately a more expensive way to fix a car you care about.
One low-end aftermarket parts importer I know has a great line, something like this ... his parts are like celebrity impersonators: their purpose is to look right, but don't put them side-by-side with the real thing or hire them to act in your next movie.

quote Originally posted by eBearing: I would very strongly disagree. I've seen more than my share of catastrophic spindle and spindle bearing failures (castastrophic as in lost wheel). I was once a stand-in Safety Steward for a Corvette club autocross where two 60's Vettes had front tires fold under due to spindle failure. The hot rod world is full of bearing and spindle upgrades for that very reason. Fortunately, the bearings usually fail first and then somebody discovers the spindle is all chewed up, and then they upgrade. Rear axle bearings also have a massively high failure rate, even with stock tires, let alone when you start putting wide, sticky tires on them. I've seen literally thousands of broken and twisted rear axle shafts, and most have a sad story to tell. Hence, companies like Strange, Summers Brothers, Mark Williams, Heidts, etc., all do high-volume rear axle and bearings business. Even the Dana axle bearings have to be upgraded. Heck, c-clip axle failures are so common and so incredibly dangerous, they're illegal for competition.

Really? Because I've never seen a catastrophic failure except when someone ignored a bearing going bad. I've seen these cars (the early Mopars) go 200,000 miles without needing new bearings (the original front bearings were re-packed about every 50,000 miles).
So... what do we need to do with the '88 Fiero front spindle to make it safe & reliable? I noticed Street Dreams has a 2" drop spindle with upgraded hub "using heavier duty A-3 and A-6 wheel bearings" (which will not fit the stock spindle), but I don't want to lower my cars 2" & can't afford the $800 anyway.
~ Paul
aka "Tha Driver"

Custom Fiberglass Parts

quote Originally posted by eBearing: What I can tell you for sure is we've sold more hubs because the Chinese hubs are providing a nice 2nd replacement business. Seems to me using cheap parts is ultimately a more expensive way to fix a car you care about.

LOL... There's never time or money to do the job right in the first place, but there's always time and money to RE-do it right later.

quote Originally posted by Tha Driver: Really? Because I've never seen a catastrophic failure except when someone ignored a bearing going bad. I've seen these cars (the early Mopars) go 200,000 miles without needing new bearings (the original front bearings were re-packed about every 50,000 miles). So... what do we need to do with the '88 Fiero front spindle to make it safe & reliable? I noticed Street Dreams has a 2" drop spindle with upgraded hub "using heavier duty A-3 and A-6 wheel bearings" (which will not fit the stock spindle), but I don't want to lower my cars 2" & can't afford the $800 anyway. ~ Paul aka "Tha Driver" Custom Fiberglass Parts

I should have separated the two. We see spindle *bearing* failures for a wide variety of reasons, too many to count. Spindle failures themselves are almost always due to (1) metallurgical failure from age or heat cycles or similar stress or (2) overloading the spindle with "modern" offset wide wheels and low-profile sticky tires. Both cause spindle failures before the bearings fail. I think spindles are overlooked far too often, especially after a wheel bearing failure or a brake problem causes overheating.

Sure wish I could drop any of my cars 2", but they'd just scrape from one pothole to the other.
The A3/A6 bearing combination should hold up, (that's a standard inner/outer tapered bearing combination), assuming the spindle and geometry are OK.

quote Originally posted by eBearing: I should have separated the two. We see spindle *bearing* failures for a wide variety of reasons, too many to count. Spindle failures themselves are almost always due to (1) metallurgical failure from age or heat cycles or similar stress or (2) overloading the spindle with "modern" offset wide wheels and low-profile sticky tires. Both cause spindle failures before the bearings fail. I think spindles are overlooked far too often, especially after a wheel bearing failure or a brake problem causes overheating. Sure wish I could drop any of my cars 2", but they'd just scrape from one pothole to the other. The A3/A6 bearing combination should hold up, (that's a standard inner/outer tapered bearing combination), assuming the spindle and geometry are OK.

I was pleased to find out that GM did use dual tapered roller hubs at one point. It is even more encouraging to see that this configuration can be packaged within the space constraints of the original '88 hub. The 5 x4.75" bolt circle is a plus also.

I am now intensely curious about the drive axle bearings.
Did GM ever build a drive axle hub with tapered rollers?
The AMC Eagle front hubs are drive axle units with dual tapered rollers... but they use a 5x4.5" pattern. I was really like to find EITHER a tapered roller drive axle hub that uses the 5x4.75" pattern OR a tapered roller non-drive hub that uses the 5x4.5" pattern.

Here is the thread about the aftermarket knuckles/spindles/hubs for the Fiero: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...0206-1-034430-3.html
Pictures start on page 3: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...0206-1-034430-3.html

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 06-13-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Will: First: The reason older cars don't have the same *BEARING* problems that modern cars do is due to both packaging and bearing type. The spindle type wheel bearings use tapered rollers, which have a higher load capacity than balls *AND* space the inner and outer rows further apart than they are in a cartridge hub. Spacing the rows further apart results in a TREMENDOUS reduction in load on each row for a given load on the vehicle/tire/suspension

Exactly. Why the hell GM insisted on using a tiny bolt-on hub design (& ball bearings for Pete's sake!) I'll never understand. What we need is a kit that adapts a normal spindle to the Fiero control arms - without costing so much no one can afford it.
~ Paul
aka "Tha Driver"

Custom Fiberglass Parts

quote Originally posted by Will: (snip, snip, snip, ...) I was pleased to find out that GM did use dual tapered roller hubs at one point. Did GM ever build a drive axle hub with tapered rollers?

Sure, all of the first 4x4 truck front hubs, and big FWD cars -- Century, Electra, Park Avenue, 88, 98, DeVille, Fleetwood, etc. You'll find them cataloged under 513016k. Beware, today's 513016K knockoffs / replacements are usually made with ball bearings, though.

And it's not as simple as ball bearings = bad, tapers = good.
For example, we made virtually all of the rear axle bearings used in professional drag racing, street rods, and other high-horsepower applications, and all are ball bearings. You probably wouldn't believe the incredibly violent tire shake in a Pro Mod car, or Top Fuel or whatever, yet most are using ball bearings ... SINGLE row ball bearings, at that. It's all in the engineering, a LOT of experience, and a little bit of black magic thrown in just for good measure.

quote Originally posted by Tha Driver: Exactly. Why the hell GM insisted on using a tiny bolt-on hub design (& ball bearings for Pete's sake!) I'll never understand. What we need is a kit that adapts a normal spindle to the Fiero control arms - without costing so much no one can afford it. ~ Paul aka "Tha Driver"

Because it requires less main line time, less skill of the main line workers and presents fewer opportunities to screw up to bolt a pre-built cartridge into a knuckle than it does to assemble and set up an old-school spindle with dual tapered rollers.

quote Originally posted by Will: Because it requires less main line time, less skill of the main line workers and presents fewer opportunities to screw up to bolt a pre-built cartridge into a knuckle than it does to assemble and set up an old-school spindle with dual tapered rollers.

*ding*

Give the man a cigar.

A sealed hub unit also has another huge advantage ... hub units are also far less expensive because they're built in a climate-controlled bearing factory with highly specialized equipment, and to more exacting specifications and tolerances no one can even begin to match outside that environment. Failures and comebacks of hub units, even the worst ones, are a tiny fraction of the comebacks from traditional wheel bearing assemblies.

It gets lost in the haze of time, but GM, Ford and Chrysler all recalled millions of vehicles back in the day due to improperly installed wheel bearings at the factory -- improperly greased, improperly set up, etc., not including seal problems discovered later, rear axle bearing rings that would crack during installation or in service, and so on and so on. Many people would have their front wheel beaings "serviced" by a factory-trained guy who scraped them up taking them off, dinged the seals, put in too much grease (and the wrong grease) so it would overheat later on, pushed it all back together with the wrong tools, mis-seated the inner seal or nicked the seal lip, cranked down the preload to failure, then re-used an old cotter pin to jam that castleated nut hard against the outer bearing. Then slam on an old, egg-shaped, leaky grease cap with the same BFHammer they used to persuade the bearings back into place. I've gone through training mechanics on several generations of wheel bearing designs, and most of these guys had 30+ years experience doing that, and far worse. And that's just the front bearings. Rear axle bearings got similar treatment, except it usually involved heavier equipment, bigger hammers, pullers, torches, more noise, and seemingly always required getting diff fluid all over the brakes.

Aaaah, the good old days. Not.

quote Originally posted by Will: I would really like to find EITHER a tapered roller drive axle hub that uses the 5x4.75" pattern OR a tapered roller non-drive hub that uses the 5x4.5" pattern.

quote Originally posted by eBearing: Sure, all of the first 4x4 truck front hubs, and big FWD cars -- Century, Electra, Park Avenue, 88, 98, DeVille, Fleetwood, etc. You'll find them cataloged under 513016k. Beware, today's 513016K knockoffs / replacements are usually made with ball bearings, though. And it's not as simple as ball bearings = bad, tapers = good. For example, we made virtually all of the rear axle bearings used in professional drag racing, street rods, and other high-horsepower applications, and all are ball bearings. You probably wouldn't believe the incredibly violent tire shake in a Pro Mod car, or Top Fuel or whatever, yet most are using ball bearings ... SINGLE row ball bearings, at that. It's all in the engineering, a LOT of experience, and a little bit of black magic thrown in just for good measure.

I know from my Northstar build that black magic doesn't come easily or quickly
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F.../HTML/000121-17.html

Pro-mod, top fuel, etc see a lot of loading, but not a lot of mileage between overhauls. Also, aren't they essentially solid axle cars? Single row bearings are easy to implement when the other end of the axle is held by a diff 30" away.
Start talking about wheel bearings for an LMP endurance racer with independent suspension and you'll have my attention. That combo of sticky tires, high downforce, high speed, huge brake torque and high power must be very challenging for a wheel bearing.

I don't expect a hub cartridge that will last indefinitely with 12" wide slicks. I'm more looking for a *REBUILDABLE* option that can have a decent service life (say, a season of racing) with 12" wide slicks and be rebuilt at the end of the season.
A tapered roller can do that.
An eBearing unit might last a season, but can't be rebuilt due to the integral races.
A knock off ball bearing unit with separate races can (theoretically) be rebuilt, but won't last through a whole weekend racing and has a high probability of experiencing a catastrophic failure due to the separate races (and lack of internal radius on the spind-flange transition).

What year range were the big cars you mentioned produced? What brands of 513016K are still roller based?

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 06-14-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Will: I know from my Northstar build that black magic doesn't come easily or quickly https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F.../HTML/000121-17.html Pro-mod, top fuel, etc see a lot of loading, but not a lot of mileage between overhauls. Also, aren't they essentially solid axle cars? Single row bearings are easy to implement when the other end of the axle is held by a diff 30" away. Start talking about wheel bearings for an LMP endurance racer with independent suspension and you'll have my attention. That combo of sticky tires, high downforce, high speed, huge brake torque and high power must be very challenging for a wheel bearing. I don't expect a hub cartridge that will last indefinitely with 12" wide slicks. I'm more looking for a *REBUILDABLE* option that can have a decent service life (say, a season of racing) with 12" wide slicks and be rebuilt at the end of the season. A tapered roller can do that. An eBearing unit might last a season, but can't be rebuilt due to the integral races. A knock off ball bearing unit with separate races can (theoretically) be rebuilt, but won't last through a whole weekend racing and has a high probability of experiencing a catastrophic failure due to the separate races (and lack of internal radius on the spind-flange transition). What year range were the big cars you mentioned produced? What brands of 513016K are still roller based?

Sorry, I was just trying to simplify things and give a real simple example of when a ball bearing is not a Bad Guy, even when exposed to operating conditions that are supposed to favor tapered roller bearings and destroy ball bearings. I wasn't trying to get into application-specific details, what constitutes "rebuildable" or not (what if the bearings aren't commercially available?) or compare F1 to LMP to an old Can-Am car to a new Top Fuel car. The LMP car, for example, is like an F1 car in that it's actually much easier to engineer and there are oceans of data to work with. They also don't put that much power to the ground (relatively speaking), the suspension geometries are exquisite, the tracks are usually nice and smooth (Sebring and a few others excepted), the financial constraints are few and far between, the supension components will usually fail before the bearings do, and so on. A lot of people would be surprised to find out how many hybrid ceramic ball bearings are out there hiding in race car wheel hubs.

Even though I'm a road course racer myself, I like to use drag racing as an engineering example because I think nothing on the planet was ever supposed to go over 300mph, control so much horsepower and torque, accelerate that quickly, etc. ... and because more people can relate to a ProStock car than an Audi LMP. Also, in top-tier drag racing, you're on your own, operating beyond where computer models fall apart, and where it's just down to who's got the smartest, most experienced people in their corner. The actual drag racing itself I actually find kind of boring. It's more fun to be in the car, but even then it doesn't last very long ... heck, even autocrossing nets you more time behind the wheel. But I digress.

Your benchmark bearing assembly might be such and so slicks over some particular period of time, and rebuildable. But I assure you that somebody else is prepared to yell louder for 10 hours MTBF and quickly field-replaceable as a unit. Somebody else will demand only that it survive their wacky camber and ackerman setup. Somebody else will require that it be the lowest drag unit ever built, and that it needs to survive just one qualifying session. Somebody else only cares about weight, and will pay anything. Somebody else demands it be made of unobtainium because that's what they heard is the best stuff. BTDT ... it's insane. I've dealt with NASCAR guys who insisted upon putting a set of our lightly-oiled ball bearing conversions on the front wheels just for one fast qualifying lap (worth up to about .1 second), knowing full well they will eventually fail and potentially put the car in the wall. All of that is why everyday parts manufacturers generally hate dealing with racers, since we all have competing priorities. And most of us have the cojones then to bleat about costs.

I recently purchases a pair of precision hubs for a different (non fiero car). The two hubs on e-bay came to about
$110 with free shipping and and lifetime warrantee. One of the hubs only lasted about 3,000 miles before it began to make noise. I warranteed it with the e-bay company, and they now have about 8,000 miles on them.

Only bad thing about the warrantee process was that I was charged shipping and handling to the the one that I returned ended up costing me about $40.00...

quote Originally posted by eBearing: Sorry, I was just trying to simplify things and give a real simple example of when a ball bearing is not a Bad Guy, even when exposed to operating conditions that are supposed to favor tapered roller bearings and destroy ball bearings. I wasn't trying to get into application-specific details, what constitutes "rebuildable" or not (what if the bearings aren't commercially available?) or compare F1 to LMP to an old Can-Am car to a new Top Fuel car. The LMP car, for example, is like an F1 car in that it's actually much easier to engineer and there are oceans of data to work with. They also don't put that much power to the ground (relatively speaking), the suspension geometries are exquisite, the tracks are usually nice and smooth (Sebring and a few others excepted), the financial constraints are few and far between, the supension components will usually fail before the bearings do, and so on. A lot of people would be surprised to find out how many hybrid ceramic ball bearings are out there hiding in race car wheel hubs. Even though I'm a road course racer myself, I like to use drag racing as an engineering example because I think nothing on the planet was ever supposed to go over 300mph, control so much horsepower and torque, accelerate that quickly, etc. ... and because more people can relate to a ProStock car than an Audi LMP. Also, in top-tier drag racing, you're on your own, operating beyond where computer models fall apart, and where it's just down to who's got the smartest, most experienced people in their corner. The actual drag racing itself I actually find kind of boring. It's more fun to be in the car, but even then it doesn't last very long ... heck, even autocrossing nets you more time behind the wheel. But I digress. Your benchmark bearing assembly might be such and so slicks over some particular period of time, and rebuildable. But I assure you that somebody else is prepared to yell louder for 10 hours MTBF and quickly field-replaceable as a unit. Somebody else will demand only that it survive their wacky camber and ackerman setup. Somebody else will require that it be the lowest drag unit ever built, and that it needs to survive just one qualifying session. Somebody else only cares about weight, and will pay anything. Somebody else demands it be made of unobtainium because that's what they heard is the best stuff. BTDT ... it's insane. I've dealt with NASCAR guys who insisted upon putting a set of our lightly-oiled ball bearing conversions on the front wheels just for one fast qualifying lap (worth up to about .1 second), knowing full well they will eventually fail and potentially put the car in the wall. All of that is why everyday parts manufacturers generally hate dealing with racers, since we all have competing priorities. And most of us have the cojones then to bleat about costs.

Don't be sorry. You're clearly the one with subject matter expertise and industry historical knowledge.

Lol... What's with all this engineering talk? I'm trying to do some hot rodding!

Engineering is making what you want from things you can get.

Hot rodding is looking at what you can get and figuring out what you can make.

Top-down vs. bottom up.

So I'm coming at the problem from a very different angle than you seem to be.

Ball bearings are perfectly fine when engineered for the application. I never said ball bearings in general were bad.

In the case of the '88 Fiero, the application has changed from the application for which the bearing was originally engineered.
The new application sees much higher loads than the original, while retaining the original packaging constraints. The new loads cause the original bearings to fail quickly.
The original packaging constraints dictate that no other hub can be used.

To me this suggests that converting to roller bearings might be better. The conversion linked above of a ball bearing hub to rollers shows that it's possible. Correct setup and testing will show whether it will cut the mustard or not. Most of the considerations you outlined above do not apply to this problem, as the packaging isn't changing, drag & weight are almost irrelevant, no one racing a Fiero has the capital to run a specialized qualifying bearings, etc.