I'm tending to small stuff on my 31 build while waiting for body from paint, which recently included the front end. I'm blue in the face from reading about subjective and sometimes vague techniques here and all over the inter webs. So, no need to rehash the variety of homegrown techniques (anyone using the search function can get their fair share). Just a lot of "been doing it this way for X years and never had a problem". I've found no quan***ative instruction for early fords, and I understand that it may not exist. What prompted this post is that I have a perceptible movement (crudely measured by simply shaking top of tire back and forth, while wheel is off ground) if I tighten the castle nut by hand (no wrench) to a point where I can insert a cotter pin. With 10 ft/lb or less on the nut i can get to the next slot in the nut, at which point said movement in front wheel is gone. For arguments sake, bearings, races and spindles are good. They are greased. And my castle nuts have 6 slots. Using 40-48 ford setup. So, my question is if we take a '65 mustang for example, there is ford literature with a procedure with torque specs (and it happens to result in tighter than hand or finger tight, at least my fingers): Is there any reason that said procedure isn't applicable to any early ford spindle with tapered timken style roller bearings: significant difference in bearing or spindle, etc? And if not, since it is tighter than what seems to be the prevailing "finger tight" vote, can one ***ume that ford learned enough in 30+ years of manufacturing that we no longer need to live with such vague procedure and erring on the side of loose? I'm not asking for homegrown techniques. I understand the concept of looser being better than too tight, so we don't need to go there. And I'm not asking for opinions about my particular situation.
For tapered roller bearings, such as you are describing, I was taught in a Service School many decades ago to tighten the nut just snug enough that the washer behind the spindle nut could be moved side to side with a little effort by twisting a screwdriver between it and the hub. In the absence of manufacturers instructions to the contrary, I have used this method on many, many vehicles, customers and all of my own.....cars, pickups, Jeeps, trailers, etc., and in several decades have never experienced a bearing failure that I can recall. Ray
C'mon, no one can tell me why the later technique and specs should or should not work for earlier applications? For reference, this is basically it from a '66 manual: "5. While rotating the wheel, hub, and drum or rotor ***embly, torque the adjusting nut to 17-25 ft-ibs to seat the bearings (Fig 3). 6. Locate the nut lock on the ad- justing nut so that the castellations on the lock are aligned with the cot- ter pin hole in the spindle. 7. Back off both the adjusting nut until the next castellation on the nut lock aligns with the cotter pin hole in the spindle............"
Lacking spec's for the early fords, I think you're asking a lot for anyone to chime in with an answer more meaningful than what you've been reading. Not that my thoughts mean a lot on this post, but I think you're on the right track. All those years of manufacturing probably did lead to the same basic ***embly getting some sort of a torque spec, wide as the range may be. I would not be happy with movement to the wheel either and would do just what you did.
Actually, the instructions you posted from the '66 manual better describe what I do than I did. That is, I do tighten the bearing snugly while rotating the hub, then back off to get the "snug" spindle washer fit that I mentioned. It might be interesting to mark the nut and try both the specific directions given and your (and my) technique and see if the nut ends up in the same place. Wouldn't surprise me one bit. Ray
Any reason you need more info than what you have? Millions of wheel bearings over the years have proven the "snug it, method works.
I have "Magic Nuts". They replace the castle nut and give you more openings for the cotter pin. I believe NAPA carries them for 4x4's, but they fit early Fords.
With front wheel bearings looser is better than tighter. There has to be some freedom to allow for thermal expansion. If you set them with zero endplay they will tighten up when warm. A little play when shaking the tire from top to bottom tells me that the bearings are adjusted correctly.
You know that the 66' uses a thin nut with the multy position sheet metal "castle" that goes over the spindle nut..Right? Then make that same set up and adjust away as the early Ford and the 66' bearing sizes are virtually the same; maybe the spread in the hubs might be a different dimension...I never leave the bearings loose, finger tight and set the "castle" to accept a cotter pin with the least amount of back off...Maybe its the way I drive but if I put the bearings loose, one slot, then the bearing rollers will shell...65' Comet, 70' F'lane DD's I adjusted to spec and my way and my way worked better [never had to replace them again]..So everything I have messed with in the last 40 years [41-48 p*** with F1, 72' Comet with KH Disc, 05' F1, Tractor, Case Loader, Crosley, 71' Torino disc, ect] and many more I can't think of now.. ..
If you want to try a way to get a very precise setting, bolt the wheel and tire on the hub, and rotate the ***embly by hand as you snug up the bearing. The rotating m*** of the ***embly lets you find the "sweet spot" between too tight and too loose. Worked for me for years on everything including cl*** 8 trucks.
0.001" to 0.005" hub endplay shows up in some specs. Volvo 240 went from 1 flat back from finger tight (after big seating torque) to 9 to 17 in-lbs, then back off to nearest hole after they adopted a one piece nut/washer combo.
Took my front hubs off for brake work and was surprised to find this. No outwards signs of trouble. I suspect it was from running them too loose? Glad I caught it in time.
We always repacked wheel bearings at 20,000 or every brake change. Snug the bearings while rotating the wheel to seat everything, back the nut off and resnug it finger tight. Never lost a bearing that I know of.
Have you guys ever dis***embled the hubs on something fresh from the factory? There usually tight as hell and need some " arm ' to break them loose,...too tight always scared me but a buddy of mine who is a mechanical engineer and also an old car, race car guy said in heavy industrial applications with tapered opposed bearings they had less failure with them tourqed pretty dam tight.......on modified stock cars I always ran them with the " rattle " just barely out(didn't want any drag)...in the end I think in a street ap a bit tight is better than a bit loose
The Jalopy Journal
