• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

[240] SKF Rear axle bearings not so sturdy under side loads?

We've always shimmed with a scrap of the dust shield (you can see it in the pic). Never any end play, no obvious drag due to preload. Obviously without it there's way too much preload and the bearing doesn't spin at all.

Interesting. I leave out the dust shield and have no issues, and very minimal (if any) end-play. Usually I end up with zero preload and about 12-ish in/lbs of bearing drag when measured with my calibrated hand/wrist. It feels like a well setup pinion bearing.

can you expand? We did wheel bearings last week, didn't shim anything..

Early Dana diffs used shims under the retaining plate to set axle end-play. You could do the same with a shim under the bearing race/cup. Reduces pad knock-back and improves bearing life unless it's set too tight.
 
Do you think its possible it is over shimmed and you are pressing the bearing cage into the rollers and thats why they ate the cage?

The shim / dust shield spaces the retainer out, so more shim would mean less preload. We have tried (briefly) assembling with no shim over a fresh bearing and unlike culberro's experience we were not happy with the resulting feel (IIRC the axle was completely un-turnable).
 
Last edited:
The shim / dust shield spaces the retainer out, so more shim would mean less preload. We have tried (briefly) assembling with no shim over a fresh bearing and unlike culberro's experience we were not happy with the resulting feel (IIRC the axle was completely un-turnable).

It sounds like something is wrong in your axle assembly. Its not normal for these cars to eat rear wheel bearings. Most people have never changed them. If assembling your rear axle without an extra shim resulted in the rear wheel not being turnable or feeling bad... you might have something thats bent or misaligned.
 
It sounds like something is wrong in your axle assembly. Its not normal for these cars to eat rear wheel bearings. Most people have never changed them. If assembling your rear axle without an extra shim resulted in the rear wheel not being turnable or feeling bad... you might have something thats bent or misaligned.

I'm sure something's wrong, just hunting for ideas as to what it might be. It's true that it's only this specific stick that's been eating them; the team has run 240s (much less hard) for > 10 years now without bearing issues.

Grasping at straws, are there any meaningful variations across years for the stub axles? We have a wide selection that have what appear to be trivial differences, but if e.g. there were 'longer' versions that pushed the axles outward, that might? add undesirable load...
 
If you happen to have a g80 diff and a long non-abs axle, there can be issues.

Not a G80; Eaton TrueTrac (modern high-preload version).

For the issue we're seeing, wouldn't a narrow stick be more of a problem? (axles maybe not going far enough in?) We don't see wear anywhere close to the base of the splines, so I can't see that being an issue...

[edit: I think I misunderstood 'long ... axle', see below]
 
Last edited:
If you happen to have a g80 diff and a long non-abs axle, there can be issues.

When you say "long non-ABS axle", are you referring to the one on the left?



Because we *are* using long stub axles (more spline in the diff seemed like a better idea...).

Would that be an issue with the TrueTrac?

Ben, how about with the WaveTrac unit? Should we be using short axles with it too?
 
On the bearing front, I picked up some Timken RW131Rs which list as a compatible part. They are quite different, but seem to have the same relevant dimensions as a set of OE Timkens off one of our spare stock:

 
Ok, spent a couple hours with the press getting filthy. SO MUCH LEARNING. Thank you for your patience.

Long axles have ~5mm of end clearance in the Wavetrac. Does not seem like a problem. About 2mm in the TruTrac. Tighter but still seems like it should be plenty.

Staring at the SKF bearings - I cannot see how squeezing them too tight could ever have caused us binding. We must have done something else wrong when we tried them without the dust shield / shims. Too much shim / dust shield clearance could definitely cause them to act up, as the outward thrust bearing ring could partially separate from the main cone, deform, all manner of bad things.

The parts in the Timken boxes are actually Bower / NTN units (R1579). They sit nicely without the shim, have minimal end play, and turn smoothly. I'm crossing my fingers for this one, and thank you for all the ideas & education.
 
Two more datapoints: found this listing for RW-902V that claims (with a hard to read shot of a paper insert from the box):

PART NUMBER IS RW-902-R

INSIDE SAYS 1971 BUICK ELECTRA..CENTURION..RIVIERA..LE SABRE OVER350
1970-71 CADILLAC REAR WHEEL
1969-70 OLDS VISTA CRUISER
1971 OLDS 88 AND 98
1969 SYLARK SPORT WAGON

RockAuto's listings for bearings for the above vehicles don't include anything that looks like these, though.

And I found / ordered a set off eBay, box lists them as replacing HB778 (but I can't find HB778 listed anywhere, so YMMV). Same circle with three stripes logo as the pic earlier in the thread, but blue rather than red.
 
Last edited:
I ran the other number (7451960 as best as I can read)on the bearings and it comes back as this:
https://spareto.com/oe/7451960
They list it as a jeep bearing, which makes sense because jeep also used a dana 30
Same number comes up as a 70s gm bearing

Two more datapoints: found this listing for RW-902V that claims (with a hard to read shot of a paper insert from the box):

PART NUMBER IS RW-902-R

INSIDE SAYS 1971 BUICK ELECTRA..CENTURION..RIVIERA..LE SABRE OVER350
1970-71 CADILLAC REAR WHEEL
1969-70 OLDS VISTA CRUISER
1971 OLDS 88 AND 98
1969 SYLARK SPORT WAGON

RockAuto's listings for bearings for the above vehicles don't include anything like this, though.

And I found / ordered a set off eBay, box lists them as replacing HB778 (but I can't find HB778 listed anywhere, so YMMV). Same circle with three stripes logo as the pic earlier in the thread, but blue rather than red.

I already told you that the other part number on the bearing comes back as 70 era GM.:e-shrug:
Also comes back as a jeep bearing which makes sense because they also use the dana 30
 
I already told you that the other part number on the bearing comes back as 70 era GM.:e-shrug:
Also comes back as a jeep bearing which makes sense because they also use the dana 30

Yup, was just closing the loop by noting that when you go pull pictures of those bearings (like, say, the A10) they don't look anything like this particular animal.
 
Go to an oldschool driveline/rearend shop and bring in all the part numbers, and the picture and see what they can get you. Dont go to the shop that makes their money putting billet covers on f250 rears. Near me is a shop that has a dirt modified on the roof as a sign. Thats the kind of place.
 
I have had this happen with wheel bearings on several cars recently. I switched back to Mobil1 grease for wheel bearings.I think the CV2 is probably fine for CVs(hence the name?) but after the last time,Im switching. Brand new set of SKF front wheel bearings on a Porsche 911 that lasted less than one rally...
 
How did the driver become aware of the problem on track? Did the brake pedal start to get long during the bearing failure? Just curious. I was driving when a front bearing failed. Long pedal but it pumped up firm and felt OK...then long again. Then a few corners later, horrific grinding felt through the steering wheel and I was approaching pit-in. Limped it back to the pits, lucky not to not break the aluminum caliper that had the rotor grinding into it as the hub flopped back and forth with each change in direction. That one cost us some time!

We never replaced a rear wheel bearing and never had a failure in ~20ish races in the 240 cheetah wagon. At the end of life of that car we were on 225/50/16 Dunlops on 16x9.5 Corvette wheels in the rear. Car had grip...but still just a skinny street tire.

I've never replaced a rear wheel bearing on any of my 240s. It really sucks when something like this happens and you have to figure out why, and replace a bunch of stuff you shouldn't ever have to touch based on everyone else's experience. :pow:
 
You were also cracking axle flanges as well, correct?
Something is not right with the rear end housing. At minimum I would swap volvo rear ends entirely to eliminate this from the equation.

Since an 8.8 swap is relatively cheap/easy if you can weld and parts are way easier to find because mustang, I would go this route sooner than later. A junkyard exploder 8.8, an extra short side axle, a welder and a weekend is all you need.
 
Back
Top