Oddjob

Any known difference between Porsche main and rod bearing in comparison to the Glyco bearings sold by most/all the aftermarket suppliers, other than price?

Heard rumors that the factory bearings have a tighter tolerance/spec - any confirmation of that?


Also, OE Turbo piston rings are over a $100 per piston. The Goetze 951 rings are about $100 for all 4. Whats the difference? Anyone actually bought a set of the OE rings, used them, or compared to Goetze rings?

KuHL 951

When I priced rebuild parts through a discount west coast Porsche dealer they offered the Glyco bearings and Goetze rings as OE just like most vendors. The price was only about 15%-25% higher than where I bought all my parts. Both Goetze and Gylco are used often and pretty well respected from the research I've done here before my rebuild.

Oddjob

Thanks Steve,

I noticed that Lindsey Racing offers both the Glyco and Porsche OE bearings; the OE bearings are twice as much as the Glyco from them. I have not called them to ask what they think the difference is (because I was not planning on ordering from them), but thought that someone else may have.

I assumed that most rebuilders are using the Glyco and Goetze parts, due to the availability and pricing in comparison with the OEs. I have used Glyco/Goetze in the past, but was curious if anyone knows the difference and if there is any justification to go with the more expensive OE bearings (if you buy them from Hennessy or Sunset, the bearing sets are only about 20% more than the Glyco sets) or piston rings?

potent951turbo

I have been wondering this myself since I am getting ready to put a new set of rod bearings in my car. I put a set of Glyco rod bearings in my old 951 and never had a problem. The car is owned by another member here, I wonder how they looked if he pulled them out.

KuHL 951

I guess what I was trying to say before is that Glyco also makes the OE bearings sold by dealers in Porsche packaging according to a few sources. I can't vouch for Goetz rings though but I bet it's the same story. I've checked out motor mounts before in a dealer Porsche box and the good ones from Paragon...they are identical only the packaging was different.

Oddjob

Thats basically my question. Are Glyco and Goetze the OEM suppliers, and are the generic packaged bearings and ring sets, the same OE specs as used/supplied by Porsche? I have heard that they are, but have also heard that they are not the same. So I do not know with any certainty.

I do know that the bearings (original factory installed) that I pulled out of one motor did not have the same stampings on them as the Glyco that I replaced them with. So I assumed that the OE supplier in 86-89 was not Glyco (or that their stampings have changed over the years), but that does not mean that porsche does not currently use Glyco as their OE bearing supplier.

KuHL 951

Jim,
This related thread of 3 months ago might help. Especially the last post.

https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...ighlight=glyco

Glyco has been around longer than Moses, well almost. The original bearings would not have a Glyco stamping as OE parts are usually outsourced about 5 years after the end of a models production. I'm sure whoever made the original bearings was either assimilated in Federal-Mogul like Glyco or is no longer servicing a specialty market like the 944 bearings. When you think about it why would any company want to compete for such a low volume item? I'm confident that Glyco is probably the only show in town for 944 bearings and they appear to be as good as the original.

Tom M'Guinn

Well, I may now have a definitive answer to the glyco bearing question. The nose bearing that came with my Glyco main bearing set had a defect, so I decided to order an official PCNA nose bearing. The bearing I received from Sunset in an official PCNA box was by all appearances idential to the Gylco bearing, right down to the stampings. Most importantly, I was clearly stamped with the Glyco logo -- i.e., the bearing in the Glyco box was idential to the bearing in the PCNA box. The only difference was price.

Tom M'Guinn

To be clear, the picture I posted above is the bearing from the PCNA box. For those not familiar with that logo, here it is on a Glyco box....

special tool

Nice

KuHL 951

Thanks Tom. I love follow-ups Guess that confirms it, a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW: What was the defect on the first crank nose bearing? It would be good to know what to look for before I install mine.

Thom

Interesting.
Here is a picture of the nose bearing I have and it doesn't even have the Porsche part number. The box of the set it comes from is slightly different from yours too.

Tom M'Guinn

Sorry, I should have mentioned that. The only think different that I could see is that the PCNA part had the porsche part number, whereas the Glyco version has a glyco number. Otherwise the same. Also, the box I posted was just to show the logo -- not positive that was a 944 main bearing box.

As far as the defect, I think the box got banged around or something. Where the two ends join to complete the loop, there was a noticeable ridge where the two ends were no aligned well.

Oddjob

Appears to be a chronic problem with the Glyco packaging. The entire main bearing set is packed loose in the box, and edges/corner get banged up. I have ordered 3 sets of main beaings from two difference suppliers - all have had scratched up bearing surfaces, one set was bad enough that I had to return them for replacement.

Tom M'Guinn

Just check the rod bearings too. Left is Glyco, right is PCNA. Note the Glyco logo on the factory bearing. Looks like there is no reason to pay extra for the "Porsche" bearings...