EPS Eternal fix Cylindrical roller bearing ims with oil feed
#31
Drifting
Martin or whoever:
I am trying to help you.
I agree LN/JR should have competition. JR agrees.It is the American Way. But to compete you need to be at least equal,or better.So let us help you?
You said:
" ball vs roller if you notice the EPS IMS use the load portion on the roller and the thrust portion on the face of the outer race that is slick in my opinion"
You mean their roller bearing has thrust flanges -I think? Just like the LN/JR rejected design.
In what way is the Vertex cylindrical roller bearing different the one LN/JR abandoned ?
It is linked here - you have seen this before:
http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/
I think this is what you mean?
Please understand I am asking just about the bearing design. Not the pump drive shaft, not oil-feed, just the physical features of the bearing. They are identical.
This solves the steel ball-bearing related weakness(?) of radial load but introduces three new problems -thrust load inadequacy,uncontrolled oil-pressure bleed and heat generation.
So ,logically , why do you/Vertex claim the cylindrical roller bearing,even with thrust flanges is adequate when Timken/Ed & the number one sales/marketing/development/patent guys have generously identified the fatal weakness of the cylindrical roller bearing for this application ? Look for posts by Rennlister "EIB" -the ex-Timken Engineer.
I am not championing LN/JR. Vertex and others could compete with an equivalent design ,but not with an inferior one. Their only advantage for me is that they are diy-friendly.Pity it is not proven as effective as some of the alternatives.
Why not try something that LN/JR have not offered/patented ?
For example (mad perhaps?) a cylindrical roller bearing with needle roller thrust bearings to answer the thrust problem?Too much heat/rolling resistance?
Perhaps a spherical bearing?
Or a diy-friendly staggered ,dual row steel deep-groove ball bearing for the single-row cars.
With/without oil-feed from the filter sandwich adapter or the cam cover.
You'll find we are a very helpful bunch here at Rennlist - if you answer technical objections to your recommendations directly. If it is just your opinion/faith/dislike of some personality - that is O.K. too. But to avoid being ridiculed you need data/evidence/measurements/facts if you are persistently recommending an expensive choice that may be very harmful to our fellow Rennlisters.
If it is just your opinion - that is great - just say so. I am trying to help you.
I am trying to help you.
I agree LN/JR should have competition. JR agrees.It is the American Way. But to compete you need to be at least equal,or better.So let us help you?
You said:
" ball vs roller if you notice the EPS IMS use the load portion on the roller and the thrust portion on the face of the outer race that is slick in my opinion"
You mean their roller bearing has thrust flanges -I think? Just like the LN/JR rejected design.
In what way is the Vertex cylindrical roller bearing different the one LN/JR abandoned ?
It is linked here - you have seen this before:
http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/
I think this is what you mean?
This solves the steel ball-bearing related weakness(?) of radial load but introduces three new problems -thrust load inadequacy,uncontrolled oil-pressure bleed and heat generation.
So ,logically , why do you/Vertex claim the cylindrical roller bearing,even with thrust flanges is adequate when Timken/Ed & the number one sales/marketing/development/patent guys have generously identified the fatal weakness of the cylindrical roller bearing for this application ? Look for posts by Rennlister "EIB" -the ex-Timken Engineer.
I am not championing LN/JR. Vertex and others could compete with an equivalent design ,but not with an inferior one. Their only advantage for me is that they are diy-friendly.Pity it is not proven as effective as some of the alternatives.
Why not try something that LN/JR have not offered/patented ?
For example (mad perhaps?) a cylindrical roller bearing with needle roller thrust bearings to answer the thrust problem?Too much heat/rolling resistance?
Perhaps a spherical bearing?
Or a diy-friendly staggered ,dual row steel deep-groove ball bearing for the single-row cars.
With/without oil-feed from the filter sandwich adapter or the cam cover.
You'll find we are a very helpful bunch here at Rennlist - if you answer technical objections to your recommendations directly. If it is just your opinion/faith/dislike of some personality - that is O.K. too. But to avoid being ridiculed you need data/evidence/measurements/facts if you are persistently recommending an expensive choice that may be very harmful to our fellow Rennlisters.
If it is just your opinion - that is great - just say so. I am trying to help you.
Last edited by Schnell Gelb; 02-02-2015 at 07:16 PM.
#32
The name Is Scott, you are telling me that the solution to the ball bearing failing is to use the same ball bearing in a ceramic and Knock out the seal on one side and splash oil on it. and because timken did a study and said the roller got hot. all bearing get hot *** long as there is sufficient oil to cool 9.5 QT. there is more surface area on a roller to get hot that is why it supports more load. what ever they come up with nobody offers a warranty to replace the motor if there product fails.
Every post I have read in reference to the IMS issue makes more sense than anything Porsche has said or done!!
In the end I want to drive my car and not worry about the engine exploding and rendering my car sold for parts on eBay. I do love this car but it is a abusive relationship. I would like to ask the CEO why the f would you have some of the best engineers in the world build such a beautiful car with mechanical flaws that were created by saving money on a $100,000 sports car. hopefully the EPS IMS bearing will give me piece of mind and I can enjoy the car.
Every post I have read in reference to the IMS issue makes more sense than anything Porsche has said or done!!
In the end I want to drive my car and not worry about the engine exploding and rendering my car sold for parts on eBay. I do love this car but it is a abusive relationship. I would like to ask the CEO why the f would you have some of the best engineers in the world build such a beautiful car with mechanical flaws that were created by saving money on a $100,000 sports car. hopefully the EPS IMS bearing will give me piece of mind and I can enjoy the car.
#33
Drifting
Ah yes, er ... Scott . Cześć :-).
Now you have vented, can we get back to the Engineering ?
Can you answer any of the questions I gently posed to you?
If you can't give technically sound answers,perhaps someone from EPS or Vertex could help out? Because so far the case for a roller bearing is not convincing.
1. Thrust load
2. Heat
3. Pressure bleed
You can say all 3 are insignificant - that is O.K. But do you have data for that or just angry feelings ? The anger is O.K. but not if you claim it is verifiable Engineering fact. If you say it is your opinion but you have no facts- that is O.K. too. Maybe EPS or Vertex have the facts. So far they have produced none -just an oily video.
And btw - most of us are painfully aware of the failings of this design but we don't rant much anymore. We're here to fix the problems -without any false hopes. We desperately need diy-friendly cost-effective fixes and Rennlist is a great place to exchange ideas & experiences. But there is a responsibility to strictly differentiate between mad ideas , previous experience, speculation, fact and nonsense. If Rennlist becomes renowned for promoting ineffective/unproven 'solutions' ,it will produce some very disillusioned Rennlisters.
And you should talk to Martin - he mimics your 'literary style' perfectly. It is like a signature -unique down to syntax,gramar and vocabulary.Amazing coincidence. Perhaps he is originally from the same town as you ?
Now you have vented, can we get back to the Engineering ?
Can you answer any of the questions I gently posed to you?
If you can't give technically sound answers,perhaps someone from EPS or Vertex could help out? Because so far the case for a roller bearing is not convincing.
1. Thrust load
2. Heat
3. Pressure bleed
You can say all 3 are insignificant - that is O.K. But do you have data for that or just angry feelings ? The anger is O.K. but not if you claim it is verifiable Engineering fact. If you say it is your opinion but you have no facts- that is O.K. too. Maybe EPS or Vertex have the facts. So far they have produced none -just an oily video.
And btw - most of us are painfully aware of the failings of this design but we don't rant much anymore. We're here to fix the problems -without any false hopes. We desperately need diy-friendly cost-effective fixes and Rennlist is a great place to exchange ideas & experiences. But there is a responsibility to strictly differentiate between mad ideas , previous experience, speculation, fact and nonsense. If Rennlist becomes renowned for promoting ineffective/unproven 'solutions' ,it will produce some very disillusioned Rennlisters.
And you should talk to Martin - he mimics your 'literary style' perfectly. It is like a signature -unique down to syntax,gramar and vocabulary.Amazing coincidence. Perhaps he is originally from the same town as you ?
Last edited by Schnell Gelb; 02-02-2015 at 07:39 PM.
#34
It dose feel good to vent thanks, i feel that ALL these companies are trying to solve the problem and i am grateful because otherwise we are all screwed. I Don`t claim to have anything more than a opinion. but I do look at bearing failure all day and make changes to help correct these problems. I see less of ball bearing and more roller bearing in the same application with less failure. I hope that EPS works for me and i am sure you do to. And maybe when the Ball bearing exploded in a 60 ton Drake press and one of the ***** went through my shoulder and came out my armpit
that gave me a bias opinion.
Cheers Scott
that gave me a bias opinion.
Cheers Scott
#35
snip
It is linked here - you have seen this before:
http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/
I think this is what you mean?
They are identical.
It is linked here - you have seen this before:
http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/
I think this is what you mean?
They are identical.
Schnell, you and I have crossed paths on a boxster forum where I disclosed that I was willing to try the EPS bearing. I've since ordered and received the bearing. It differs significantly from some of their published pictures and is quite different from the one in the link provided.
The roller bearing in that write up has a cage with an inner and outer race, just like the ball bearings originally fitted. With the EPS bearing the inner race and roller bearings take ZERO thrust load by design.
By my measurement, the outer bearing race has 0.006" clearance between the thrust face of the IMS bolt, and the IMS cover. Those faces are full diameter, precision ground surfaces. It's not just "a washer" as I've seen some people call it.
Even if the rollers were taking thrust load, and we accept that the thrust capacity of a roller is less than a ball bearing, how much thrust load is there?
Back when I used to hop up VW type 1 motors I managed to hammer a crank case pretty badly. The main bearing which took all the thrust was fine, it was the case web under the bearing that didn't do so well. But in the type 1 it has helical cut cam gears which generated quite high thrust loads which changed direction depending on whether you were hard on the throttle (asking 3X the power that the engine ever developed stock) or under heavy engine breaking. I went with straight cut cam gears and lived with the noise they produced (I rather liked it actually).
The M96 has chains which don't in themselves generate fore/aft thrust. It is my theory (read: opinion, not fact) that the only thrust loads the M96 IMS shaft will see is from the inertia of acceleration and deceleration of the vehicle. That inertia is a product of the weight of the IMS shaft (it's a hollow tube and quite light) and some of the weight of the three chains which go over the IMS. That's really not a whole lot of weight to restrain, and while my 986 is fast it is not exactly eyeball flattening.
If the limit for a roller was 150 lbs of thrust that would be allow a 50 pound shaft assembly to have 3G acceleration/deceleration. As it is I don't think the IMS even weighs 3 pounds. It would be quite difficult to calculate the amount of chain weight carried by the IMS. It is obviously more than just the part wrapped around the sprockets since the ramps do nothing to restrain fore/aft motion. Even if we used the entire weight of the three chains (I'm omitting the outer two chains since they can't possibly impart thrust to the IMS), it doesn't add up to 10 pounds, which means I can subject the car to 15G fore/aft acceleration. That is space shuttle territory or a collision to develop those numbers. The logical way to determine what thrust loads there really are would be to instrument the car and go drive the **** out of it.
I would not be even slightly surprised to know that Jake has done this.
Before I say this next part, Schnell I have no beef with you or anything you've written and I enjoy the discussion so this isn't directed at you in any way. All I'm doing is restating what I mentioned in another forum:
As of a few months ago Vertex had done 800 installs of the EPS roller in two years with no returns. If that bearing were junk we would certainly have data to show that the roller really is bad and be able to offer more than just point to a one page document telling us why it won't work.
Me, I'm going to run one for 6-8 months and then tear my engine down again and do it right (3.6L LN Nickies and some decent connecting rods for starters). I'll cheerfully post up pics of my bearing when it comes out.
#37
Drifting
Let's be clear, nobody has called the roller bearing "Junk".
Let's try to use engineering terms in their most pedantic ,conventional meaning because otherwise this discussion will deteriorate to uselessness quickly.
As far as the others terms are concerned: "washer" ? I think you mean Thrust Flange? Thrust face is different. A normal IMSB bolt does not have one on the IMS cover plate side.Did you mean 'nut' or is the Vertex/EPS bolt totally different to say an LN/Porsche IMSB bolt?? In what way?
You might want to go through your interesting post and adjust for conventional use of terms like radial/thrust /axial/dynamic load. Most of what you describe are radial loads,not thrust. But if you fix it,it could be interesting.I just want to be sure we all use the same conventional terms. Otherwise Martin, err Scott may as well write in Polish to us.
It is a pity that no engineer from EPS or Vertex has stepped up.The questions are simple and pertinent.
Just trying to understand.
I agree with you(and have stated it elsewhere) that without knowing the actual thrust forces experiences by the IMSB, that objection to the roller bearing is difficult to accept.
The heat issue with the roller bearing - the heat will be transmitted to the oil.How much of a problem is that ? Track cars will quickly expose that issue ?
The pressure bleed issue -how much bleeds off? No data. Pedro's DOF uses only 1/2 p.s.i.
It is interesting that Pedro/TuneRS who have a DOF system(taps the camshaft cover by removing a blanking bolt) ,do not offer a roller bearing option. Just deep groove steel or ceramic *****. Why? They have the oiling system and it would have been easy to spec & offer a roller bearing option.
Lots of questions.Few answers.
Let's try to use engineering terms in their most pedantic ,conventional meaning because otherwise this discussion will deteriorate to uselessness quickly.
As far as the others terms are concerned: "washer" ? I think you mean Thrust Flange? Thrust face is different. A normal IMSB bolt does not have one on the IMS cover plate side.Did you mean 'nut' or is the Vertex/EPS bolt totally different to say an LN/Porsche IMSB bolt?? In what way?
You might want to go through your interesting post and adjust for conventional use of terms like radial/thrust /axial/dynamic load. Most of what you describe are radial loads,not thrust. But if you fix it,it could be interesting.I just want to be sure we all use the same conventional terms. Otherwise Martin, err Scott may as well write in Polish to us.
It is a pity that no engineer from EPS or Vertex has stepped up.The questions are simple and pertinent.
Just trying to understand.
I agree with you(and have stated it elsewhere) that without knowing the actual thrust forces experiences by the IMSB, that objection to the roller bearing is difficult to accept.
The heat issue with the roller bearing - the heat will be transmitted to the oil.How much of a problem is that ? Track cars will quickly expose that issue ?
The pressure bleed issue -how much bleeds off? No data. Pedro's DOF uses only 1/2 p.s.i.
It is interesting that Pedro/TuneRS who have a DOF system(taps the camshaft cover by removing a blanking bolt) ,do not offer a roller bearing option. Just deep groove steel or ceramic *****. Why? They have the oiling system and it would have been easy to spec & offer a roller bearing option.
Lots of questions.Few answers.
Last edited by Schnell Gelb; 02-02-2015 at 11:02 PM.
#38
If the thrust is your concern, look at the fix for the early double row ball bearing there retainer doesn't sit in a groove they wedges a Spiro-loc in the bore. they do not seem to be worried about the thrust. that was a fear of mine. I have the double row and was afraid that the Spiro-loc could fall out.
#39
Drifting
Yup, without the IMSB thrust data the technical discussion can't proceed. It becomes conjecture & who do you trust ?
Once the thrust forces are known, there is still the heat and oil pressure bleed issue to evaluate.
Since neither EPS and Vertex offer nothing in these 3 fundamental issues in their literature or here on the Forum, their cylindrical roller bearing seems to be condemned by their own silence.Sad. We've given EPS many priceless opportunities here to answer the issues . Pretty photos in Excellence and oily videos don't address any of these technical concerns.
Once the thrust forces are known, there is still the heat and oil pressure bleed issue to evaluate.
Since neither EPS and Vertex offer nothing in these 3 fundamental issues in their literature or here on the Forum, their cylindrical roller bearing seems to be condemned by their own silence.Sad. We've given EPS many priceless opportunities here to answer the issues . Pretty photos in Excellence and oily videos don't address any of these technical concerns.
#40
Drifting
Scott
"I have the double row and was afraid that the Spiro-loc could fall out"
Do you mean Spiro lox ?
http://www.spirolox.com/
or: http://www.underhoodservice.com/tech...on-procedures/
or Spiralock ?that is like a helicoil
Or do you mean the part-circle wire retainer of the LN Gen 2 staggered dual row bearing?
http://imsretrofit.com/gen-2-single-row-ims-retrofit/
Just helping clarify your post.
"I have the double row and was afraid that the Spiro-loc could fall out"
Do you mean Spiro lox ?
http://www.spirolox.com/
or: http://www.underhoodservice.com/tech...on-procedures/
or Spiralock ?that is like a helicoil
Or do you mean the part-circle wire retainer of the LN Gen 2 staggered dual row bearing?
http://imsretrofit.com/gen-2-single-row-ims-retrofit/
Just helping clarify your post.
#42
Drifting
If you tell me the size of the LN or OEM bearing this fits I can look up the shear load it will tolerate. Even the light duty ones are often well over 10,000 pounds !
#44
Drifting
You've lost me . A Spiro Lox that does not fit in a groove on an OEM or LN IMSB ?
So what does function does it perform on a deep-groove ball bearing in a shaft?
Is this what you mean?
So what does function does it perform on a deep-groove ball bearing in a shaft?
Is this what you mean?
#45
No, that is not correct, read the install manual. Sits in smooth bore against the face of bearing. we can go back and forth all week, But I and many other people have a different understanding of mechanical problem dealing with them all day. My opinion dose not matter. engineering data and facts are the beginning of most mechanical creations for automobile. but we are left with the fact that a engineer created the 996 and its engine. some times creative mechanical people find solutions. All of these companies are trying there best. we have to critic, that is how products improve. I did allot of research before i made my choice. thanks for letting me have my opinion. I hope it was helpful for someone that has to pick from 4 great products.
Cheers Scott
Cheers Scott