59 replies to this topic

[Ray Bell]

I seem to recall years ago reading that Vandervell either invented or perfected the slipper shell type of plain bearings.

Is this right? In short, I'd like to know when and by whom they were brought about. Anyone know? I tried googling, but that doesn't really work when you don't know exactly what words to use. And I don't really trust Wiki, though obviously a lot of their stuff is close enough for my present purpose (I'm doing a story about poured bearings and want to set the scene).

Thanks in anticipation...

[VAR1016]

I seem to recall years ago reading that Vandervell either invented or perfected the slipper shell type of plain bearings.

Is this right? In short, I'd like to know when and by whom they were brought about. Anyone know? I tried googling, but that doesn't really work when you don't know exactly what words to use. And I don't really trust Wiki, though obviously a lot of their stuff is close enough for my present purpose (I'm doing a story about poured bearings and want to set the scene).

Thanks in anticipation...

In replying I'm assuming you mean the "Thinwall" bearing shells?

As I recall they were invented by Clevite in the USA in the 1920s. The story goes that Tony Vandervell, who at the time was running a small bearings company in London (bought for him by his father C.A.V.) heard about the Clevite invention went to the USA and stayed on Clevite's reception sofa for three days until they finally gave him the European licence.

I have always thought that Vandervell Bearings was acquired by Automotive Products and merged with their Glacier bearings division, but I cannot remember where I got this information.

[Greg Locock]

I'm almostcertainly on the wrong track here, but I had thought a slipper bearing was one where there were three concentric bearing shells, an inner and an outer, and then one in between. This spins at an intermediate speed, thereby reducing the friction losses.

Another thing I've heard "slipper bearing" used on the crosshead of steam engines, or on a scocth yoke possibly, where it is just a linear bearing on a 'foot' with a hinged ankle joint.

[VAR1016]

I'm almostcertainly on the wrong track here, but I had thought a slipper bearing was one where there were three concentric bearing shells, an inner and an outer, and then one in between. This spins at an intermediate speed, thereby reducing the friction losses.

Another thing I've heard "slipper bearing" used on the crosshead of steam engines, or on a scocth yoke possibly, where it is just a linear bearing on a 'foot' with a hinged ankle joint.

Yes, the word "slipper" put doubt in my mind - but then when I read "shell"...

Your description reminds me the strange "half-speed' big ends that Ernest Henry incorporated in some of his Ballots

[cheapracer]

I thought they earned the nick 'slipper shells' just because you simply 'slipped' them in.

[Ray Bell]

So it was Clevite in the '20s?

Any idea what car had them first? Any other information?

Thanks for the help so far...

[gruntguru]

Yes, the word "slipper" put doubt in my mind - but then when I read "shell"...

Your description reminds me the strange "half-speed' big ends that Ernest Henry incorporated in some of his Ballots

Probably more correctly termed a "fully floating bearing" - almost universal in plain-bearing turbochargers, although not due to any benefit from the halved surface speeds, more to do with the additional damping provided by the outer clearance gap and its ability to eliminate "shaft whirl".

[VAR1016]

So it was Clevite in the '20s?

Any idea what car had them first? Any other information?

Thanks for the help so far...

I think I got this information from a book about the history of Vanwall, which I no longer have since I foolishly lent it to somebody. So it was through the story of GAV getting the licence that I heard that Clevite had invented the shell bearing.

It says 1929 here.

[VAR1016]

Probably more correctly termed a "fully floating bearing" - almost universal in plain-bearing turbochargers, although not due to any benefit from the halved surface speeds, more to do with the additional damping provided by the outer clearance gap and its ability to eliminate "shaft whirl".

Shaft "whirl"?

I read about the Henry Ballots in "The Vintage Motor Car" - Clutton and Stanford. Apparently the bottom end of Henry's engines frequently gave trouble despite his "half-speed" big-end idea!

[gruntguru]

Shaft "whirl"?

I read about the Henry Ballots in "The Vintage Motor Car" - Clutton and Stanford. Apparently the bottom end of Henry's engines frequently gave trouble despite his "half-speed" big-end idea!

Sorry - meant to say "bearing whirl" or "oil whirl".

Oil Whirl

[Joe Bosworth]

I have always been under the impression that Vandervell´s major development was the tri-metal bearing. This involved a steel shell over which they placed what I remember as a lead-indium layer followed with a very thin tin layer.

I mention impressions because I am not working from either clear memory or written documentation. This goes back to early/mid Fifties when I started to use them. At least back then nobody else provided tri-metal bearings.

Does this bring anybody else in with better details?

[McGuire]

I have always been under the impression that Vandervell´s major development was the tri-metal bearing. This involved a steel shell over which they placed what I remember as a lead-indium layer followed with a very thin tin layer.

I mention impressions because I am not working from either clear memory or written documentation. This goes back to early/mid Fifties when I started to use them. At least back then nobody else provided tri-metal bearings.

Does this bring anybody else in with better details?

What you are describing is essentially the Clevite-style bearing. Apparently Vandervell had the market in your part of the world.

I did a little research on Ray's question as to first production application and haven't come up with anything definitive as yet. The '29 Chevrolet (all new six-cylinder replacing the four that year) used an insert bearing on the mains and rods if I recall properly, but I don't know if it was an actual Clevite bearing. My memory says no, it was more of a "semi-insert" type bearing.

[VAR1016]

What you are describing is essentially the Clevite-style bearing. Apparently Vandervell had the market in your part of the world.

I did a little research on Ray's question as to first production application and haven't come up with anything definitive as yet. The '29 Chevrolet (all new six-cylinder replacing the four that year) used an insert bearing on the mains and rods if I recall properly, but I don't know if it was an actual Clevite bearing. My memory says no, it was more of a "semi-insert" type bearing.

According to the link I posted above (Mahle now owns Clevite) the shell bearing was invented in '29 so I suppose it would be unlikely that it would have appeared on the '29 Chevy. Mind you your description does demonstrate the way things were going and I expect that the bearing you describe may well have been a Clevite product.

Lancia Fulvia owners usually have to search a bit and pay a lot to get the correct lead-indium bearings (Vandervell VP2 material) for their cars; I have seen these packaged both as Vandervell and Clevite. I wonder why manufacturers such as Federal Mogul insist on producing bearings for the Fulvia in the wrong material. Of course they work but...

An amusing aside is that the big end bearings for the 1600 Fulvia had a lowly alternative: the Moskvich - and yes VP2 material was specified for that car. These of course are now very rare indeed!

[VAR1016]

Sorry - meant to say "bearing whirl" or "oil whirl".

Oil Whirl

Interesting; I can see that at 100,000rpm this phenomenon would be most unwelcome!

[Lee Nicolle]

I think I got this information from a book about the history of Vanwall, which I no longer have since I foolishly lent it to somebody. So it was through the story of GAV getting the licence that I heard that Clevite had invented the shell bearing.

It says 1929 here.

The fact that Mahle now own Clevite may be a problem. Here in Oz they aquired ACL piston co and now you cannot buy rings for the Race Series pistons, and a lot of the piston range has been deleted too. And some of what is left is one size fits all meaning what you get is low compression [less than OEM] gunkers that make doughy thirsty engines. And the rings start at 25 thou end gap which is often more than OEM at 150000 miles!!
Federal mogul have also been doing this making it hard to put a decent engine together. A set of those pistons combined with the seemingly standard thicker head gaskets meant the engine gained 20cc of volume per cylinder.
All this stuff is now mostly junk, a 9-1 original engine is struggling to be 8-1, with so much ring leak as to be worn out new.

[mariner]

If my memory serves me right ( which is often doubtful!) there were two benefits gained by Clevite's shell bearing.

The first one was the avoidance of all the slow casting of the bearing metal into the con rod and cap ends ( or the main bearing caps etc.).This was vital for cheap mass production.

The second one was the introduction of crushabilty of the thin shell so as to ensure rapid heat transfer away from the bearing, thus preventing overheating.

I seem to recall that it was the second idea , making the bearing really thin so it could crush that was the breakthrough because earlier replacable shells failed due to insufficient contact with the mass of the rod end etc.

[Ray Bell]

That's definitely an interesting aspect to it, mariner...

And Lee, that all sounds pretty sad. I guess you mean the 'race series' pistons like for HQs and so on? Or the less popular ones like Falcons?

Fortunately there's a very wide range of pistons available in both forged and hyper eutectic (sp?) versions from the US at almost reasonable prices.

[VAR1016]

The fact that Mahle now own Clevite may be a problem. Here in Oz they aquired ACL piston co and now you cannot buy rings for the Race Series pistons, and a lot of the piston range has been deleted too. And some of what is left is one size fits all meaning what you get is low compression [less than OEM] gunkers that make doughy thirsty engines. And the rings start at 25 thou end gap which is often more than OEM at 150000 miles!!
Federal mogul have also been doing this making it hard to put a decent engine together. A set of those pistons combined with the seemingly standard thicker head gaskets meant the engine gained 20cc of volume per cylinder.
All this stuff is now mostly junk, a 9-1 original engine is struggling to be 8-1, with so much ring leak as to be worn out new.

Yes this kind of thing is most annoying isn't it?

I can recommend CPS (Construzione Pistone Speciale) in Italy but of course cannot know if they could help you. Otherwise it seems to me that only in the USA can one find the individual service one needs for these projects. I have had good results from Venolia pistons.

[VAR1016]

If my memory serves me right ( which is often doubtful!) there were two benefits gained by Clevite's shell bearing.

The first one was the avoidance of all the slow casting of the bearing metal into the con rod and cap ends ( or the main bearing caps etc.).This was vital for cheap mass production.

The second one was the introduction of crushabilty of the thin shell so as to ensure rapid heat transfer away from the bearing, thus preventing overheating.

I seem to recall that it was the second idea , making the bearing really thin so it could crush that was the breakthrough because earlier replacable shells failed due to insufficient contact with the mass of the rod end etc.

And of course the time spent scraping the bearings!

[Lee Nicolle]

That's definitely an interesting aspect to it, mariner...

And Lee, that all sounds pretty sad. I guess you mean the 'race series' pistons like for HQs and so on? Or the less popular ones like Falcons?

Fortunately there's a very wide range of pistons available in both forged and hyper eutectic (sp?) versions from the US at almost reasonable prices.

I think HQ pistons are still advailable. But no file back rings. AMCA pistons are not and the same for rings. I believe the same for saloon cars. For some reason ACL used a narower top ring on some of these pistons or a different oil ring. My Clevo pistons [brand new] had to be modified to use normal American top rings.
A lot of fairly common US 70s [and later] engines are no longer serviced with anything decent. 318 A series have nothing decent advailable at all. As is 307 Chevs, 400 M Ford. Even a common engine like a 302 W. Last set I bought for a customer [FM supposedly performance] was a Chev piston with a Ford pin height. That has happened forever on 4" Mopars even in forged. The valve reliefs are totally wrong, as is the dome.
Be very careful when purchasing, compare pin heights, valve reliefs, domes with the old ones before installing and also remember [and check] that the original headgaskets were generally thinner than what is sold these days. All of which loses compression rapidly.

[Greg Locock]

I think I've figured it out. the complex bearing I was referring to is actually called a triple slipper. So, if you used slipper to mean a thin bearing shell then that is exactly what it is, three thin bearing sheels, concentric.

[Wuzak]

Allison developed a process for bonding bearing material (bronze) onto steel backings in the early '20s. This was, of course, for aero engines.


I think they count as shell bearings, as the bonding was not to con-rods or the like.

[J. Edlund]

Probably more correctly termed a "fully floating bearing" - almost universal in plain-bearing turbochargers, although not due to any benefit from the halved surface speeds, more to do with the additional damping provided by the outer clearance gap and its ability to eliminate "shaft whirl".

Actually, ball bearing turbochargers tend to use a similar design (although not rotating) where an oil film holds the ball bearing floating for damping purposes.

[gruntguru]

Actually, ball bearing turbochargers tend to use a similar design (although not rotating) where an oil film holds the ball bearing floating for damping purposes.

Thanks J. I dismantled many a turbo in the old days but never a later ball bearing type.

[Joe Bosworth]

Mac:

You posted above, ¨What you are describing is essentially the Clevite-style bearing. Apparently Vandervell had the market in your part of the world.¨

In the Fifties my part of the world was 30 miles outside of Chicago and inhabiting 87th street speedway, Santa Fe Park, Soldiers Field, Half Day drag strip, Wilmot, Road America, Lawrencville, Connelsville, Stout Field, Watkins Glen etc. Ahhh, then there was Snow White drive in and street racing on Lincoln and Skokie Ave´s or going over to Woodward Ave around Birmingham Mi.

I used to drive 60 or 70 miles round trip to get Vandervells as Clevite didn´t have tri-metal bearings at that time. If I thought Clevites were as good I would have driven the mile down to Dave Farr´s speed shop to get them. Or is this getting into TNF thread stuff?

Regards

[gruntguru]

Mac:

You posted above, ¨What you are describing is essentially the Clevite-style bearing. Apparently Vandervell had the market in your part of the world.¨

In the Fifties my part of the world was 30 miles outside of Chicago and inhabiting 87th street speedway, Santa Fe Park, Soldiers Field, Half Day drag strip, Wilmot, Road America, Lawrencville, Connelsville, Stout Field, Watkins Glen etc. Ahhh, then there was Snow White drive in and street racing on Lincoln and Skokie Ave´s or going over to Woodward Ave around Birmingham Mi.

I used to drive 60 or 70 miles round trip to get Vandervells as Clevite didn´t have tri-metal bearings at that time. If I thought Clevites were as good I would have driven the mile down to Dave Farr´s speed shop to get them. Or is this getting into TNF thread stuff?

This seems to settle it (the tri-metal issue), although not an independent source. (Link, Page three, paragraph 2)

"A further step in the evolution of bearings was the first TriMetal bearing in 1944 – a steel backed, galvanized lead-copper cast bearing with a very thin layer of Babitt (Micro-Babitt) alloy."

Mahle-Clevite Propaganda.

Edited by gruntguru, 29 March 2010 - 03:54.

[McGuire]

Mac:

You posted above, ¨What you are describing is essentially the Clevite-style bearing. Apparently Vandervell had the market in your part of the world.¨

In the Fifties my part of the world was 30 miles outside of Chicago and inhabiting 87th street speedway, Santa Fe Park, Soldiers Field, Half Day drag strip, Wilmot, Road America, Lawrencville, Connelsville, Stout Field, Watkins Glen etc. Ahhh, then there was Snow White drive in and street racing on Lincoln and Skokie Ave´s or going over to Woodward Ave around Birmingham Mi.

I used to drive 60 or 70 miles round trip to get Vandervells as Clevite didn´t have tri-metal bearings at that time. If I thought Clevites were as good I would have driven the mile down to Dave Farr´s speed shop to get them. Or is this getting into TNF thread stuff?

Regards

I think we are confusing a couple of points. Clevite originated the modern insert-style bearing as well as its "tri-metal" variety -- of which there are many, lead-indium being one.

[McGuire]

If my memory serves me right ( which is often doubtful!) there were two benefits gained by Clevite's shell bearing.

The first one was the avoidance of all the slow casting of the bearing metal into the con rod and cap ends ( or the main bearing caps etc.).This was vital for cheap mass production.

The second one was the introduction of crushabilty of the thin shell so as to ensure rapid heat transfer away from the bearing, thus preventing overheating.

I seem to recall that it was the second idea , making the bearing really thin so it could crush that was the breakthrough because earlier replacable shells failed due to insufficient contact with the mass of the rod end etc.

Exactly right. Before insert bearings, babbitt had to jigged, poured, fitted, and then run in, often for hours. Totally impractical for mass production, a huge bottleneck. Meanwhile, the development of the shell or insert bearing was more difficult than it might appear.

[Engineguy]

I've seen:

1920 Marmon

1929 joint development by Packard and Federal-Mogul

and 1929 development by Clevite.


It may, like a lot of "who was first" questons come down to semantics. The Marmon inserts may have had thick shell and/or thick babbit coating on them, maybe "burned-in" after fitting like some poured babbit (i.e. apply almost-melt heat while turning crank 188 rpm)... something that disqualified them in FM or Clevite eyes as prior use of what they later developed. It might have been Mogul diecast babbit insert without steel shell?


=============================================

"The CLEVITE CORP. was founded in 1919 as Cleveland Graphite Bronze to make bearings and bushings for the automotive industry. Under a name derived from the graphite baked into the interior of the self-lubricating bearings used to support engine crankshafts and piston rods, Ben Hopkins began CGB operations at 2906 Chester with 20 employees. The demand for bearings followed the rise of the auto industry; by 1937 the company, then located at 8880 E. 72nd St., made 183 million parts annually and employed 2,300. This growth was due largely to the introduction of the Thinwall bearing in 1930. As World War II approached, CGB anticipated the need for aircraft bearings, and after 2 years of research it developed a silver-plated bearing that could be mass-produced and withstand heavy wear."

=================================================

"My understanding is that the copper-lead precision insert type bearing was developed jointly by Federal Mogul and Packard, and tested on the Packard High Speed test track. Wasnt there."

(This guy might be confusing FM and Clevite)

=================================================

"The Muzzy-Lyon Company & The Mogul Metal Company, 1899-1923

The history of Federal-Mogul may be traced to 1899, when J. Howard Muzzy and Edward F. Lyon, two mill supply vendors in Detroit, began searching for ways to produce better Babbitt metal. Babbitt metal, an alloy of tin, antimony, and copper, had been patented in 1839 by Isaac Babbitt as an anti-friction agent surrounding moving metallic locomotive parts. The use of Babbitt metal remained the principal means of preventing rotating metallic shafts from overheating and wearing out. However, the introduction of combustible engines early in the 20th century prompted a need for new, improved Babbitt metal.

Having developed an alternative formula for Babbitt metal, Muzzy and Lyon left secure jobs at J.T. Wing and Company, a vendor of mill and factory supplies and rubber goods, where their friendship and business acumen had gradually matured.

Determined to be their own bosses in the market they knew best, the two partners opened their first facility on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, in 1900. During this time, the mill and factory supply business was highly competitive, and many producers offered shoddy merchandise at inexpensive prices. However, Muzzy and Lyon established a reputation for high-quality products and were able to reinvest most of their profits back into the business. They used aggressive and imaginative advertising, providing money-back guarantees and coupons good for prizes ranging from pocket rulers to firearms.

Whatever time Muzzy could spare from his primary responsibility of managing the financial and manufacturing end of the business he devoted to experimentation with Babbitt metals. Lyon, when not on the road selling company products, joined his partner in blending new formulas of tin, antimony, and lead. Their company soon garnered major orders from Clark Motor Company and the Sheffield Motor Company. As a result of the increased business, the partners formed a subsidiary company called the Mogul Metal Company.

During this time, the traditional method of making motor bearings was to pour molten Babbitt metal directly onto the motor block and to shape the metal to fit by hand. Mechanics replaced worn bearings by laboriously gouging out the old metal and then pouring in the new. When Sheffield's parent organization, the Fairbanks Morse Company, inquired as to whether die cast metals could be manufactured to form standard size bearings, Muzzy and Lyon began working on a method. They purchased a typecasting machine, and, by modifying it, they were able to make some of the new parts themselves, while commissioning various machine shops to produce the rest. The design and construction of Muzzy's and Lyon's new machine remained a secret, and while the partners had limited mechanical and engineering experience, the machine proved successful.

The potential of the die casting machine so impressed the partners that they decided to drop the mill supply business completely. The company would devote its entire resources to manufacturing and mechanizing automotive bearings and Babbitt metals. They sold their products under the brand names of "Duro" (made according to a purchased formula) and "Mogul" (their own formula developed by Muzzy and Lyon). Orders for their die cast bearings began to arrive, and, in 1910, an important order was placed for 10,000 connecting rod bearings for the massive Buick 10, one of the first cars to use parts produced by Mogul Metal. That year, the partners nearly lost a large order from the Hudson Motor Company, when they refused to compromise their secret processes by allowing Hudson engineers to inspect the plant.

Federal-Mogul Corporation, 1924-54

In 1923, Muzzy learned that Douglas-Dahlin, a large Kansas City-based parts distributor, stood in danger of bankruptcy while owing Mogul a large sum of money. S.C. Reynolds, vice-president of Federal Bearing and Bushing, which also stood to lose money, called Muzzy to discuss the situation, proposing a trip to Kansas City to protect their interests. When Muzzy and Reynolds began discussing their companies and assessing their relative strengths and weaknesses, they realized the advantages of a merger. The Federal Bearing employees were expert bronze foundrymen but lacked the capacity to produce Babbitt. Muzzy-Lyon, on the other hand, operated a complete Babbitt foundry but purchased bronze on the market. The companies merged in 1924, taking the name Federal-Mogul Corporation. To protect its investments, Federal-Mogul took over the near-bankrupt Douglas-Dahlin Company, entering the parts distribution business.

In 1927, Federal-Mogul purchased U.S. Bearings Company, an Indiana distributor that resold replacement bearings. The following year, Federal-Mogul's involvement in the service business increased substantially with the acquisition of the Watkins Manufacturing Company of Wichita, Kansas. Following this major expansion, Federal-Mogul also purchased the Pacific Metal Bearing Company in San Francisco, primarily to supply its West Coast branches. In 1936, the corporation acquired the Indianapolis-based Superior Bearings Company, and, in 1937, the service division went international with the acquisition of the former Watkins Rebabbitting Limited, with Canadian locations in Toronto, Montreal, and Winnipeg. By 1939, Federal-Mogul was operating 53 service branches across the North American continent."

===================

Sorta related interesting story: a current day babbiteer - http://www.hemmings...._feature25.html
.
.

[2F-001]

The Denis Jenkinson - Cyril Posthumous biog of Vandervell relates the "Tony Vandervell going to Ohio" story as mentioned above by VAR1060.
Further, it implies that Vandervell went off to Ohio on something of a whim to seek out the bearing design he'd heard about (the Thinwall-type).

The tale goes that, en route, he met the Chief Experimental Engineer at Studebaker (Delmar 'Barney' Roos) who said they were trying these bearings on their current prototypes - this was in 1931 - and told him about Cleveland Graphite & Bronze (later Clevite). Roos's name was then a useful introduction.
I don't know enough about the US car industry to know if that might constitute 'first use' by Studebaker or whether they followed up with them in production.

(The book implies that Vandervell set off on his quest to Ohio not actually knowing who made the bearings, which seems a touch odd.)

Edited by 2F-001, 29 March 2010 - 13:53.

[VAR1016]

The Denis Jenkinson - Cyril Posthumous biog of Vandervell relates the "Tony Vandervell going to Ohio" story as mentioned above by VAR1060.
Further, it implies that Vandervell went off to Ohio on something of a whim to seek out the bearing design he'd heard about (the Thinwall-type).

The tale goes that, en route, he met the Chief Experimental Engineer at Studebaker (Delmar 'Barney' Roos) who said they were trying these bearings on their current prototypes - this was in 1931 - and told him about Cleveland Graphite & Bronze (later Clevite). Roos's name was then a useful introduction.
I don't know enough about the US car industry to know if that might constitute 'first use' by Studebaker or whether they followed up with them in production.

(The book implies that Vandervell set off on his quest to Ohio not actually knowing who made the bearings, which seems a touch odd.)

Hello there; I remember you from the TNF meetings in Surrey back in 2004; happy days!



I suppose my recollection was roughly correct; thanks for expanding on the story; I'm amazed that in 1931 GAV set off for Ohio without specific information!

EDIT: sorry I cannot credit the photograph and I cannot remember who made it: so apologies and acknowledgments in advance.

Edited by VAR1016, 29 March 2010 - 14:14.

[2F-001]

Yes indeed; how are you? (For the benefit, or otherwise, of others, I seem to have been absent - or late - at the meeting pictured above.)

Edited by 2F-001, 29 March 2010 - 14:14.

[VAR1016]

Yes indeed; how are you? (For the benefit, or otherwise, of others, I seem to have been absent - or late - at the meeting pictured above.)

I wondered if you took the picture!

Me, well obviously alive, and working (when there is some work) largely on old English cars on the shores of Lake Geneva at Evian les Bains.

Sadly none of my beloved Fulvias at present!

I hope you are well; please give my best to the other TNF-ers (sorry to the techies for posting all this here...). I still have my badge (No 7!)

Best

Paul

[cheapracer]

Yes indeed; how are you? (For the benefit, or otherwise, of others, I seem to have been absent - or late - at the meeting pictured above.)

..or you took the photo

[McGuire]

The Denis Jenkinson - Cyril Posthumous biog of Vandervell relates the "Tony Vandervell going to Ohio" story as mentioned above by VAR1060.
Further, it implies that Vandervell went off to Ohio on something of a whim to seek out the bearing design he'd heard about (the Thinwall-type).

The tale goes that, en route, he met the Chief Experimental Engineer at Studebaker (Delmar 'Barney' Roos) who said they were trying these bearings on their current prototypes - this was in 1931 - and told him about Cleveland Graphite & Bronze (later Clevite). Roos's name was then a useful introduction.
I don't know enough about the US car industry to know if that might constitute 'first use' by Studebaker or whether they followed up with them in production.

(The book implies that Vandervell set off on his quest to Ohio not actually knowing who made the bearings, which seems a touch odd.)

Yep, some degree of writer's artifice is often employed in these stories. Pinch of salt sometimes required.

Just because you are the only people on earth who might care, the former home of Barney Roos (in Toledo, where he eventually arrived as VP of Engineering at Willys-Overland, where he directed the design and development of the WWII Jeep, among other things) is just down the street from mine. (The boyhood home of another Barney, Oldfield, is a mile or two the other way... toward the other side of the tracks as it were.)

Barney Roos was quite an engineer and quite an individual. The Jeep engine was originally developed for the four-cylinder W-O Whippet in the '20s. Since the company was essentially broke (Great Depression) Roos performed a resourceful $1.98 update of the engine for the 1937 Willys, which included a conversion to modern shell bearings. With a few more updates this same engine continued in production into the 1950s.

Cleveland Graphite and Bronze aka Clevite has an interesting history. When during WWII the workers went on strike, the U.S. Army seized the plant in order to secure production. The workers were granted their demands and ordered back to work at something close to gunpoint. Today, part of the former grounds has been turned into a city park -- named Graphite-Bronze Park. However, part of the factory is still there.

[VAR1016]

..or you took the photo

No, that's me in the plum-coloured top - fruity huh?

[Ray Bell]

For the benefit of those who've never seen it done, here's a glimpse of the process involved in doing the old white metal bearings:



Ready to pour into the shell, which is firmly held up against a mold. Some do this centrifugally, with the shells in a clamp arrangement which rotates at maybe 700 rpm as the molten metal is poured down a spout.

It all happens very quickly, the shell having been pre-tinned to be made ready:



Next step is machining, this example is a connecting rod with a dipper for lubrication, mains shells have to be line bored.



And a bit of a look at how differently it all used to be done way back in the early years:



Ever since I was a kid I wanted to know about this process, but it wasn't until last year that I got a chance to see it done. Not many people doing it these days...

[Lee Nicolle]

For the benefit of those who've never seen it done, here's a glimpse of the process involved in doing the old white metal bearings:



Ready to pour into the shell, which is firmly held up against a mold. Some do this centrifugally, with the shells in a clamp arrangement which rotates at maybe 700 rpm as the molten metal is poured down a spout.

It all happens very quickly, the shell having been pre-tinned to be made ready:



Next step is machining, this example is a connecting rod with a dipper for lubrication, mains shells have to be line bored.



And a bit of a look at how differently it all used to be done way back in the early years:



Ever since I was a kid I wanted to know about this process, but it wasn't until last year that I got a chance to see it done. Not many people doing it these days...

Though unless you are into veteran cars you will never need to know.
I belive the process is still used occasionally in industry for some older [but not veteran] machinery. We used to have a pump jack that had poured bearings, quite expensive to do 40 years ago. The pump was late 50s manufacture.

[gordmac]

I can remember my father talking about blueing the bearings and hand scraping the high spots. I think there were shims below the caps, they were removed as the scraping progressed. Once there was a certain ammount of the bearing contacting the journal the engine would be run but I think it got stripped again after so many miles. This would have been on road cars not that long after ww2.

[Allan Lupton]

White metal bearings (usually direct metalled, rather than shells) were used well after the second War so they are not just in Veteran cars.
Moreover for those of us who use out-of-date cars they are helpful in that when you need to you just pour and machine them, whereas having thin-wall shells made in penny numbers is to all intents and purposes impossible.

[VAR1016]

My father told me that his first car was a "Bullnose" Morris Cowley, for which he paid in 1932 £2/10/- (£2.50).

He told me he had the big-ends done which cost him £8 as I recall, I suppose about £500 today (I don't believe official figures for the decline of the value of money). Since they would have been poured bearings, that sounds like pretty good value to me for what is rather a lot of work.

He told me he sold the car (which he described as a great big suet pudding) for "thirty bob" (£1.50) and "the bloke drove it away!"

[gruntguru]

He told me he had the big-ends done which cost him £8 as I recall, I suppose about £500 today (I don't believe official figures for the decline of the value of money).

£8 was more than 2 weeks wages for a tradesman in 1932.

[Lee Nicolle]

White metal bearings (usually direct metalled, rather than shells) were used well after the second War so they are not just in Veteran cars.
Moreover for those of us who use out-of-date cars they are helpful in that when you need to you just pour and machine them, whereas having thin-wall shells made in penny numbers is to all intents and purposes impossible.

While not sure of the cut off period between vintage and veteran probably the last vehicles with poured bearings was mid 50s and that is 55 years ago.
I can understand the frustration of not being able to buy slipper bearings though that would be in very unusual circumstances. I have never heard of an engine that bearings are unadvailable for.

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by gordmac
I can remember my father talking about blueing the bearings and hand scraping the high spots. I think there were shims below the caps, they were removed as the scraping progressed. Once there was a certain ammount of the bearing contacting the journal the engine would be run but I think it got stripped again after so many miles. This would have been on road cars not that long after ww2.

There's the clue for my early memories... hand scraping, not machining...

Lee, some Hemi 6s came from the factory with oversize main shells. That is, the tunnel was bored 0.020" oversize for some reason and shells with a larger OD were fitted. The engine number is highlighted with an asterisk on these engines.

You can't get them any more.













But I'm told some Chevrolet slipper fit. And that's probably the salient fact, that with so many different slippers out there, you will eventually find something to fit.

[McGuire]

Babbitt is not that difficult. If you are handy and have studied up on it or seen it done a few times, you should find it fairly easy. Kind of enjoyable, really. More fun than watching a CNC machine anyway.

[Allan Lupton]

While not sure of the cut off period between vintage and veteran probably the last vehicles with poured bearings was mid 50s and that is 55 years ago.
I can understand the frustration of not being able to buy slipper bearings though that would be in very unusual circumstances. I have never heard of an engine that bearings are unadvailable for.

Based on the VCC and VSCC definitions we (in Britain) use:
Veteran=pre1905
Edwardian 1905-1918
Vintage 1919-1930
Post-Vintage Thoroughbred (certain makes/models only) 1931-1940

I very much doubt that shell bearings are available for every engine that ever used them. Remember, too, that you need them in various undersizes to cope with reground journals.
It is often the case that a near match can be used with a bit of machining, but that in turn leaves one vulnerable to the bearings that were a near match disappearing.

Edited by Allan Lupton, 31 March 2010 - 07:35.

[Allan Lupton]

. . . I had thought a slipper bearing was one where there were three concentric bearing shells, an inner and an outer, and then one in between. This spins at an intermediate speed, thereby reducing the friction losses.

Yes, one comes across this idea in a lot of early designs, but nobody has explained how the "one in between" knows it has to operate at an intermediate speed, as in the normal way of things whichever face (inner or outer) has greater break-out force or friction will win and take the floating shell with it at its speed.

[Greg Locock]

Yes, one comes across this idea in a lot of early designs, but nobody has explained how the "one in between" knows it has to operate at an intermediate speed, as in the normal way of things whichever face (inner or outer) has greater break-out force or friction will win and take the floating shell with it at its speed.

Once the free spinning side goes fast enough it'll create more torque than the stiction on the stationary side. Anyway Boeing seem to like it, apparently.

[Allan Lupton]

Once the free spinning side goes fast enough it'll create more torque than the stiction on the stationary side.

Not if it's properly lubricated!

[VAR1016]

Babbitt is not that difficult. If you are handy and have studied up on it or seen it done a few times, you should find it fairly easy. Kind of enjoyable, really. More fun than watching a CNC machine anyway.

Yes, looking at the pictures, I would really like to try it - as you say "enjoyable", but I doubt the opportunity will arise sadly.

Better work than poring over bearing catalogues trying to find something that will fit!