Yet another Avet bearing question - the spinning of the pinion bearing

[johndtuttle]

Cheers for that

Mainly I saw "There is no free lunch" and I couldn't agree more.
Just so I am clear.
Axial load = sideways pressure caused by the inner race moving towards the handle as drag is increased?
This is bad as it moves the inner race out of it's original position causing pressure on the balls which transfer this to the outer race and in the process some sort of degradation occurs.
An angular bearing reduces this due to the "lip" on the race?

Or is this incorrect

This is partly correct. It is not so much the lip on the race per se in a true angular contact bearing. The true problem when you displace the inner race is that the interior cage that is holding the balls gets moved in such a way that load is not properly distributed and the balls get crunched over time.

Ideally the bearings support all of the load rather than just the races only as you then have the best reduction in friction, I believe. If the load is being held on the outer race and not born by the balls then it is functioning as a bushing as far as the axial load is concerned. Not bad, just not as free spinning as if the balls were doing it. A true angular contact bearing bears axial load as well or better than normal loads, as I understand them.

As I understand it, Angular Contact Bearings are so much more expensive due to the more complicated design/materials of the inner races and the tolerances required. This, and the relatively low numbers that are made as they are highly specialized in application (ie rarely required). Mass quantity is the name of the game to lower prices. Whenever I have looked it is remarkable how few choices and vendors there are for them let alone any availability for the size you would like.

[Keta]

Most wheel bearings are angular contact bearings, they are very common.

[limitdown]

I did a full mod of my Makaira 50 with angular contact bearings last March.
My handle bind is practically at zero with drag up at 70lbs.
Each SKF bearing cost me only around $10-15. I even sent a set to Alan in hopes that he would slap them into his Mak50 and post some numbers!
Angular contact bearings are VERY common. Metric ones with inner ring diameters (bore) of 5mm or larger are VERY easy to get. Since most of the world metricated 50 years+ ago, Inch ones are slightly more difficult to get.

Thrust bearing + radial bearing has a major shortcoming. To avoid binding the radial bearing, the thrust bearing would need to push up against only the outside ring of the radial bearing. This in turn creates the same axial load that we're looking to decrease. I'm still thinking about a configuration that would work.

Another solution I've thought of is to use tapered roller bearings. However, I had an extremely difficult time sourcing these with bores of less than 15mm. Tapered roller bearings are EXTREMELY common in cars.

Link to my mod page
http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=6771.0

Some pics

[johndtuttle]

Thanks for that and thanks to Keta too.

I guess my understanding was that it is the issue of the sizes (Imperial) and small sizes required (tiny inner diameter) rather than them being some kind of rare fish altogether but did not make that clear in my post.

Your post linked above details the problems I was referring to re: lack of availability and cost and minimums required for many reels with odd ball sizes.

"Of these 3, only angular contact bearings are available off-the-shelf with inner diameters (ie bore) of less than 15mm. The world has “metricated” (ie moved to the metric system), so it’s very difficult and expensive to find inch/imperial bearings. I haven’t been able to find inch angular contact bearings for my EXW50 so I’ve put that project on ice.

For small R4-sized bearings (0.25x0.625x0.196 inch) used in the small Avet SX, MX and JX’s, angular contact bearings are either way too expensive at $125+ or need to be custom made at quantities over 500 pieces. If I can get 100 people to commit to purchasing 2 pieces each, then I’ll commit the capital and take inventory risk. From my chats with a few bearing manufacturers, the best choice for our application would actually be tapered roller bearings, but they are much more difficult (ie expensive) to produce in small sizes."

best regards


ps en regards to the bearings you found for the Makaira what is the ball material (chrome steel?) and is there an "abec" rating? Thx!

[Keta]

Small angular contact bearings are hard to find, limitdown found one that worked for his reel.

[Bryan Young]

I found the same as John.  Very expensive and at that price, it's not even stainless steel.

[johndtuttle]

I found the same as John.  Very expensive and at that price, it's not even stainless steel.

I really don't want to rain on anyone's success and I think we could (with our obsessive maintenance) keep a chrome steel bearing alive for quite a while.

The average guy would take it off the store shelf, take it on one boat ride, never catch a thing on it, put it away and come back in a year to find the bearing pitted or frozen.   This is how I would look at it if I were in the reel business: "you cannot sell the average consumer on having to crack his reel and pack his bearings as a requirement for the success of your business model/market acceptance of your finished product". It's really something only us crazies do .

When I do a search for a 7x19x6 pinion bearing to replace with an angular contact one I get either a 100% ceramic one from Boca ($119), a Chrome Steel one from VXB ($12) and zero returns for a Stainless Steel ABEC 5 rated Angular Contact bearing. This is a very brief search but in a nutshell is the scope of the problem as I understand it.

best regards

[SoCalAngler]

Today I too installed a angular contact bearing in my Avet SX. After greasing and installation I found the same as Vadein did in the other thread which is not much if any reduction in the handle binding at higher drag pressures. The bearing cost $15 and a distributor of the New Hampshire Ball Bearing company is only around 5 miles from my house, so I thought I would give it a shot. Will it last longer, who knows? As I stated before I don't over fish my reels and have not ever gone through a pinion bearing in my Avets. I thought maybe I could squeak out a few more pounds of drag so I could bump the reels up in line class. Well, without and noticeable reductuon in the binding issue I think I will keep them in the line class before the bearing change.

EDIT:The new bearing is stainless steel

[Robert Janssen]

Funny; i've been emailing back and forth with those people all day. Small world.

A angular contact bearing is designed for this application, a thrust bearing/radial load bearing combination is a "patch" and it will put the thrust load on a thin spot on the side plate.

May i disagree, Keta? Or maybe I'm not entirely clear on what you mean...

A thrust bearing, named for what it does best, is wholly suitable for taking the thrust load imposed upon bearings in lever drag reels. It doesn't put the load on a thin spot on the sideplate; it distributes it even better than what does a comparable radial bearing having only a relatively thin edge does. Unless you mean the balls themselves, in which case a thrust bearing with ground races does very well, as opposed to a thrust bearing with flat washers.

It does not however support radial loads, and falls short of suitability for reels for that reason. However, it could be used in combination with a radial bearing: the thrust bearing takes the thrust, and the radial bearing the radial load. Which happens to be the arrangement I am currently experimenting with (for educational purposes only, or while i await a reliable supplier of AC bearings) in the Avet MXL, mentioned briefly earlier in the thread. It also happens to be not entirely dissimilar from the arrangement coincidentally shown today here on the forum being used in a Penn Fathom.

Thrust bearing + radial bearing has a major shortcoming. To avoid binding the radial bearing, the thrust bearing would need to push up against only the outside ring of the radial bearing. This in turn creates the same axial load that we're looking to decrease. I'm still thinking about a configuration that would work.

Ain't nuthin' to it... just provide some relief to the back side of the thrust bearing's washer.

If angular contact bearings are used they need to be flanged so they can not be installed backwards.

There is some merit to that. Otherwise, it is in fact only 50/50 odds of getting it right.

you cannot sell the average consumer on having to crack his reel and pack his bearings as a requirement for the success of your business model/market acceptance of your finished product

Yes, that too. The truth is, that a vast majority of fishermen don't hang out at forums like this, even if many do.

.

[Keta]

Where are you planning on placing the thrust bearing, most likely on the end of the spool shaft where the side load will be on a thin spot of the side plate. This might cause problems.  In my experiance thrust loading is controled with angular contact bearings in the majority of applications.

[jaypeegee]

I updated my post in the general thread as I have discovered my MXL pinion bearing is the cause of the drag difference between the mxl and lx I own.

I will need to replace the pinion bearing soon and have asked how cheap I can go on that bearing given it's known failure rate.
A 1 dollar bearing seems more attractive than a 20 dollar one if its going to go south reasonably quickly.

So will be following this thread with more than the usual interest.

[limitdown]

Thrust bearing + radial bearing has a major shortcoming. To avoid binding the radial bearing, the thrust bearing would need to push up against only the outside ring of the radial bearing. This in turn creates the same axial load that we're looking to decrease. I'm still thinking about a configuration that would work.

Ain't nuthin' to it... just provide some relief to the back side of the thrust bearing's washer.  

ah, you're right. A relief spot. Same arrangement as my Mak50's thrust bearing and right spool bearing. In the Mak's right spool arrangement, the axial load put onto the thrust bearing is fully transferred to the spool. The radial bearing sits in a deeper recess and doesn't come into contact with the thrust bearing. This way the radial bearing purely handles radial load and the thrust bearing purely handles axial load.
An arrangement of radial + thrust bearing would be a great solution if there is enough space.

you cannot sell the average consumer on having to crack his reel and pack his bearings as a requirement for the success of your business model/market acceptance of your finished product

Agree. The bearings would need to be 440C stainless and not the regular 52100 bearing steel

ps en regards to the bearings you found for the Makaira what is the ball material (chrome steel?) and is there an "abec" rating? Thx!

The SKF's are Abec7, but the material is 52100 bearing steel. This is ok for my own personal use as I fully grease up with Yamalube. However, if I were selling these bearings, I would definitely get full 440C stainless

Today I too installed a angular contact bearing in my Avet SX. After greasing and installation I found the same as Vadein did in the other thread which is not much if any reduction in the handle binding at higher drag pressures. The bearing cost $15 and a distributor of the New Hampshire Ball Bearing company is only around 5 miles from my house, so I thought I would give it a shot. Will it last longer, who knows? As I stated before I don't over fish my reels and have not ever gone through a pinion bearing in my Avets. I thought maybe I could squeak out a few more pounds of drag so I could bump the reels up in line class. Well, without and noticeable reductuon in the binding issue I think I will keep them in the line class before the bearing change.

EDIT:The new bearing is stainless steel

NHBB has two different R4 sized angular contact bearings. The one with the bigger 3/8 inch balls has more than 2.5x the load rating versus the one with 1/4 inch balls. This is yet another instance in life where having bigger balls is better!

In the pic below, the column we're concerned with is static load. Take 1/4 of that to get approximate max axial load.

One potential cause of the non-improvement in handle binding is that the inner ring might be rubbing against the right side plate. When axial load is placed on the inner ring, it will move ever so slightly to the right. Some reels actually have a recessed spot in the bearing cup already because radial bearings' inner rings will also move to the right slightly. I actually had this rubbing problem with a smaller reel in which I slapped some A/C bearings.

[limitdown]

Cheers for that

Just so I am clear.
Axial load = sideways pressure caused by the inner race moving towards the handle as drag is increased?
This is bad as it moves the inner race out of it's original position causing pressure on the balls which transfer this to the outer race and in the process some sort of degradation occurs.
An angular bearing reduces this due to the "lip" on the race?

As JohnTuttle stated. A true angular contact bearing is more complicated than just having a lip on the outer ring.

The race of the outer ring is angled very precisely. The most common angles are 15 and 25 degrees. There are even AC bearings with 30, 35 and 40 degree angles . The higher the contact angle, the higher the max axial load, but max speed is reduced. Speed rating is never a problem for our uses. For an R4 AC bearing at 30 degrees, you're probably looking at a max RPM of like 30,000+, which is 500 revs per second. A typical Abec5 R4 radial bearing is rated at around 45,000 RPM with oil lubricant and 38,000 RPM with grease lubricant.

[johndtuttle]

Worth adding to this discussion is a look at Penn's solution to this dilemma.



The full post on the Torque LD 2-Speed is here:

http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=9685.0

And I hope to add some comments from Penn after a confirming email about these design issues.

Partly I point our community to the Torque design for them to also see the "complete" package that is required to address these issues. The Penn design requires more space for both the thrust bearing and for the larger pinion bearing than Avet uses.

This means that Avet provides the benefit of lower cost and lighter weight.

This means that a Torque is a tougher and heavier reel at a higher cost.

There is no free lunch!



best regards