Superblend installation

pierodn said:

This is what i found into the case, there is not the 6 stamped on and so, as Les teachs, is not a superblend but a standard bearing (but i cannot able to see any difference, wich is please?).

Click to expand...

According to Beltdriveman's info, the standard MRJA30 bearing had eleven rollers, and the 6/MRJA30 Superblend had thirteen, however, all the images of apparently standard MRJA30 bearings I can find shows thirteen rollers! In John Hudson's NOC engine rebuild video, he identifies an eleven roller bearing as a "Superblend 6/MRJA30" so it seems it may not be possible to positively identify the bearing by the number of rollers. :roll:

The FAG306E has 12 rollers.

pierodn said:

But i have a question: this standard bearing was good items for a non Combat engine?.

Click to expand...

Premature main bearing failure only became a serious problem on the Combat models because of the increased "Combat" engine performance which was produced at significantly higher RPM, and, combined with lower gearing (19T output) meant the Combat engines could be consistently revved up to, or beyond 7,000 RPM by their riders.
Pre-Superblend bearings fitted in a standard tuned/geared 750 engine where the revs are kept below 7,000 RPM is unlikely to cause any problems, however, re-using any partially worn main bearings could be considered to be something of a false economy.

L.A.B. said:

pierodn said:

re-using any partially worn main bearings could be considered to be something of a false economy.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I agree Les.
Ciao.
Piero

hello All. lovely day again.
this issue must have been covered many times. So here we go again.

To those arguing about technical aspects really good stuff, including those OPINIONS that are wrong.

Fact 1 the term superblend is unknown outside the Norton world. it is not a recognised technical engineering term describing any special magical properties nor relates to Norton exclusivity.

Fact 2 the key to the whole issue is the suffix E. this is NOT heavy duty or another description. it means maximum capacity, nothing more, nothing less

fact 3 ALL modern roller bearings from reputable manufacturers have the modified roller ends known as logarithmic curve. this is a given. it is entirely different from the E designation. An MRJ306 will have the logarithmic curve on the roller ends .

those wishing to get a definitive picture, go to your FAG or SKF man and ask for literature on the suffix E. or google the subject, there is plenty of stuff on this.

then listen to blokes like pommy John who has raced Nortons using other than MRJ306E M or M1. he is an example of where steel cages are fine.

Also the recent post by LAB regarding the unknown author's lecture. this is spot on. Read this carefully and inwardly digest.

So forget about the term Superblend. it is a subjective definition used by Norton as a marketing tool and only causes confusion.

To the purist, the suffixes E and M or M1 are the bits that matter.

Also the bloke who wrote that it is the steel quality that matters, he is entirely correct.

I also have to be convinced that use of Normal clearence instead of C3 will lead to premature failure or have catastrophic consequences. I welcome stories to the contrary.

as before , this is not a comprehensive argument regarding all technicalities of roller bearings, but an attempt at a succint post that may remove or eliminate the bullshit and myths surrounding the term Superblend.

kind wishes to All
Bradley

B.Rad said:

Fact 2 the key to the whole issue is the suffix E. this is NOT heavy duty or another description. it means maximum capacity, nothing more, nothing less

Click to expand...

Wouldn't argue against most of that. Including that this has been done to death before.

However, E most certainly does mean heavy duty.
E actually stands for EXTRA - they have an extra roller in there ( = heavier duty).
Count them, if you don't believe !!!!!!!
This increases the load bearing capability. Considerably.

The C3 means it can also stand a bit more misalignment in the shafts.
May not matter a bean if you don't rev the zinger out of it. But if you do.
Not good engineering practice. At all. But if it helps...

Hopethishelps.

SteveA said:

Buy the genuine Andover Norton packaged part, don't worry about where it was actually made, let AN worry about that, fit them correctly (as advised), don't be as anal as some of you are about end float (Norton weren't) and ride the damn thing. :roll:

Click to expand...

Good advice. !

But the how and why of what works and what supposedly doesn't work still hasn't been fully written.
And some folks like to know the how and why. So do the folks that put em together....

Dommies used the earlier bearing combo for nearly 25 years, with not too many bearing problems.
Although they do wear out. (Do superblends last longer ?? ?).

Cheers.

Superblend? What's that?

I hearby redesignate this bearing as the "Might Mellow" And although I would never use one, you can get a "Mighty Mellow" for your gearbox layshaft too.

Just to be clear, you too can re-designate this bearing to you whetever you want to call it. Enjoy!

FYI. I have Might Mellows in my drive and timing side of the crankcase.

Hello rohan

thanks for your info.

Mate, i am trying to get rid of the subjectiveness about this subject and use the bearing manfacturers info as given. E may very well have more rollers and be "heavy duty" but referring to any manufacturers list of suffixes E as listed means maximum capacity, however that mey be interpreted

I do agree with you about the general thrust but E is defined as maximum capacity. how that capacity is achieved is seperate issue.

C3 means greater internal clearence then normal. remember we are only talking microns here. my logic says that more clearance does not exclusivly mean more tolerance to misalignment. it may make the situation worse, by removing close dimensional location. as in a worn bearing. roller bearing worn races do not increase the capacity for misalignment. the design of these bearings in regard to mis alignment is taken care of by the logarithmic curve.

These after all are CYLINDRICAL ROLLER bearings

But gee it was good to hear your side. we are not a great deal apart in understanding these issues

thanks for that
Bradley

Can anyone give info where normal clearence in racing has resulted in main bearing seizure. I am keen to hear of examples.

B.Rad said:

Can anyone give info where normal clearence in racing has resulted in main bearing seizure. I am keen to hear of examples.

Click to expand...

If you go out to the historic races, you can usually inspect all the blued bits - lying on the pit floors !!
I wouldn't like to attribute any causes to most of them though - they are usually too far gone to say with certainty whether it was tightness, lube failure, debris caused, or what.

Nortons certainly went to looser fit main bearings - in several stages.
There was a bulletin for the commando, advising that the housing was being made larger - to prevent crushing on installation.
And then the C3 fit bearing came out.

Whether this was to prevent tightness on fitting, heating causing tight bearings, etc etc.
This was oft quoted as preventing crank/crankcase problems in hard revving motors, so allowing for a bit of misalignment seems to be in the sandwich there somewhere....

It would be neat if you could talk to the guys that made the bearings. Wouldn't suprise me one bit to here them say " yea the bosses said taper the rollers. tried to tell em the grinders don't work that way, parts feed in one end an out the other. Boss left pissed so we let him sling his line of shit an we flared out the ends of the outside races a couple tenths. " Thats my usual experience in situations like this.

Indeed.
We also have to remember that Nortons were suffering the deep embarrassment of worn out bearings, blown up engines, broken cases and broken cranks at very short mileages in Combats - ie within the warranty period. So they threw all the solutions they could think of at the problem - AND retreated from making Combats... !

Whether all of these solutions, or parts of the solution, were necessary does not seem to have been researched - thoroughly at least.
But folks with commandos and dommies with earlier style bearing sets are still trundling along, some with a fair old mileage, so that must tell us something. ?

I'm ready, the two FAG are in place, no shim on drive side.





Ciao.

Piero

grandpaul said:

SteveA said:

Buy the genuine Andover Norton packaged part, don't worry about where it was actually made, let AN worry about that, fit them correctly (as advised), don't be as anal as some of you are about end float (Norton weren't) and ride the damn thing.

Click to expand...

Well where's the fun in that?

I noticed you added to the sum total as well...

Click to expand...

Well, yes I did. Fun?.....we all get our kicks different ways I suppose

Maybe my situation is different, I have a brand new set of Maney cases, a brand new Maney 80.4 crank, I am going to take my own advice on main bearings....

There really is so much more to do in the build...

The history of bearing manufacture and marketing names is a bit lost on me, last time I built an engine from scratch I did pretty much the same, with new MKIII cases and crank, bearings out of the Norton experimental shop in '75, so the type would be the last ones they used....and no shims on either drive or timing side...just 'some' end float....they ran for four seasons of racing for me with no issues, which means four or five engine strips, inspections and rebuilds, maybe six. Certainly, two dropped valve occurences, a cam follower stellite foot floating around in there and various other maladies did not upset them....best we could tell, this motor was making around 80bhp at the crank, on tall gearing it ran to around 150mph in '76.

Of course, it accumulated very few real miles, just hard race miles, it did not spend much time in the rev band that probably caused most crank flex in an 850, and only revved over 7K a couple of times, one of which concluded with a dropped, big, re-angled valve at 140mph...

Being a short stroke my new motor will be revved harder, but the approach to bearings won't change....and I won't be reading any bearing catalogues any time soon.

Have you pressed the inner races on to your cranf shafts end yet? I see on the timing side that the inner is sttill in the bearing or is it a ball type?

pierodn said:

I'm ready, the two FAG are in place, no shim on drive side.


Piero

Click to expand...

pvisseriii said:

Have you pressed the inner races on to your cranf shafts end yet? I see on the timing side that the inner is sttill in the bearing or is it a ball type?

pierodn said:

I'm ready, the two FAG are in place, no shim on drive side.


Piero

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

H,
I have an other original roller FAG inner race, a little little more larger lapped hole that enters and goes out from krank shaft very easy.
I use this to search the clearance and if i need to shim.
Piero

pierodn said:

I have an other original roller FAG inner race, a little little more larger lapped hole that enters and goes out from krank shaft very easy.
I use this to search the clearance and if i need to shim.
Piero

Click to expand...

That is really smart. Good on you.

What do you think about?????


http://www.ebay.ch/itm/NJ306E-Cylindric ... 1076571667


Pieo

I think you could buy bearings from Andover Norton for your Norton.
Even if price is a bit higher you know that the bearing sold by AN are the right ones for the job ,unless you think you know more than AN about commando why try anything else?
And don't come crying in a few years that nobody is selling good quality Norton parts when you try to save a few € by buying cheap .

pierodn said:

What do you think about?????


http://www.ebay.ch/itm/NJ306E-Cylindric ... 1076571667


Pieo

Click to expand...

Maybe not so smart. Look for "c3" and "M1". This ebay bearing could be from any manufacturer. The information is unclear.

I agree.
As you can see, i mounted the two FAG bearings that i bought fron Andover, of course, so i am sure.
Ciao.
Piero