Babbit vs Inserts I read somewhere you should not run inserts unless you have a pressurized oil system. Any help here?
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts I don't know the answer to your question, but I have read the same thing. My model A has run for 90 years with the babbit, why change and invite new types of problems? Jack
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts There are many ,many members on this forum who have driven 10s of thousands of miles with inserted engines.Opinions will vary and lots of disscussions on this if you do a search.
Dennis |
Re: Babbit vs Inserts There are a few conversations on this topic that a search should bring up. I think a lot of people go to inserts because pouring babbit correctly is becoming a lost art. That being said, if you find someone that does good babbit work, I would take poured bearings over inserts on a stock engine.
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts A fellow club member ran 30,000 miles on an insert motor and it started to knock. The surface of the insert rod bearings failed.
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts I should add that this was a stock motor, non pressurized.
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts I have one of each and both are driven hard. Last Year, I took my inserted engine to Bert's Model A to have some stuff checked and everything was fine. It was built in 1985 and it was built using Kabota tractor inserts. That engine was run at 3500 RPM on a dyno and the babbited engine was run on the same dyno at 3200 RPM. These engines produced 60 and 59 horsepower at the rear wheels respectively. Neither engines have a pressure oil system.
Quite frankly, I don't think that it makes a bit of difference based on my observations. However, I'm a firm advocate of having A engines balanced by a professional machine shop. The Durango-Silverton Narrow gauge railroad has a facility in town to do babbit pouring. Someday I'm going to ask if they would do a Model A engine. |
Re: Babbit vs Inserts It will work either way . I prefer babbit . Babbit bearings can be adjusted by removing or adding shims between the connecting rod and rod cap . Insert bearings only have a thin layer of babbit where they meet the journal of the crankshaft and are not shimmed or adjustable . Babbit is softer than steel . If the thin layer of babbit wears off the insert ,. steel on steel will wear out very , very quickly . It has been said that insert bearings can be used with dipper cap oiling . Pressure oiling would be better and last longer but costs more !!!
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts Ok fine, but how many are running a filter system too that have inserts? Just saying that you got X miles with them but not including the fact you do have a filter installed is only telling part of the story.
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts Quote:
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts The key of this discussion is the quality of the work done by a MACHINE SHOP.
Yes quality shops are not cheap but are worth it in the long run. Our X31 engine started to knock an found some babbit flakes. The engine was gone through in 1996 with over 40,000 touring miles. It is now back at the same shop and the original machinist is doing it. He had all the records from the rebuild in 96. Impressive! |
Re: Babbit vs Insert Quote:
We have the Orange Empire Railway Museum in Perris, Ca about 20 miles from my house. They have a shop to restore and maintain the old engines and trollies in their collection. There is also a railroad museum in San Diego. Likewise, I may stop by to find out if they can pour Babbitt. David Serrano |
Re: Babbit vs Inserts In my most used Model A, a 1929 Phaeton, I run inserts with just the middle one pressure fed at 25 psi. It has an oil filter on the side cover and an air filter, 5.5:1 head, downdraught carburettor and mild touring cam. I have put about 40,000 miles on it towing a camper around the outback. I am just now staring to hear the bottom end pounding away under full throttle so I will soon be pulling it down and doing whatever I think it needs. I expect to find the middle main bearing worn but considering the miles it has done and how they have been done, I am not complaining.
I have a friend who does similar trips towing a camper behind his 1928 Chev with babbit bottom end. He carries a spare con rod with him and adjusts the mains every few thousand miles. Clearly, my inserts have stood up to the demands better than his babbited engine. PS Re oil change. I watch the instruments and when I see the oil pressure droping for the usual 50mph and 180F, I change the oil. That is a regular 3,500 miles using the cheapest oil out there. |
Re: Babbit vs Inserts I have a motor that I don’t know who built it but it is inserted and this last weekend we did a parade and somewhere in the motor or trans noise started and a slight knock. The motor would not idle and either the alternator bearings or throw out bearing is going out. I am planning in the near future on pulling the motor and trans and take them apart to check everything out.
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts Quote:
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts From reading multiple posts on the subject it seems that babbit tends to fail more gradually than inserts. If you hear a babbited engine making noise there is probably time to tighten things up before damage is done to the crank whereas if you hear an inserted engine making noise it is already too late.
My personal experience backs this up. My old engine had failing mains and rods, flaking apart, chunks missing, etc. As bad as it looked and sounded, the crank only needed to be polished before being used in the new engine. I was very happy the rods and mains could be kept at .010 under. |
Re: Babbit vs Inserts If there is no damage to the crank can the insert bearings just be replaced?
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts Quote:
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts Add me to the not true gang.
|
Re: Babbit vs Inserts I removed and replaced the insert main bearings in my 1951 Massey Harris Tractor without removing the crankshaft but that was a continental four cylinder engine .
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.