View Single Post
Old 05-27-2015, 12:20 AM   #3 (permalink)
kir_kenix
kir_kenix
 
kir_kenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Emerson, Ne
Posts: 207

1997 Chevy s10 - '97 Chevy S10 WT
Pickups
90 day: 32.71 mpg (US)

1997 Ford Escort - '97 Ford Escort LX
Team Ford
Last 3: 32.29 mpg (US)

Razz - '97 Yamaha Razz
90 day: 109.57 mpg (US)

2004 Ford F250 - '04 Ford F250 XLT
90 day: 16.32 mpg (US)

2000 S10 4.3 - '00 Chevrolet S10 W/T
Pickups
90 day: 19.4 mpg (US)

2010 corilla - '10 Toyota Corolla LE
90 day: 32.82 mpg (US)

'Yota - '22 Toyota Rav4 LE
90 day: 37.41 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by some_other_dave View Post
Looks like some hellacious stress risers on the edges of the grooves. I wonder how durable they are, especially in heavily-loaded applications?

-soD
I was thinking the same thing. I imagine these would be for fairly lightly loaded applications where reduced friction trumps longevity. I would think that the ball bearings would wear more with this design, just by simply having more surface area in contact with the "race grooves" (not sure what they would be called here).

Hopefully they are amazingly durable and work perfectly as shown...These could cut out a ton of friction if distributed throughout a vehicle (wheel bearings, carrier bearings, transmission tail housings, etc, etc...).
  Reply With Quote