View Single Post
Old 07-25-2016, 04:50 PM   #6 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,443

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,209
Thanked 4,388 Times in 3,362 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
Since Wheel RPM is only between 700 and 1000 RPM at highway speed the wheel bearing losses are not very large.
I'm also thinking about crank shaft, con-rod, and other accessory bearings that could be replaced by these retainer-less bearings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
Just about all cars and trucks now use roller bearings due to their greater strength. Metros have them on the rear (don't know about the front) and my '59 Chevy has them on the front (don't know about the rear).
Is there a similar method that can be used in roller bearings to space them out without use of a retainer?

Are conventional roller bearings as efficient as conventional ball bearings?
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote