Set 20 Bearing Variants?

[Past_Miner]

I have been working on a 1976 9" rear for a build I have been doing for my daughter (for years...). I pulled a set of Explorer rear brakes off of the donor we pulled the engine and transmission from and I have been setting the rear end up to accept the brakes.

I used this project as an excuse to buy a narrowing jig and went ahead and changed the housing ends from the early big bearing to the Torino ends. Everything was going great right up until this morning when I got set up to press the wheel bearings on and realized that the bearing ID on a Set 20 is 1.562" and the stock axles are only 1.53" OD on the bearing surface.

My question is if anyone knows if there is a tapered roller bearing with the outer seal that has the correct 3.150 OD and a 1.53" ID?

I'm starting to think that I might have to go back to the sealed ball bearings to use the stock axles. If anyone has a line on a wheel bearing that would work for this application I would appreciate it.

Here is a shot of the new housing end installed.

 

[DirtDonk]

there might be, but I've not seen it (or even searched for it) or seen it talked about here. At least not that I remember.
The original Set 20 was never meant to be installed on a stock 28-spline Bronco axle, but as you found out went on axle shafts with a completely different diameter.

While you can hunt down on the specification sheets, is there any real reason you could not just go with the standard sealed large bearing with your setup?

Paul

 

[Past_Miner]

Thanks for the feedback, Paul. I don't think there is any reason I can't use the sealed bearing, I just wanted to know if there was another option out there.

I just returned from visiting every parts store in town and between them all I was able to get two bearings and seals. I will get it put together tomorrow and see if there are any dimensional problems with the brake bracket.

 

[Past_Miner]

It looks like the Currie spacer rings will work with the sealed bearings. Aside from that, I'm not sure there is much more to say here.

 

[DirtDonk]

Other than "don't forget the seal" perhaps?

Paul

 

[DirtDonk]

Is the rings only duty to center on the backing plate and bracket?

Paul

 

[Past_Miner]

Is the rings only duty to center on the backing plate and bracket?

Paul

No, the caliper mount is quite a bit thicker than the stock brake backing plate and this ring is thick enough to allow the axle retaining plate to apply the correct preload to the tapered roller bearings.

In the case of the sealed bearing it takes up the extra space so the bearing can't float in and out of the housing. The ring is almost 3/16" thick.

 

[Past_Miner]

Amazingly, I remembered to put the inner seals in both sides.

As usual, I had to take the first side apart a few times to get everything working correctly. The bottom line is that the explorer brakes work well with the stock axles but the brake offset is slightly shallower than the explorer (and most aftermarket) axles by 1/8". The explorer is 2 1/2" and the stock '76 axles are 2 3/8".

I put everything together and the caliper has enough float to mount up without difficulty or dragging. However, the back of the wheel studs are so close to the brake shoes for the parking brake that they make contact with the retaining springs as the axle rotates. I imagine it could have run that way for a long time but it would be annoying to listen to and the spring would eventually fail and cause all kinds of problems in there.

Somewhere, I had read that it's possible to shim the bearing out 1/8" with a thrust bearing washer and I had bought a couple that fit the housing end. I probably read it on this forum but I have had these parts for a couple of years so I can't remember where I got the info and I can't give proper credit. I installed the washer behind the bearing and added a 1/8" shim plate to the face of the caliper mount so the Currie ring applies the same preload force as before. The studs clear the spring and the brake offset is 2 1/2".

The offending spring is the yellow one in this picture. I installed it backward (with the spring ends facing out) to get a little more clearance but it wouldn't be necessary with the shims in place.