Spindle Bearing/seal kit, which order for install?

[ntsqd]

You don't necessarily have to pack the inside of the seal area, but the spindle itself and certainly the bearing area should be packed.
The more grease the better at keeping moisture out in the long term. A bunch will splooge out when you install the spindle, but that can then be used to re-pack the bearings and/or the hub's inner cavity surfaces.

Paul

To address this I made a special tool from a spare spindle nut, some exhaust tube, an o-ring, a chunk of plate and a grease zerk. O-ring is a size that butts against the end of the spindle. Tube and plate are welded to the spindle nut to form a "cup" of sorts. Several short pieces of tube were cut and made smaller OD to create a ledge for the o-ring. Zerk is in the center of the plate.
Screw the tool on far enough for the o-ring to seal on the end of the spindle, attach grease gun, and listen for grease to splorch out of the back of the spindle. You may need to use a bar to keep the stub axle from backing out of the rear of the stub spindle under pressure from pumping the grease in.

Main reason that I made this was so that if I suspect water entry all I need to do is remove the locking hub and I can use the tool and the grease gun to flush any contaminates out the far side of the stub spindle.

 

[jamesroney]

And pretty lame that this shop manual would be incorrect.

Ouch! That's harsh. Don't forget that the shop manual and service literature needs to be published and distributed PRIOR to release of the vehicle. So the shop manual for the 76 Bronco front axle had to be designed based on engineering forecast and design intent at least a year before the model year introduction. The guy that created the BOM and the assembly sketch had no way to know what the final released design might be.

Factory service manuals are often incorrect. It takes years of "as-built" info to get the manuals right. The image from @FordBronc shows an application from "73-79" which means that it was released AFTER 1979. Not too useful to a mechanic in a Ford Dealership in 1976.

So you have a choice. You can have an incorrect service manual with the "best engineering judgement" available immediately, or you can wait 3 years to have one that is more "correct."

You go to war with the Army you have. Not with the Army you wish you had...

(and yeah, being the Senior Director of Engineering for a Fortune 100 manufacturer carries some baggage...)

 

[ba123]

Ouch! That's harsh. Don't forget that the shop manual and service literature needs to be published and distributed PRIOR to release of the vehicle. So the shop manual for the 76 Bronco front axle had to be designed based on engineering forecast and design intent at least a year before the model year introduction. The guy that created the BOM and the assembly sketch had no way to know what the final released design might be.

Factory service manuals are often incorrect. It takes years of "as-built" info to get the manuals right. The image from @FordBronc shows an application from "73-79" which means that it was released AFTER 1979. Not too useful to a mechanic in a Ford Dealership in 1976.

So you have a choice. You can have an incorrect service manual with the "best engineering judgement" available immediately, or you can wait 3 years to have one that is more "correct."

You go to war with the Army you have. Not with the Army you wish you had...

(and yeah, being the Senior Director of Engineering for a Fortune 100 manufacturer carries some baggage...)

After my initial thought that it was incorrect, I went and got my Chilton's manual which is like 66-83 or something stupid and it's also wrong. Shows the same schematic.

 

[ntsqd]

That's the problem with a fast paced development cycle, legacy artifacts. No one takes the time, because they don't have it to spare, to correct known but trivial defects. I've only worked for one company that valued those corrections enough to have a dept. dedicated to finding and fixing them as part of their sustaining operations. The rest of them have deluded themselves into thinking that they'll fix it "some day".

 

[DirtDonk]

On some sites, there are entire segments dedicated to posting corrections to the original factory manuals.
I know for sure of some for GM vehicles and maybe there are some for our Fords also. But we do know they are pretty darn good in general.
One thing that does seem to keep changing overtime is the correct torque value for certain things. Sometimes the manufacturer released a supplement when there wasn’t a major design change.
Usually the supplement will include several corrections.

One thing that never got corrected in the aftermarket manuals is the major change in the bronco wire harness for’71.
Changed from the firewall connectors to the wires passing through a grommet in the firewall 71.
All the manuals include 71 with the earlier 70 and prior design harness. So owners of 71s have to fiddle around a bit to get the right information.

 

[brbuilder]

I’ve been following this discussion and have a question. I had downloaded the spicer d44 manual that someone had previously posted on this site. Figure 35 in the manual shows this seal (#4) being installed by hand on the stub staff and states “the lip of the seal is to be directed towards the spindle”. It appears to be an old document so maybe this information has been revised/changed?

 

[DirtDonk]

The way I read that, it seems to be another confirmation of what was just discussed. That the “open“ face, or “lip“ goes against the spindle bearing.
To me that is “facing the spindle“ as near as I can tell.

So that particular document, more so than the Ford book, seems to be accurate, and not in need of revision.
Unless I’m reading it wrong?

 

[brbuilder]

The way I read that, it seems to be another confirmation of what was just discussed. That the “open“ face, or “lip“ goes against the spindle bearing.
To me that is “facing the spindle“ as near as I can tell.

So that particular document, more so than the Ford book, seems to be accurate, and not in need of revision.
Unless I’m reading it wrong?

So is the orientation of the seal shown in the picture posted by Oldtmer correct?

 

[ntsqd]

One side of that little seal has a flat face and the other is grooved while the ID and the OD are tapered. If you look at it closely the grooved side has both the largest OD and the smallest ID. I oriented them with the groove facing towards the knuckle. That way when I pump grease thru from the other end to flush out any possible contaminates the sealing lips (those largest and smallest diameters) are gently pushed out of the way by the escaping grease.

I've greatly exaggerated the shape, but like this:

 

[ba123]

I’ve been following this discussion and have a question. I had downloaded the spicer d44 manual that someone had previously posted on this site. Figure 35 in the manual shows this seal (#4) being installed by hand on the stub staff and states “the lip of the seal is to be directed towards the spindle”. It appears to be an old document so maybe this information has been revised/changed?

Yes, #4 with the lip towards the spindle (facing out) is correct. You cannot get that wrong when you're doing it, it would not make any sense the other way. The firmer part of this seal (non-lip side) stretches onto the slinger lip and stays there and the flexible lip presses against the spindle to create a seal. In that pic posted on page 1, he has this seal facing the correct way, but it cannot just be placed there. MUST be stretched onto the slinger and it spins with the axle.

 

[Oldtimer]

So is the orientation of the seal shown in the picture posted by Oldtmer correct?

Chicken or egg?

Per my photo the seal would keep water out of spindle bearing, And as ntsqd points out, would allow grease (contaminates) to pass by.

Per James comment, flipping the seal over, with lips facing spindle bearing, is the correct orientation, and was Spicers intent to keep grease in.

Per ba123's comment (and others I have seen) it may not matter since many are not even installed.

 

[DirtDonk]

So it’s still two schools of thought.
The first time I took mine apart, which is far as I could tell was the first time it had been done, the open lips were facing inward towards the spindle bearing. Not inward towards the differential.
I still stared at the picture in my Chilton’s manual for a few minutes before deciding the diagram showed it as being the same way I was doing it.

On the few Broncos I worked on while they were still verifiably new, they were all that way.
Open “cup“ face toward the spindle bearing.

 

[DirtDonk]

Sorry there folks.
I was still focusing on the small ring spindle bearing seal.
I guess you were talking about the larger seal that I always referred to as the “bellows“ seal.
I’ll go back and look at the diagram to see what #4 actually is.

 

[ba123]

Chicken or egg?

Per my photo the seal would keep wter out of spindle bearing, And as ntsqd points out, would allow grease (contaminates) to pass by.

Per James comment, flipping the seal over, with lips facing spindle bearing, is the correct orientation, and was Spicers intent to keep grease in.

Per ba123's comment (and others I have seen) it may not matter since many are not even installed.

totally agree that it probably doesn't matter and might be better in there wrong than not at all, but yes, mine wasn't even there so prob doesn't matter. How many seals do you need for one tiny little spindle bearing

BUT, to think about it, the flange-flexible part of a seal usually faces something and does not point to a flat object. Like think of a rear main seal, or any seal you've installed, which way does it point?

But even if I had my own in incorrectly, I would not go in and change it. no point.

 

[Oldtimer]

. . . but the one that @FordBronc posted does...what is that page you posted out of?

Looks like an image from the 73/79 for CAR parts book.

1973-79 Ford Car Parts and Accessories Catalog - Fordmanuals.com

1973-79 Ford Car Master Parts and Accessories Catalog. The 1973 thru 1979 Ford Car Master Parts and Accessory Catalog is the original manual used by Ford technicians to identify the correct part for Ford cars.

fordmanuals.com

 

[ntsqd]

Seems spectacularly useless to me when the small seal is oriented with the groove facing the locking hub. It's only going to keep the grease from migrating towards the thrust washer, which I want to happen. It won't keep contaminants out of the spindle bearing, which I want it to do.

The thin lip of the big seal should rub on the inner face of the stub spindle.

 

[ba123]

Seems spectacularly useless to me when the small seal is oriented with the groove facing the locking hub. It's only going to keep the grease from migrating towards the thrust washer, which I want to happen. It won't keep contaminants out of the spindle bearing, which I want it to do.

The thin lip of the big seal should rub on the inner face of the stub spindle.

I don't completely understand...I think you're saying the same thing kinda.

The big seal does face the spindle and keeps contaminants out.

the small seal faces the spindle bearing and keeps the grease in.

Totally my own speculation, but how I see it.

 

[jamesroney]

The thin lip of the bellows should rub on the inner face of the stub spindle.

FIFY.

 

[ntsqd]

I don't completely understand...I think you're saying the same thing kinda.

The big seal does face the spindle and keeps contaminants out.

the small seal faces the spindle bearing and keeps the grease in.

Totally my own speculation, but how I see it.

I don't care about keeping the grease in, I want it to keep the junk out - something that the big seal is not well known for being supremely effective at doing. The inner spindle bearings that I just installed were needle bearings. Doesn't take much junk in volume or size to mess those up. With the whole gap between the spindle and the stub axle pumped full of grease I've got enough grease in there. Losing a little past that seal won't hurt a thing and what does leak out lubricates the thrust washer.

 

[DirtDonk]

And packing the spindle does a pretty good job at keeping junk out as well. Maybe not of the spindle bearing, but from getting all the way into the bearing hub.
For more "normal" use, the small ring seal does an adequate job of keeping junk and gunk out of the back face of the spindle. The axle floats and I never had the impression that the floating bellows seal ever had good full contact when the shaft was pushed inward toward the differential. Maybe that's not the case?

But then, there are always these: WH Extreme Spindle Bushing Thingies
The sealed nature and non-roller self-sizing design of these bearings can prevent pretty much anything from getting past them.
Makes the performance (or lack thereof) of the previously discussed parts mostly moot.

Paul