The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Driveline U/Joint Replacement

I have a 1950 3100 With a 3 speed. I bought a u/joint from the Filling Station (fs-101) the replacement joint has needle bearings where as the original just used bushings. I didnt see a problem with the needle bearings so I went ahead and tried to install it. The problem I'm having is the caps that bolt to the yoke on the transmission will not seat all the way into the yoke. The bearing caps aren't machined like the originals. Has anyone else run into a problem like this when replacing their u/joint?

http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc399/bicounty/746b93261d7df4206d0210f7a069534a.jpg

http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc399/bicounty/cfbbeea640c84d5ab37cfacb2f535e00.jpg

I would worry more about keeping those needles in place; many (let's say 75% as a high estimate ) replacement parts that are manufactured for these trucks do not fit exactly as the part they are replacing. I'm a new guy to these trucks myself, but what you've got pictured looks like it will function just fine.

Brad

Edit - I can't delete this post, but somebody else will chime in with definitive advice. I'd file the new part to seat properly

That is seated correctly, they were not intended to touch all the way around. Just on the mounting flange and on the first 1/8" on each side.

In looking at your pic. again it looks like it is not touching on the mounting flange on one side.
It looks like it has not been machined with the flat sides to drop in place.

Bicounty,

I replaced the U-Joint in my late '49 1/2 ton Chevrolet Truck. I got mine from Classic Chevy Truck Parts. NO NEEDLE BEARINGS! It came with the bushings. I'm with Uncle Brad and Pre'68 Dave, it looks seated correctly, but I would definitely be concerned about those needle bearings and staying in place. The front u-joint moves side to side just a little bit, but I would be concerned about the needle bearings slipping out or breaking and working there way into the transmission output bearing. If it were me, I would get the U-Joint with the bushings like the original. Just a suggestion.

Tim

Bicounty

I agree with the gentlemen above. The only thing I do not see is the clip to install under the bolt to prevent the bolt from backing out over time. You need to make sure this is installed or somewhere down the road a loud noise awaits.......

I have reservations about using needle bearings in this application. The design of the entire u-joint assembly is archaic. "Improving" it with needle bearings seems to me like putting lipstick on a pig, as well as possibly creating a weak link in an already troublesome design.
It will likely work just fine when installed, but what happens with wear, or lack of adequate lubrication, or missing a gear on a shift. Solid bushings are much more forgiving under harsh conditions.
Either that or these needle bearings are the best thing since sliced bread. Time will tell. (BTW, was any of you in here around before sliced bread?)
Carl

In the early 40's Chev used needle bearing U' joints from the factory for a few years. They changed back for some reason.

It took them very little time to recognize that lipstick does nothing for a pig?

I should probably just put the original one back in. it was realy fine but I just figured while I have it all apart I would replace it. I did run the caps on a belt sander to take some off and I did get it to sit flat on the yoke but it's not snug like the original. If I bolt the original cap in I have to almost pry it out of the yoke. I can see how the torque goes from the yoke to the cap and the 1/4 28 bolts just hold the cap in the yoke. Like Brad said a high percentage of the replacement parts for these old trucks need modification to make them work.

It will be impossible to file-fit the new part- - - -it's hardened. It might be possible to file or grind just a little off the corner of the yoke without compromising the strength of anything, but I'll add my voice to the chorus of "use the bushing"!
Jerry

Use the bushing version. There's no good lubrication for the needle bearings, which will fail without it. I have been told the bushings are "oillite" which is supposed the absorb lube as it cools and release lube as it gets hot. The technology is pretty crude.

Anybody else heard the "oillite" thing?

"oillite" ---> "oilite"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oilite

"There's no good lubrication for the needle bearings, which will fail without it."
The u-joint bearing/bushing gets oiled/lubricated by the lubricant inside the u-joint enclosure.

I assume this is discussing an enclosed u-joint/drive-shaft?

Your lubrication for the enclosed U-joint comes thru the rear
bearing and that's what the seal back in the torque tube is
for and the seal in the replacement Okie bushings. If you
don't have oil in the bell then you are running your
transmission oil level to low.
If....and I repeat, If.... that needle bearing cap seats
properly in the yoke, then there is no reason is shouldn't
last as long as any other of the billions upon billions of
Needle bearing universal joints that the automotive industry
has been using in their cars and trucks long before I was
born, and that was a long, long time ago.
The original universal joint cap was not oilite, it was a
solid steel metal to metal plain bearing design. Oilite is
made by compressing under extremely high pressure, powdered
metal till it bonds together resulting in a porous structure.
They are best suited for axial loads or in linear applications
and are not well suited to heavy radial loads.
In my opinion, the interference I saw in the original posters
picture only needed to be relieved in the corner till the
machined surfaces sat flush with each other.
I think a needle bearing U-joint is an excellent up grade to
the original plain bearing U-joint.
Denny Graham
Sandwich, IL

I've still got to say that I believe needle bearings are better suited to open driveline U-joints that have trunions with a grease fitting that lets you drive lube from a grease gun into the joint from the inside under pressure. In my experience with my '46 4 speed crashbox and an enclosed driveline, very little lube comes out of the back of the trans to lube the U-joint. And yes, this is with the transmission properly filled. It's also going from the outside of the joint to the inside, which is not as good as the greasegun method. As a consequence you get premature U-joint failure. This is with either needle bearing type or bushing type (although the bushings seem to hold up a bit better).

After replacing several of these U-joints (getting really hard to find), I decided about 15 years ago to start periodically lubing the U-joint through the pipe tap that's right above it on the rear of the trans housing. I put in about 4 oz. gear lube every 300 miles or so. Interestingly, I find that my trans will become overfull from doing this, indicating that the lube is going from the U-joint back into the trans somehow. This takes a while, so that I'm usually draining a bit from the trans when I add to the U-joint housing. Been doing it for years and hasn't hurt anything, though. I notice that when it needs some lube, the truck seems to develop a little noise and the U-joint tends to vibrate a little - lube it and it's fine for another 300 miles.

Does anybody make a trunion that fits these enclosed drivelines that has a grease fitting on it?

How would you grease a grease-fitting trunnion that is inside an enclosed driveline?
Open the cover?

It says in MPC that you can use, needle bearing, bushing or Granodized type. (read Note under rear yoke)
Just as long all 4 are the same.
Bearing, Roller, Bushing - Group # 5.566 I'm assuming roller means (needle bearing)
373344 eBay - Type ???

Is Granodized the same as "oilite" ?
How do you know if you have a Bushing or Granodized type?

Roller would be needle brg. If you note all of those are for
the open universal joints. that is the rear or intermediate
in the case of the half enclosed drive lines.
Granodized is a GM term. Have never found a description of it
from any GM literature but here is quote of Gene's
interpritation of it from over at the VCCA:
"graanodized refers to a coating. I would bet it is like the
tin Chevrolet plated the cast iron pistons with from 1935 and
up. Luthy brand piston rings advertised that they were granodized
to assist break-in. Have see n it mentioned as being used on
other parts also.
The granodizing looks like a black powder coating. In the high
friction areas it wears away and helps to form a super smooth
wearing surface."

I would imagine that it was a process for thermal or flame
spray coating a material on the surface of a part or it
might have been an early type of thin graphite coating.

Your ebay listing is just showing a set of plain type
bearing caps, which appear to be steel. I'm not familiar
with the pre-WWII vehicles, but judging from the parts book
I would imagine that some were still using the plain
bearing caps even though the roller bearing caps were
in use on some vehicles.

Been tryin' to figure it out but ya got me stumped cuz I'm not
a texter....what is MPC?

Keep in mind, this is a discussion, not the gospel. We're
discovering something new about these trucks every day.

Denny G
Sandwich, IL

The "New Departure Division of General Motors Corporation" is mentioned/referenced in the 17th Ed. of Machinery's Handbook. There is a quote attributed to the New Departure Handbook, Vol. II-1951 in the bearing section, but I could not find "granodized" mentioned (edit-in any of those 92 pages in the bearing section).

Brad

Mesmerizing. I would like to see some of their references if it is commercial. (As in, commercial where & by who & when)

Good stuff, Tim.

Brad

DG, I think MPC refers to the Master Parts Catalog.

Circa 1949 from the US gov. Previously Thermoil Granodine.

Edit- Here is a screenshot of the patent office information. The search times out, so my previous links would not work.

Thanks
Brad

MPC stands for "Master Parts Catalog" Don't feel bad, when I 1st saw MPC I was stumped for a couple days.
U-Joint Illustration link from 1929 - 1957 Chevrolet Master Parts & Accessories Catalog on http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/ Website.
The text on the page from chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com was not very clear so went to
This Page and This Page ---on--- http://www.gmpartswiki.com/browse and screen shot a close up and uploaded on my Photobucket Album.
The reason: www.gmpartswiki.com/browse is not very quick at loading pages sometimes, but the text is sometimes clearer.

Correct.
---------------------
I would say This picture (scroll down) of the u-joint assembly shows the bushing type bearing.
Read under "Universal Joint" It says 'using bushings in place of needle bearings'
I think most of the bearings I have seen were of the Granodized Type.
Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3
Pic 4

Denny Graham,tclederman and Uncle Brad thanks for the Granodized Trunnion bearing explanation.
Pretty much clears up that mystery.

Here are some pictures of a disassembled 1954 Chevrolet 1/2 ton U-Joint.
The bearings used I believe are of the Granodized type.
Pic A
Pic B
Pic C
Pic D
Pic E
Pic F
Pic G
Pic H

What is interesting the rear yoke bearing (ring) not only moves on the trunnion surface, but also on the rear yoke hole surface.
On both sides of the bearing there is movement.
Unless the lock ring keep the bearing from moving inside the rear yoke hole.
Isn't the rear bearing suppose to be pressed into the rear yoke hole with no movement? (tight fit)

On the front yoke bearing (winged) there is only movement on the trunnion surface and inside surface of the bearing.
The other side is fixed and bolted to the front yoke.

Hi TC. Yes, I'd be happy to slide back the U-joint ball every 100 miles and hit a zerk fitting with a grease gun. Over the years I've heard a lot of people talk about problems with U-joint lubrication on the enclosed driveline trucks and cars. My technique of adding lube to the pipe fitting on my 4 speed has worked, but I have to do it every 300 miles or so or I start getting some vibration and noise. At least I haven't burned up a U-joint in many years, though.

In my effort to make everything as perfect as possible I ordered another u joint fron Classic. The new joint is cheap Chinese crap. Why do I even try. I'm going to use the original joint. If you look at the original cap you will see a flat line machined at the base of the arch. The transmission yoke has the same flat line machined into it. They kind of lock into each other. You can see the crappy looking casting on the replacement cap.


http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/bicounty/media/E136F16D-7B8E-4A66-B194-DB76054861F6.jpg.html

http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/bicounty/media/90916376-DAA0-4BA9-A50C-4ECC44DA5E97.jpg.html

I recently had to replace the throwout bearing (clutch release bearing) in my 52 3100. The bushing type u-joint was galled, probably let my oil level get too low. So I decided to replace it. I was surprised that I had no trouble sourcing a USA made throwout bearing from NAPA but none of the local parts houses could help me with the u-joint. I did a search to try and determine which internet supplier might carry the best product and this thread seemed to confirm my fears.

In the end, despite the negative opinions, I tried the same FS-101 kit with the needle bearings from the Filling Station. I had a different experience than Bicountry in that everything fit back in just like the bushing type I removed. No gaps and no misalignment. I don't see any way the needles can come out as someone speculated. I don't know if I will have trouble down the road but right now it seems all is well. I did spend a fair amount of time working my way from 220 grit all the way to 1000 grit on all the surfaces of the ball and torque tube that will see any movement in hopes of stopping the oil leakage and will keep my eye on that. Still not sure why Bicountry had the fitment issues with the u-joint but I am relieved I didn't.