Rod Bearings help!

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by R3dliner

Its been proven the VAC bearings are the way to go.
Switching to 0W50 will give you 50 more WHP lol.

What has been proven, extensively in multiple forums, is that VAC should be avoided in general

In the case of bearings, I'm quite sure I will go with the people who discovered the issue and worked at solving it in several hundred page threads here than another shop which has consistently failed to perform with BMWs

So yeah, both my E9Xs are getting BE bearings. I would not put anything built by VAC on my car, even if it was free

[whats77inaname]

Originally Posted by R3dliner

Its been proven the VAC bearings are the way to go.
Switching to 0W50 will give you 50 more WHP lol.

After reading this post, how could you make that recommendation?? http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...4&postcount=68

[Mvy]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

What has been proven, extensively in multiple forums, is that VAC should be avoided in general

This statement is not supported by Maleks findings. Over 200 cars with VACs were checked after install and showed no additional wear.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by Mvy

This statement is not supported by Maleks findings. Over 200 cars with VACs were checked after install and showed no additional wear.

To be fair, he has put them in nearly 200 cars without issues. He has dismantled quite a few which are tracked etc and no wear has been shown on any.

Anyone who decides to turn a blind eye to this is probably the same kind of person who argues about iOS vs Android lol.

There will always be fanboys!

[L4ces]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

What has been proven, extensively in multiple forums, is that VAC should be avoided in general

In the case of bearings, I'm quite sure I will go with the people who discovered the issue and worked at solving it in several hundred page threads here than another shop which has consistently failed to perform with BMWs

So yeah, both my E9Xs are getting BE bearings. I would not put anything built by VAC on my car, even if it was free

It would be helpful if you can provide some justification as to why you wouldn't? PM if not here.

Thanks.

[R3dliner]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

After reading this post, how could you make that recommendation?? http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...4&postcount=68

I saw this thread too and MFR chimed in with good findings
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=13k+va

[doogee]

Originally Posted by R3dliner

I saw this thread too and MFR chimed in with good findings
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=13k+va

No point arguing with these people. You could pull a clean set out of a car with 500,000 miles and they'd still say they wouldn't want them in their car.

Lets not forget what Harrop recommends...VAC:

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by L4ces

It would be helpful if you can provide some justification as to why you wouldn't? PM if not here.

Thanks.

I've read enough horror stories from them. The most ridiculous screw ups you could imagine have happened to them, long before I had money to buy performance goodies. I never had a bad experience because by the time I started buying goodies I had seen enough reputable members screwed over.

Admittedly, I've read most of this on the other forum, not m3post, but the staggering amount of screw ups go way beyond what could be considered normal.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by Mvy

This statement is not supported by Maleks findings. Over 200 cars with VACs were checked after install and showed no additional wear.

I don't understand your quote. I'm saying I would never do business with VAC because they're a magnet for screwups and you answer their rod bearings appear to be good.

They may be good. I also saw the supercharged car with no bearing wear pics. That's nice. So if VAC manages to not epically screw up my order, it seems like their bearings work?
I still won't take the chance.

[pbonsalb]

Clevite makes and coats the vac bearings, not vac.

[Green-Eggs]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

Clevite makes and coats the vac bearings, not vac.

The Clevite part numbers have the following suffix definitions. Any combinations of these may appear.

H : Trimetal, lead, copper bearing.
K : Clevite TriArmor coating
X : 0.001 inch extra clearance (can be helpful if you're using a coating, but not from Clevite).

The designations on these bearings is HX, not HK.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

The Clevite part numbers have the following suffix definitions. Any combinations of these may appear.

H : Trimetal, lead, copper bearing.
K : Clevite TriArmor coating
X : 0.001 inch extra clearance (can be helpful if you're using a coating, but not from Clevite).

The designations on these bearings is HX, not HK.

This is correct, VAC sends the bearings to Calico for coating.

[anerbe]

So, if you have the extra clearance, it will be stamped at the end "HX" and it will come with a Calico packaging to designate the bearing was coated by Calico.

[deansbimmer]

MRF has reportedly installed a large number of VAC bearings. The number of sets removed after any significant usage is much smaller- I don't see he's posted details on very many of those at all.

I use VAC bearings when I can't get BE bearings. I've only had good luck with them once installed (they're in our daily driver) but I make sure they're the copper/lead bearings before I take them out of the bag. They've shipped coated 702/703 bearings before and others have reported the same, which is unforgivable when they advertise a completely different product. VAC doesn't have knowledgeable phone/email support either which IMO is a major blow to their public reputation.

I think BE would do MUCH better if they could keep their supply covering their demand.

[pbonsalb]

Originally Posted by doogee

This is correct, VAC sends the bearings to Calico for coating.

CORRECTED PER THE POST BELOW: There are two versions vac has sold. One is factory aluminum bearings with calico coatings. The other and more desirable one is clevite lead copper bearings with calico coating coating.

Here are the details on the vac clevite calico barings:

https://www.bebearings.com/PreviousA...ated_Bearings_

[doogee]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

There are two versions vac has sold. One is factory aluminum bearings with calico coatings. The other and more desirable one is clevite lead copper bearings with clevite coating.

Incorrect! Pleeeease do not post false information if you aren't sure about something. This leads to more and more false information being spread and confusing people.

VAC's custom bearings are Calico coated.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by deansbimmer

I use VAC bearings when I can't get BE bearings. I've only had good luck with them once installed (they're in our daily driver) but I make sure they're the copper/lead bearings before I take them out of the bag. They've shipped coated 702/703 bearings before and others have reported the same, which is unforgivable when they advertise a completely different product. VAC doesn't have knowledgeable phone/email support either which IMO is a major blow to their public reputation.
.

So I see their reputation for excellence also exists in M3Post... unsurprising

[whats77inaname]

Originally Posted by R3dliner

I saw this thread too and MFR chimed in with good findings
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...ghlight=13k+va

I guess you're missing the point I'm trying to make. The OP ordered a very specific set of bearings for a very specific purpose. VAC sends him a completely. different. product and passes it off as what the OP ordered, mistakenly or not. Granted, there's been no wear, but the point is, they sent him something he didn't ask for in place of what he did ask for, and didn't bother to tell him.

I don't know about you, but I loathe doing business with places like that. Regardless of wear/no wear....it's about the principle.

[Green-Eggs]

Originally Posted by doogee

Anyone who decides to turn a blind eye to this is probably the same kind of person who argues about iOS vs Android lol.

I don't think it's a religious argument on that level because those arguments are somewhat irrational. This isn't an irrational argument at all. Some people believe that you can't come to any meaningful conclusions when the rod bolts he used have bore distortion that increases clearance at 90-degrees up to an extra 0.0012 and could be masking the wear. It's still an out-of-round bore, and it's still the wrong thing to do for the engine. I think that's where the blind eye is being turned because nobody seems to care that this really matters...when it matters a great deal to any high end engine builder. That's why they always hone the rods when they install new rod bolts to ensure there is no bore distortion. If the installer can't do that, then at least they should choose the bolts that cause the least amount of distortion.

I have these VAC coated bearings sitting in front of me with only 1500 miles on them, on an NA engine, using OEM bolts with no bore distortion. I think you've convinced me to photograph them, post the pictures, and show how worn they were after 1500 miles.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

I don't think it's a religious argument on that level because those arguments are somewhat irrational. This isn't an irrational argument at all. Some people believe that you can't come to any meaningful conclusions when the rod bolts he used have bore distortion that increases clearance at 90-degrees up to an extra 0.0012 and could be masking the wear. It's still an out-of-round bore, and it's still the wrong thing to do for the engine. I think that's where the blind eye is being turned because nobody seems to care that this really matters...when it matters a great deal to any high end engine builder. That's why they always hone the rods when they install new rod bolts to ensure there is no bore distortion. If the installer can't do that, then at least they should choose the bolts that cause the least amount of distortion.

I have these VAC coated bearings sitting in front of me with only 1500 miles on them, on an NA engine, using OEM bolts with no bore distortion. I think you've convinced me to photograph them, post the pictures, and show how worn they were after 1500 miles.

So what would cause one engine to kill a set of bearings in 1500 miles and a bunch of others being perfectly fine after being used much longer? If this is the case, there is a manufacturing defect with some rods, or some sort of assembly error. Doesn't make sense.

[Green-Eggs]

Originally Posted by doogee

So what would cause one engine to kill a set of bearings in 1500 miles and a bunch of others being perfectly fine after being used much longer? If this is the case, there is a manufacturing defect with some rods, or some sort of assembly error. Doesn't make sense.

To me, it makes perfect sense. If you have a bearing with too little clearance already, then add a coating to that bearing (like in the case of the original VAC coated bearings), then you've just decreased the clearance by another 0.0005 inch. That's exactly what these bearings are that I have.

When you use that same coated bearings, but with rod bolts that increase clearance by an extra 0.001 at 90-degrees, you're likely going to get less wear. So people look at that bearing and they incorrectly conclude the coating is what saved the bearing. They don't realize that the bore is no longer round, it's somewhat oval, and adds extra clearance right in the area that they're looking for wear.

[+EDIT]
When you use the correct rod bolts, or those with a different spec that minimize the bore distortion, those are the bearings you want to look at for wear. The ones I have used OEM bolts that we know have the least bore distortion. The fact that these bearings are pretty worn after 1500 miles may tell you something about the ones that were inspected without OEM bolts. As far as I know, these are the only set I've seen pulled with correct bolts, and they're the only set I've seen with excessive wear as well on the coated bearing.
[-EDIT]

Bore distortion is never a good thing even if the bearing looks good afterwards. The bearing is already somewhat oval shaped from the factory. The shape helps push the oil around the bearing and maximizes the film strength at 90-degrees. Now with an egg-shaped bearing, you've weakened the film strength at 90-degrees where you need it most. But hey, the bearings looked fine when they were inspected!

See the problem here?

[whats77inaname]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

To me, it makes perfect sense. If you have a bearing with too little clearance already, then add a coating to that bearing (like in the case of the original VAC coated bearings), then you've just decreased the clearance by another 0.0005 inch. That's exactly what these bearings are that I have.

When you use that same coated bearings, but with rod bolts that increase clearance by an extra 0.001 at 90-degrees, you're likely going to get less wear. So people look at that bearing and they incorrectly conclude the coating is what saved the bearing. They don't realize that the bore is no longer round, it's somewhat oval, and adds extra clearance right in the area that they're looking for wear.

Bore distortion is never a good thing even if the bearing looks good afterwards. The bearing is already somewhat oval shaped from the factory. The shape helps push the oil around the bearing and maximizes the film strength at 90-degrees. Now with an egg-shaped bearing, you've weakened the film strength at 90-degrees where you need it most. But hey, the bearings looked fine when they were inspected!

See the problem here?

Yes. Which is *exactly* why I purchased BE Bearings and the BE-specific ARP bolts. This has been mentioned in other threads as well. And you're right, people just pretty much yawn and look the other way. At this point, maybe some people can understand why Doc was pissed when he didn't get bearings in which he could measure the lead (and possibly copper) levels in the oil, instead of saying, "Yeah, but they didn't wear."

You take a stock bearing, which we can all pretty much agree doesn't provide enough clearance, and then you COAT IT, which decreases the clearance MORE. And then say the coating is the magic elixir. Obviously it is doing a marvelous job, but why not just go with the bearing that provides the right clearance?