January 16, 201115 yr Is this the ones???....eBay UK They look too thin....and I wonder why there is a cut/slot in them?... these look like the bearing liners you see on car engine cranks. Best of balance. Neo Edited January 16, 201115 yr by Neo
January 17, 201115 yr Is this the ones???....eBay UK They look too thin....and I wonder why there is a cut/slot in them?... these look like the bearing liners you see on car engine cranks. Best of balance. Neo Seen that, not quite sure about it. Possible they have gone with that type design with a thicker bushing. As fitment of the bronze bearing can be a bit trickey as the things basically require a ream-to-fit after installation, this type bearing witha different bush may not require that. Possibly someone needs to call DK Bikespares or Splatshop, or MRS to see whats up with all this.
January 17, 201115 yr Is this the ones???....eBay UK They look too thin....and I wonder why there is a cut/slot in them?... these look like the bearing liners you see on car engine cranks. Best of balance. Neo Nah, looks nothing like them. Mine are much thicker.
January 17, 201115 yr The eBay supplier has replied to my question and said "Yes these are the ones, they replace the needle roller set up of the earier models...regards Howard" So I'm not sure what's going on with the pics. Best of balance. Neo
January 19, 201115 yr The eBay supplier has replied to my question and said "Yes these are the ones, they replace the needle roller set up of the earier models...regards Howard" So I'm not sure what's going on with the pics. Best of balance. Neo oward is a reputable fellow it seems, as I have got stuff of him in the past. Not sure what he is onto here, as reports seem to verify that our initial thought that these are not correct as per the picture. Send him another reply, Neo, stating that he needs to ck on this!Or we shall call upon The Addict! to rattle his cage! Think he knows Howard!
January 19, 201115 yr Send him another reply, Neo, stating that he needs to ck on this!Or we shall call upon The Addict! to rattle his cage! Think he knows Howard! Here's that reply... "These are genuine sherco replacement parts the part numbers are B/2964 and B/2965, they are most probably phosphur bronze with a zinc type coating" Maybe Sherco have settled on these then? Best of balance. Neo
January 20, 201115 yr Could these be the bearing surfaces that the bushing interfaces that replaces the bearings? They look like it.
January 20, 201115 yr Here's that reply... "These are genuine sherco replacement parts the part numbers are B/2964 and B/2965, they are most probably phosphur bronze with a zinc type coating" Maybe Sherco have settled on these then? Best of balance. Neo Well, that is all good, but the old standard HK bearings are probably about 3mm thick in the wall, or roughly 6mm difference in ID vs OD, no exact numbers here, and by the pic, these will not do? As they appear only about 1mm thick, so something else has to change. If the inner bushings are the same, then the bore size in the dogbones would have to be reduced to accept the thinner bearings.... If Howard cannot get a grip on this question, maybe someone can call MRS or Splatshop to get an answer?
January 20, 201115 yr Hummmm, Wow, that's strange. Is it an optical illusion or are the new dogbones thicker to maintain the same ID as the bearing style? I was going to say that if the dogbone of the bushing style was the same as the bearing one then the bushing would just have to be bigger to compensate for the larger ID.
January 20, 201115 yr Yes Cope I'm with Lumpylion. That looks like a different dogbone .... Have you measured the inner diameter? A comparison of 2006 and 2011 Spare parts books shows both as C157..... BUT! (and this is the big but) the 2011 parts book shows the dog bones and bearing shells as one part number/kit. This implies to me that we are looking at a new dog bone now (impersonating and old part number) and Howards bearing shells are in fact correct. Best of balance. Neo
January 20, 201115 yr You can't always rely upon Sherco using a new part number for a new part which is similar to a prevoius one. I found this out a while ago with a piston for a 2005 290. The new (2008 I think it was) piston had the same number as the 2005 part but the new one did not have the transfer hole in the piston skirt. If you were to talk to Sherco parts dealers I think they will confirm there are several instances of this type. Perhaps inevitable with the many parts which make up the bike!
January 21, 201115 yr You can't always rely upon Sherco using a new part number for a new part which is similar to a prevoius one. I found this out a while ago with a piston for a 2005 290. The new (2008 I think it was) piston had the same number as the 2005 part but the new one did not have the transfer hole in the piston skirt. If you were to talk to Sherco parts dealers I think they will confirm there are several instances of this type. Perhaps inevitable with the many parts which make up the bike! The piston skirt seems to make no real difference, and the parts do directly interchange in this case.
January 21, 201115 yr Friend sent me the piccy for comparison. Seems obvious the new dogbones have a smaller hole to accept the thinner bearings, and a part number change on the 'bones is in order as the tophat bush seem to be the same. Seeing these new bearings in situ, I am doubting they are of a bronze base material at all as they are too thin. I think it likely they are a coated steel insert of a certain material used to reduce "stiction" similar to those used in fork sliders. Wonder if anyone has put a magnet to them?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.