Shopsmith Forums

Jacob wrote:

jsburger wrote:
"Dusty was talking about the documentaion connected to the P/N which would identify the OEM. That would be the print for the part and that is proprietary usually. The print number is usually the same as the P/N. That is what we don't have access to."

JS that maybe true a lot of times, but there are engineering drawings that specify the components to be used, but not necessarily the manufacturer. That prevents the engineer (or draftsman) from getting involved with procurement and possible sole-source situations.
I'll take a look to see what Magna did with their drawings.

Nevertheless, the part number on bearings are not necessarily the same as the part they go into.

Of course. The bearing in this case is the end item. The print for the bearing will have all the part numbers for all the parts that go into making the bearing. Since it is a print from the bearing manufacture I would assume the parts are all made by the bearing manufacturer unless the print defines the source which it should if not made internally.

Of course the P/N on the bearing will not be the same as the P/N of the part it goes into (end item). The print for the SS head stock will list the bearings and should list the source unless SS makes the bearing. The bearing individual P/N's will not be listed.

Also sometimes the P/N on a component of a top level print will be an internal P/N. If you go to that P/N print (and there will be one) it will simply say this is where to get the part we want used.

jsburger wrote:

Jacob wrote:

jsburger wrote:

Of course. The bearing in this case is the end item. The print for the bearing will have all the part numbers for all the parts that go into making the bearing. Since it is a print from the bearing manufacture I would assume the parts are all made by the bearing manufacturer unless the print defines the source which it should if not made internally.

Of course the P/N on the bearing will not be the same as the P/N of the part it goes into (end item). The print for the SS head stock will list the bearings and should list the source unless SS makes the bearing. The bearing individual P/N's will not be listed.

Also sometimes the P/N on a component of a top level print will be an internal P/N. If you go to that P/N print (and there will be one) it will simply say this is where to get the part we want used.

No, no, no. I am not talking about making the bearing but the part. In this case the 'End Item' is the part where the bearing goes into. Just like the machine is the end item where the part goes into.
And again, the print does not always list the source. That is something the procurement department does (or gets involved in).
Any way all of this is a mute point.

A few words re bearing part numbers(not Shopsmith numbers).

Most bearings are indeed metric. The exceptions are the ones that have one or more dimensions in inches.

The different bearing manufacturers each have their own unique model designation(part numbers).

So the only 'precise' way to identify a bearing is at minimum the dimensions(OD,ID,Thickness). Add to that the shields and other variations(including material).

Metric od and metric thickness with a imperial(inch) id are used in the SS since a 5/8" shaft is common.

Jacob wrote:

No, no, no. I am not talking about making the bearing but the part. In this case the 'End Item' is the part where the bearing goes into. Just like the machine is the end item where the part goes into.
And again, the print does not always list the source. That is something the procurement department does (or gets involved in).
Any way all of this is a mute point.[/quote]

Please re-read my post. That is what I said.

No the bearing is an end item on its own. That is what I am saying. Each component/part is an end item from the manufacturers point of view that made the part. When I buy a bearing from Timken/Fafnir that is an end item as far as they are concerned.

No the top level print does not always list the source but if you look at the print for the particular sub part it will either be a print on how to make the part if made in house or will simply list the source. The top level print could be the bearing it self or the entire SS head stock. Please understand what a top level print is (I know you do). There is a top level print for a component of the head stock and then there is a top level print for the head stock it self. The detail on those two prints are very different as I am sure you know.

Jacob wrote:The bearings I showed in the picture above are predominantly from Fafnir (although there are three from Norma Hoffmann, same size as the 29 I have from Fafnir).

Some are in the original boxes (wrapped in wax paper) and have serial numbers that I can give you if you are really interested. In addition I have the ID, OD and width for the five different sizes.
I do not know where each of them were used on the ShopSmith.

I am sure Shopsmith knows where they now come from and where they are used. So, ask them.

Thank you. I just wanted to know who made them, not part numbers etc. as there are likely many roadblocks in using that data this far out.

To the best of what I have found out thus far, Fafnir Bearing founded in 1911, was acquired in 1985 by Torrington who in 1968 became part of Ingersoll-Rand's Bearings, Locks, and Tools business group.

It then became a division of the Timken Company in stages starting in 2003 as they realized the value of their automotive bearings. Needle bearing facilities and the Torrington brand name were sold to JTEKT in 2009 by the Timken Company.

Prior to that in 1964 INA had a joint venture with Fafnir Bearing Co. but I am not sure which bearings were involved.

Schaeffler (who founded in 1942 to produce bearings for the Norden bombsight) announced that FAG had purchased the Norma Hoffman Bearing Corporation of Stamford, CT. in 1965, and the plant was subsequently closed. They were known for precision aircraft bearings among other things.

By 1969 INA bought out Textron, the new owner of Fafnir Bearing Company. INA Bearing Company becomes incorporated. I'm not sure when Textron bought Fafnir, which would be bought by Torrington in 1985 as discussed.

Today the Schaeffler Group, INA and FAG brands manufacture high-quality rolling bearings, plain bearings, linear guidance systems, and engine components for mechanical engineering, aerospace and the automotive industry all over the world.

It was in these tumultuous times that the entire US bearing industry was complaining to the government in the 1980’s to the 1990’s that Asian and European bearing producers were selling bearings below their manufacturing cost, an illegal practice to undermine the US manufacturing and seize world markets.

I guess the real interest to me was the historical timeline against the backdrop of what was happening with Shopsmith and many who simply didn’t survive.

Thank God Folkerth needed a 9" saw blade and wouldn't give up til he found one or we might not be having this conversation today.

I am sure the machinists in the forum have lots more knowledge as it was quite a big issue in industry.

We should have been electing tradesmen, woodworkers, steelworkers, and machinists to Washington back then. They understand you have to build things to build industries to use them.


Thanks again,

Everett
better to measure the ID/OD and other dimensional data.

everettdavis wrote:
We should have been electing tradesmen, woodworkers, steelworkers, and machinists to Washington back then. They understand you have to build things to build industries to use them.

Everett

Here I don't agree (and I don't want to turn this into a political discussion on Christmas Eve).
But electing persons strictly on the basis of their occupation is wrong.
I certainly would not want to have a great wood worker be the one to negotiate foreign policies (unless wood working were his hobby) and know all that is involved and all is safe for us in this great country.
Again, all of you, enjoy the end of this year and a Merry Christmas.

Jacob wrote:

everettdavis wrote:
We should have been electing tradesmen, woodworkers, steelworkers, and machinists to Washington back then. They understand you have to build things to build industries to use them.

Everett

Here I don't agree (and I don't want to turn this into a political discussion on Christmas Eve).
But electing persons strictly on the basis of their occupation is wrong.
I certainly would not want to have a great wood worker be the one to negotiate foreign policies (unless wood working were his hobby) and know all that is involved and all is safe for us in this great country.
Again, all of you, enjoy the end of this year and a Merry Christmas.

Just a poor attempt at political humor, and I agree. Merry Christmas!!

Everett