Wheel Bearings - Oil or Grease?

[109 Pretender]

One thing about the grease that keeps me from using it is the Railco Bush at the top of the swivel. This has a vsmall hole in bottom to allow lube in - meaning lube has to travel vertically. Some lube also splashes in around the "ear" of the swivel it's pressed into. Even though Green mentioned that the grease has a low viscosity it's still higher I guess than 90 wt. oil. That bush is the most fragile wear item in the housing - made from a synthetic material (probably soybeans of some kind that comes in contact with top kingpin shaft made of steel. I have used Almasol 601 gear lube (Lubrication Engineers, FT. Worth) since the early 70's when I raced an MG in SCCA. This 90 wt is like honey - it has a very high cling factor and sticks to gears, etc like glue. Everybody has their own poison and this lube was the only thing we found that could keep Jag and MG boxes together under hard racing conditions. In fact this is the only gear lube that I use in my 109 in the 28 years I've owned it.

[greenmeanie]

Eric,
Grease WILL work - just not as effectively as 90wt.

Again I simply ask - where's the science or data to support this. There are lots of subjective viewpoints on this. I am asking for an objective ****ysis.

There are many more issues than mere cost. One could compare maintenance cycles, protection of the lower bearing after wading as oil will float on top of any water that collects in the swivel while the grease clings to the balls protecting them. I can go on and on.

Just to keep things interesting I have run rgease in an axle and am running oil this time. I run grease in my 101 that originally specced with CV's bathed in oil and the 109 I am building now - well we'll see how I feel on the day.

The big advantage of oil in my opinion is that is cheaper for the owner to replace under regular maintenance and is one less type of fluid to carry on the road.

[leafsprung]

Everything she said in this thread is the gospel - period!

Nobody's word is gospel. I have a lot of respect for Teriann and her knowledge of, and travels with, land rovers. However, she would probably be the last person to tell you that she was the most knowledgeable/experienced land rover mechanic alive. Many people are going to have different experiences with different maintenance techniques. Frankly both methods will work fine. Many if not most people have free wheel hubs which means these needle bearings are not under constant load when driving for extended periods of time. Furthermore there is a fairly significant gap in between the Ujoint cross and the bearing cup (you can easily see the roller bearings) which is sufficent for either the oil or the "one shot grease" to pass through. Ive disassembled shafts out of trucks with both types of lubricant and there was definitely lubricant in the needle bearings on both assemblies. Ive never heard of a failure or even a rumor of a failure from using "one shot grease". Does one work better than the other? Probably, but not enough to notice. Personally I use 90 wt because Im too cheap to be bothered with grease at 25 bucks a tube (what the dealership charges for it)

[daveb]

edit. I see this is already being beat to death. nevermind.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


TeriAnn you are not the only one to offer this viewpoint. Care to share with us your personal experiences with actual failures of u-jointed series land rover axles that can be attributed to the use of one shot grease?

Thanks
DaveB

The thicker one shot grease does not flow well into the needle bearing spaces and it doesn't do as good a job as 90wt at removing heat from the bearing area.

[Eric W S]

Eric,
Grease WILL work - just not as effectively as 90wt. Your reasoning is correct - to a point. ALL auto manufacturing decisions are cost based (necessary in a for-profit organization like LR). But I suspect there is little, if any, cost savings for the manufacturer whether they use grease or oil. There is a HUGE savings if warranty claims can be solved w/grease vs. replacing swivel balls (corrosion) and seals, etc. Even better if the grease prevents the warranty claim to begin with... Remember this - Einstein/Newton were both wrong - MONEY makes the world go around, at least it used to until just recently....

I really don't want to talk shop here, but there could be considerable savings in choosing one option over another. But let's not degrade ourselves by even discussing it any further. Accounting and cost discussions are boring and that is coming from one.

I think that the whole grease argument is best left to the physics behind the actual lubrication, IMO. Lubrication technology has advanced leaps and bounds since the the Series hey-day. So as Green has stated, grease is a viable option that is best left for the owner to implement or not. I think any discussions of warranty issues from other models is really detrimental and confusing to the topic - "what's better for my swivels".

EDIT:
And money still makes the world go round!

[SeriesShorty]

I'm old fashioned and use 90w. I don't have to worry about making sure I have a couple of packets of One Shot laying around in the basement. In the event I have a wild hair up my tail end and fling out a wild n crazy weekend of fluid refreshing, or I simply played too much in the water and needed to do an emergency milkshake evacuation, I don't have to worry cause there is always 90w to be found. Simplicity is my friend - enter Series, goodbye Disco.

[jp-]

I have a compromise.

140W oil.

All problems solved.

[yorker]

What?! no one has brought up Lucas Hub Oil yet?

[kenscs]

There is a lot of information and debate of grease vs. 90wt on the front bearings, but what about the rear bearing specifically? I just took off the rear hub assembly because leaky rear oil hub seal ('71 iia was sitting in a garage for 12 years) and found no evidence of grease. Just looked like 90wt had worked its way into the hub down the drive shaft (likely dissolved the grease a long time ago). Bearings looked totally fine (only 23k on Odometer, ex-ambulance and sat for probably 15 yrs now and so far all parts wear pattern matches the miles so I kinds believe the odometer). Since there is no filler plug for the rear hub, it doesn't seem like one can service that hub other than removal. I was originally going to pack the bearings with grease, but then, when I looked at the axle design, it looks like 90wt is going to work its way into the hub. My guess is the 90wt is going to break down the axle grease and not sure it is optimal to have both mixing with each other. On the other hand, the bearings would be dry until 90wt from axle casing works its way into hub. Maybe use a simple wheel bearing grease to keep them going until 90wt works its way in as opposed to the new super-duper synthetic stuff that might react poorly with the 90wt? Any suggestions? Nothing like opening a 7-year old debate huh?

[yorker]

Since there is no filler plug for the rear hub, it doesn't seem like one can service that hub other than removal.

There is a filler plug, one of the drive flange bolts is removed and allows you to fill it.

[edit] it is the one that lines up with one of the wheel studs.