Yes, one must consider the value of hybrid rolling element friction characteristics in the application. Rollers although higher in capacity can be more prone to skidding if there is lubrication problems especially when thrust is present. When I was last into this I couldn't get a cylindrical roller made in a ceramic....so I used ceramic ball rolling elements to great effect in aggressive lubrication environments.
I also put a dual ceramic ball rolling element bearing in my M96 to cover all the bases, based on my experience and unknowns at that time
Quote:
Originally Posted by particlewave
Yeah, same here. I can be a bit blunt, but we are all in the same boat. Sorry about that. My point in my first post was that debates over the IMS options get ugly quick and I (and most here) prefer to keep things light and avoid confrontation...which I failed at miserably in this thread, haha 
That's a beautiful 987 and don't feel like you aren't welcome here. The 986 and 987 are still very similar and there are plenty of guys here with the 987, so plenty of help and discussion to be had.
FWIW, I think the roller bearing is superior to any single row ball bearing, ceramic hybrid or not. However, if I replaced my double row bearing, I'd probably favor a double row ceramic hybrid ball bearing over roller.
Single - roller bearing.
Double - ceramic hybrid ball bearing. |