Latest victim of the 348 gearbox curse

Understood it perfectly.

Which brings me to my next train of thought. Until we find a suitable upgrade, or even after we find one, I think it would be a good idea to get the bearing cryogenically treated. Better yet all the bearings and gears. I was gonna send out all of my stuff when my box was torn down, but I got anxious and wanted to drive my car. After all it was off the road for just about half a year, as I was taking my SWEEEEET time. Anyway I think getting the bearing cryo'd could help.

 

Right on Reiner! I'll see what the shops say.

 

On the thin nuts glad you found them.

Reiner is the first known case of 348 engine out on dolly method. For those of you doing it on the dolly he thought of it. He is also the first to do this modification to the gearbox AKA "Reinerbearing". It is so sweet I wish I thought about it. Reiner has saved you guys lots of money.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Right on Reiner! Thanks for the update.

But how come you suckers didn't tell me about the install party. I would have gone down just for kicks.

 

Please explain the gearbox bearing picture.

 

Your best bet is to find a 355 that is being parted out and source the updated parts from that gearbox. They will be more durable, and because of the gearing your car may be a bit quicker.

 

Or just do like Andy did, put the whole 355 gearbox in your 348.

 

The more 355 parts in a 348 the better.....

 

The 348 is much more than 1/2 the 355 yet at 1/2 the price. Each verson will always be better in someways yet worse in other. I love that 355 power steering and those valve guides...well another thread. We'll let Reiner be the test for not only his bearing my my theory that the 348 Gb problems are not about the bearing but about torque on the ring nuts. I talk about torque and fastener loads peoples eye roll and still others jump on me as you can read in other threads. But the data and technique is out there for appropriate fastner use and I am one racing datapoint that lives by those words spoken by many before me. So far all the GB's I've put back together are still together with no Ferrari special tools and some deviation from Ferrari WSM specs. It seems to work based on common sence fastener application known in the manufactuering industry. Some will ask "do i think I am a better engineer than Ferrari"...That's not the issue...I just choosing different compromises and hindsight is always 20/20.

 

Depends. Yes...if you mean the 355's individual throttle bodies or 6 speed tranny going into a 348.

No if you mean the 355's air bags, valve guides, exhaust headers, power steering, window computers, power top, top computer, power seats, seat computer. power shocks, steering wheel, tiny MAF, or M5.2.

Some iterations of both 348's and 355's use the same Motronic 2.7, which is cool. Some use similar individual throttle bodies, lack of strakes on side doors, kevlar/carbon-fiber bumpers, and speedline race wheels.

I'm unaware of *any* 355 using the F-40's light-weight half shafts, but some 348's did.

 

Reiner did not chime is so I'll speak up. Reiner wanted the bearing ASAP and without all the hoopla so he got spherics to match the bearing size and type but it has bigger balls but less of them. The oem bearing has a lip on it to land in the intermediate case. This may be a propritary feature I don't know. So spherics just cut a slit in the new bearing and added a snap ring to act as the oem lip. Thus the new bearing acts just like the oem bearing instantly available and quickly done by any bearing house. I do not know the relative merits of fewer big balls vs lots of small ones. There is no other difference reiner bearing is double row etc... So far it is working.

 

The slit plus snap ring is clever.

Bigger bearing balls (and fewer of them) means that it can handle less lateral stress if I remember correctly. Increasing the size of the balls (by having fewer of them) increases the stiffness of the bearing: http://www.bearings.machinedesign.com/guiEdits/Content/BDE_6_4/bdemech6_43.aspx

Still, Reiner seemed to indicate that it was the failure of the lay shaft metal-ring/gasket that caused the bearing failure, rather than lateral stress.

 

Ernie's theory was lateral stress caused bearing to fail thus shaft bang. He thinks it is the bearing. Me...preload loss on shafts by poor lockring torque failure = increased bearing stress = failure. I think it is the lockring. Less filling tastes great! Either way the cure seems to be if caught early new bearing and tight rings. In theory Bigger balls means increased bearing stiffness and thus lower bearing deflection rate.

 

New bearing and tight rings works for me. Has this been the *same* bearing failing on all known early 348 tranny failures? Is this the bearing that was upgraded in the later 348 models?

Has there been pitting from debris or stress on any of the other bearings, even if they haven't failed...or was the pitting limited only to this one bearing?

 

Oh dear - not a doughnut, but what damage does this sort of thing do then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrH4KDKmFCE&mode=related&search=

next time....

 

It damages the drivers ego. LOL!!!

 

Never! I'll get it next time.

 

Okay gents.

Been driving the Mondial T after the detailed inspection (all good) and replacement of just the bearing that failed (and I replaced it's brother bearing that lives right next door - for good measure - but it was still in good shape).

No noise. Seems fine.

I used that super-lightweight Redline again too.

Just keeping you updated.

 

Cool update!

 

Thanks.

That is one thing that sort of bugs me. It's when you give someone help and then you never hear back to see how things worked out, either good or bad. So thanks for updating us.

 

+1!!

 

I hear that loud & clear. And thank you (and No Doubt, Pap, FBB).

Anyhow, here is a photo I forgot. The two new bearings (torqued per BillyBobs suggestions) so that any future searchers will be enlightened:
Image Unavailable, Please Login