Home › Forum › Ask A Member › Out with Clutch Dogs: In with Ball Bearings in the OMC 6 HP
- This topic has 20 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
seakaye12.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 17, 2017 at 2:29 pm #6773
Recently I have had the pleasure of going through a gearcase in a little 6HP Evinrude; 1987 vintage. It’s the "new" gearcase (at least new to me) with the one-piece housing and the bearing retainer held on by the two bolts behind the prop.
The shift rod rotates as opposed to going up and down…..the Clutch Dog is spring loaded and gets pushed by a little "bullet" actuated by the shifter cam. A whole lot like MERCURY….yessir…..but that’s neither here nor there….
What I noticed when I viewed a youtube video…and looked over parts diagrams…..was that my 1987 was the last year for that style of drive….in 1988 the Clutch Dog was gone….replaced by 4 ball bearings that get lifted up into the forward or reverse gear….thus making them turn along with the prop shaft.
Here’s the video where a guy has one torn down: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjXoSWWv9qQ
The Ball design is certainly cheaper to service; assuming only the balls wear. The balls sell for $8.99 each vs. $112.99 for the dog.
My question here is to just get comments about this design change. Why did it occur? How has that design held up over the years? Is the ball bearing design at all common in other motors? Any and all information will be appreciated.
Thanks, Chuck
April 17, 2017 at 3:37 pm #56258Very interesting. I confess, I know nothing about it. But I’ll almost bet that $9 ball is an ordinary ball bearing for less than a buck. Worth looking into anyway.
April 17, 2017 at 3:41 pm #56259This is a 1/4" ball bearing. Hillman Fasteners 58119-C.
April 18, 2017 at 12:42 am #56291Hodaka dirtbikes of years past used this type of transmission instead of clutch dogs and shift forks. I figure if the internal ball style was king it would be in most all lowers…no other cycle tranny used or uses that style either…fwiw..
April 18, 2017 at 4:51 pm #56323Just wondering, weren’t those the Belgium built motors? Maybe that’s why it’s different…
April 19, 2017 at 12:12 am #56336Funny you should mention this topic, I am getting ready to post a thread concerning some of the engineering issues on both styles of these gearcases used in the 4-8hp engines with full gear shift….
In any event, this "ball bearing clutch system" was introduced in 1988 on the 4deluxe thru 8hp models, replacing the conventional clutch dog system used on earlier models. But, it is important to note that OMC went back to the conventional clutch dog system on these engines in the early 90s, so I’m thinking this system performed no better than the clutch dog system it replaced, maybe it was cheaper to produce. Those balls are surely inexpensive, but the gears lugs are subject to wear just like on the clutch dog system. I am trying to remember, but I think some of the ball failures included the balls actually being sheared in half and escaping into the gearcase. So, most failure/repairs will probably include at least one gear.
I will start my thread here with yours, and try not to go on and on like I am prone to do.
In any event, I remember doing routine servicing to these gearcases (both styles) many years ago, and always noticing that gear lube seemed black/burned. This was not necessarily a case of water intrusion, just burned up/black/thick lube. Back then, I never paid much attention, just changed the lube. It’s only in later years that I have pondered just what the cause(s) could be for lube failure in this little light duty gearcase. It is only in the past few years that I have discovered the problem.
Look at item #1, the prop shaft bushing seal carrier, then look at item #8, the reverse gear. The back face of that reverse gear rubs directly on the inner raised rib of the prop shaft bushing/carrier. There is no bronze thrust bushing/bearing used here. Now notice the spring that preloads the clutch dog/balls forward or the prop shaft aft, adding even more friction between these surfaces. I’m no metallurgist for sure, but the steel gear surface rubbing on that aluminum rib is going to make a lot of heat and friction between those two surfaces. Like I say, I am used to the reverse gear on most gearcases being cushioned by a bronze bushing or actual thrust bearing preventing this type of friction/wear. And, in this situation, this problem is amplified by the spring inside the prop shaft which adds even more pressure between these surfaces.
Now, how does this situation relate to shift system problems. Eventually, the inner aluminum rib is worn down by the hard gear surface resulting in excess prop shaft end play. This prop shaft end play results in inadequate dog/ball engagement in both gears. The problem is that the servicing techs (myself included) just replaces the dog/balls/gears thinking the damage is a result of improper shifting. The repair never lasts long before shifting problems reappear, or in extreme cases, the engine won’t even shift correctly right after the (incomplete) repair.
So, why is it that us technicians never notice all the end play in the prop shaft? Very simply, because that darn spring holds the prop shaft tight against the reverse gear so you can not easily notice evaluate the excessive prop shaft end play. In order to evaluate the prop shaft end play, the spring must be removed from the prop shaft. Not a real big deal, just removing that bushing seal carrier. Unfortunately, the balls fall out into the case on the units with the ball shift system. But, on the other hand, you wouldn’t be looking for excessive end play unless the unit was in for shifting problems, so it would have to be pulled down anyway.
The obvious fix is to replace the prop shaft bushing/seal carrier, this part is very expensive if you can find one, keeping in mind that the problem will reoccur, especially on engines used as sailboat auxiliaries or high hour tender use. I have been pondering how the heck to repair this problem properly, without having to replace the original prop shaft/seal bushing. I just starting googling outlets for bronze bushings and found one that fits perfectly between the reverse gear and the worn aluminum prop shaft/seal bushing. The gearcase I am currently working with had about 1/8" prop shaft end play. The bronze thrust bushing I found online is about 1/8" thick as well. The prop shaft bound up when the unit was gently assembled, so I had about .025-.030" machined off the raised aluminum rib of the prop shaft bushing/seal carrier. Now, there is about .010" prop shaft end play and there is a bronze thrust bushing between the reverse gear and prop shaft bushing/seal carrier.
I have taken some pictures and will post them later this week….DonApril 19, 2017 at 1:18 am #56342Don,
Excellent explanation on this!
April 19, 2017 at 1:23 am #56343Great idea Don !
I didn’t even know of this "newer style" shift mechanism ’till now, ( thanks to Seakaye for posting this) . When I run into one I will know what I am looking at :geek: , and what to look for too. :ugeek:
Looking forward to the pictures.April 19, 2017 at 3:00 am #56348Don,
Thank you for the explanation on this gearcase. I have seen you mention there were issues with the gearcases on these motors. I didn’t know what the issues were until.I read this thread and your post really cleared it up for me. That is a great idea with the bronze thrust washer. That should help a lot. Looking forward to the pictures.
-BenOldJohnnyRude on YouTube
April 19, 2017 at 6:22 am #56351Thanks for the very detailed explanation of what is going on in those units. But can I add my 2c? In forward gear (and any significant power load), the prop thrust would be moving the prop shaft away from the reverse gear/bearing housing. So the only force pushing the reverse gear against the bearing housing while running in forward gear would be the thrust of the reverse/pinion bevel gears trying to move away from each other (true, not to be ignored).
In neutral gear the reverse gear is rotating and being pressed against the bearing housing by the spring as you indicated.
However, while running in reverse gear, the prop thrust is pulling the gear and reverse gear even tighter against the bearing housing. You mentioned sailboat use. To my thinking, that is the greatest cause of wear at that point. Those guys really get onto reverse while backing down a heavy sailboat. A fisherman, trolling for hours on end MIGHT not be exerting enough forward prop thrust to move the shaft against the spring, I dunno about that. And how about if he is back-trolling?
The bronze thrust washer sounds good. It probably would be even better if you could figure out a way to keep the bronze washer from rotating against the aluminum. An engineer, which I am not, would be able to tell us the friction co-efficient of those parts sliding together.
Keep up the good work, you are appreciated.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.