Wheel hub/bearing assy interchange?
- Thread starter 5is1
- Start date
vetteoz
Well-known member
Front hub?
# 513090 93-02 F-bodies, 97-00 S10 are the same item
They will fit up to the Vette but the F body hub is threaded to use bolts from the rear so the holes have to be drilled out to use the through bolts as used in the Vette setup
Or you install smaller bolts from the rear
# 513090 93-02 F-bodies, 97-00 S10 are the same item
They will fit up to the Vette but the F body hub is threaded to use bolts from the rear so the holes have to be drilled out to use the through bolts as used in the Vette setup
Or you install smaller bolts from the rear
gmjunkie
Well-known member
No,There not a direct fit!!
There are other differences too!! Unless you have a drill press and some super hard bits,just as well spend the extra $$$ and get the right bearing!!
You'll end up spending any savings in time!Changing to smaller bolts on the front suspension parts is stupid,Stupid,STUPID!!Do the job right the first time,or please step away from the car,the life you save may be Mine,My Wifes,or My Grand Kids!!
John Robinson
Gone but not forgotten
I know this is on a different part but the logic and reasoning is the same for any parts that are cannibalized. I posted this earlier on another thread.
First lets look at the 4L60 for example. When a new design is developed it will have a common name for that design such as 4L60. This is just the design version from there each nameplate (Chevy,Pontiac,Olds,etc,) that used that unit in it's lineup will assign there own unique part number to each application they use it in during that model year.(Impala,Caprice,Corvette,Blazer) Again the power train engineering department will specify different operating parameters for each application. So when they changed the 4L60 from a mechanical shifter to an electronic shifter they added the E to the design designation and all new part numbers and parameters were generated by the end users. Does this mean that you can't put the unit from a Caprice in a Corvette if all the external factors were the same. Of course not but it does mean for example that the Caprice unit will shift slower and have more lag to create smoother shifts whereas the Corvette unit will have crisp and no lag shifts. I hope this will clarify why it probable is not a good idea to swap and switch units from different donors. Again I will say that you might be able to use a Camaro unit in a Trans Am since they had the same basic performance parameters.
If this is not a good enough reason for not doing what you propose Keep in mind what Junk posted about the difficulties of machining the part to work. Add to that the fact that the C4 was capable of pulling .98G's on a skid pan and that G load was designed into the hub etc. Why would you take a hub from a car that was not able to load it's hubs with that high a G load and put it on a car that will over stress the hub and bolts.
First lets look at the 4L60 for example. When a new design is developed it will have a common name for that design such as 4L60. This is just the design version from there each nameplate (Chevy,Pontiac,Olds,etc,) that used that unit in it's lineup will assign there own unique part number to each application they use it in during that model year.(Impala,Caprice,Corvette,Blazer) Again the power train engineering department will specify different operating parameters for each application. So when they changed the 4L60 from a mechanical shifter to an electronic shifter they added the E to the design designation and all new part numbers and parameters were generated by the end users. Does this mean that you can't put the unit from a Caprice in a Corvette if all the external factors were the same. Of course not but it does mean for example that the Caprice unit will shift slower and have more lag to create smoother shifts whereas the Corvette unit will have crisp and no lag shifts. I hope this will clarify why it probable is not a good idea to swap and switch units from different donors. Again I will say that you might be able to use a Camaro unit in a Trans Am since they had the same basic performance parameters.
If this is not a good enough reason for not doing what you propose Keep in mind what Junk posted about the difficulties of machining the part to work. Add to that the fact that the C4 was capable of pulling .98G's on a skid pan and that G load was designed into the hub etc. Why would you take a hub from a car that was not able to load it's hubs with that high a G load and put it on a car that will over stress the hub and bolts.
vetteoz
Well-known member
I'm not advocating doing it , just posting what others have done.The F-Body bearing is the same spec / dimensions as the C4 one.
There is a member on CF that has them on his '96 street / road race car running Hoosier tires that has had no problems
bucket
Well-known member
well i guess weve about cover that topic...lol
JAKE
Well-known member
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
I've read that sort of reasoning often: "So and so did such and such and had no problems", as if that makes it okay to do. Nope, it doesn't, no matter how you slice it, it's still wrong. Whether is fails or not is immaterial; it's still wrong.
Just yesterday, I posted a long rant (on another Forum) on this same issue, but I won't bore you with it here. That is unless someone asks me to, then I'll cut and paste it, LOL.
Jake
West Point ROCKS! Nation's top COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!!
I've read that sort of reasoning often: "So and so did such and such and had no problems", as if that makes it okay to do. Nope, it doesn't, no matter how you slice it, it's still wrong. Whether is fails or not is immaterial; it's still wrong.
Just yesterday, I posted a long rant (on another Forum) on this same issue, but I won't bore you with it here. That is unless someone asks me to, then I'll cut and paste it, LOL.
Jake
West Point ROCKS! Nation's top COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!!
Similar threads
Corvette Forums
Supporting Vendors
Dealers:
