Joe, I'm not sure the rear bearing should float either.? Looks like there may be a nut of some sort that tightens on the spindle and holds the inner ring.? I have machines with a threaded spanner ring with a set screw to secure the bearing.? hard to tell from
the diagram.? Are there threads?
The double row looks to be correct if you can verify the width.? A double will provide a much higher radial load which is what you want when tensioning the wheel.? I would not expect the bearing to be able to move as a single row one would unless there is a
wide alternative to the standard size.? The rpm is low so the double makes sense.? Dave
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Another question on my rebuild project.? The saw was built with open cage bearings and large grease reservoirs.? Upon the advice of some on FOG I went with sealed bearings.? The bearings I removed front and rear were the same, same size, steel shields.?
Now I found a parts diagram from Tannewitz and they show a double row bearing for the wheel side which makes sense.? Also it looks like the double row bearing would seat in position and the rear bearing floats in the housing.? I will measure the space for
the front bearing to ensure its sized for a standard bearing width.? ?It looks like a past owner put the wrong bearing in the front.? Any reason not to use a double row bearing?? Based on the quality of the machining from Tannewitz I am pretty sure alignment
would not be an issue.? Also with the smaller single row bearing on both sides it looks like the upper wheel / shaft / bearing assembly could move back and forth.? the bearings are a press fit but still seems odd.? Pic attached from the manual.
