[HoosierPE]

Greetings fellow F-body enthusiast!

I've created this new topic to introduce Hoosier Performance Engineering's first new product; a clean sheet approach to a billet front hub and bearing assembly for the 4th Gen F-bodies and C4 Corvettes. Many of the other hub/bearing threads are getting pretty long and don't really end with a sustainable solution, so I thought a new thread was in order.

I won't bore you with the details on HPE, other than to say a group of highly qualified and skilled automotive engineers have gotten together to create performance products for the 4th Gens and modern muscle cars. You can read more about HPE on the General Discussions forum where Kevin introduced HPE as a new sponsor.

I've been contemplating the 4th Gen front hub issues since I returned to Auto-X in the fall of '97 with the purchase of my first TA and began working in earnest on new designs in November of last year. What you see below is the result of two gear-heads' work for the past 7 or 8 months, plus over $6000 worth of invested in prototypes, tooling and CNC programming. Prototypes are installed and accumulating mileage and we will be ready to take orders as soon as the machine shop volume quotation is received and final pricing can is set. (Trying to wrap up pricing yet this week.)

I'll let the pictures do the talking first, and then will follow up with some detailed descriptions of the components. Enjoy.

Finished product:
(IMG:https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1014542_375876139190953_1528206097_o.jpg) , (IMG:https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/976331_375876125857621_1907471607_o.jpg)

Here's a disassembled OEM hub and the new HPE replacement parts. Note the OEM uses ball bearings while the other is tapered roller. On Timken's website, the tapered bearings are rated much higher in every category vs. the ball bearings. Small bearing has a 1.25" ID and the large bearing has an 1.5" ID. For comparison, the old GM RWD cars used like 7/8" and 1" bearings with the front spindle design.
(IMG:https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1009411_377277199050847_782089290_o.jpg)
(IMG:https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/999016_377277289050838_494724905_n.jpg)
(IMG:https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1009351_377277345717499_1374075883_o.jpg)
(IMG:https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/1015137_377277329050834_2109600006_o.jpg)

We use an inverted spindle design, much like OEM part, except ours is a two piece design with a wheel mounting flange and pin (spindle) that we shrink fit together. The shrink fit provides three times the push out force of an equivalent press fit. Pin, flange and housing were all coated with a clear zinc treatment. The pin has been case hardened in the two areas where the bearing races will rest. The mounting flange is case hardened where the seal will run. Specs were per the Timken recommendations for the bearings used.
(IMG:https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/1008279_375876219190945_1586806985_o.jpg)

Pin with locking washer, nut and small cap screws. The washer engages the key way in the in threaded end of the pin, the nut is added and torqued to desired preload, and when the threaded holes in the nut lines up with the holes in the washer, the cap screws are added as the retention mechanism, basically replacing the cotter pin in similar parts.
(IMG:https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/1014577_375876269190940_1184777397_o.jpg)
(IMG:https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1015262_375876245857609_442072466_o.jpg)

Sub-assembly shown with dry bearings for clarity.
(IMG:https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/1015600_377277409050826_1257648155_o.jpg)

These assemblies are completely rebuildable and repackable. Should be the last set you will ever need.

I will add some more pictures of the prototypes installed on one of our cars.

Please let me know what you think!

[SuperMacGuy]

I'm not on the SEB, but my opinion is that, locally/regionally, no one would have a problem if I used them. In fact no one would ever notice, nor care, I bet. Nationally, maybe there is a question, but this could be viewed as a direct replacement part for worn out parts. There's not an allowance in the rulebook for "more well designed replacement hub". Then again, there's no mention of replacement of mundane items like fuel filters, valve stems, oil filters, or rear axle bearings. It's just assumed no one cares nor it makes any difference.
There is no performance advantage gained. In fact, the additional weight could be viewed as a weight penalty. Or, you could argue it is a safety improvement, as there is less chance of pad knockback from worn hubs and thus less chance of losing braking ability. Could you claim you bought them as direct replacements and didn't know the differences internally? If it were sold at AutoZone in a black box with a rusty patina on them, would anyone know the difference?
Anyone who would argue this is any type of actual on-track performance advantage would need their decision making authority revoked.
I think the previous SEB "no comment" (other thread) was sort of saying, "it's not a big deal and it would be too restrictive to put an actual ruling/wording on them. run them as is, and don't worry about protests". Wasn't Sam on the committee back then? I hope he would have said these would be OK to use.