Greasable vs non-greasable gimbal bearing

[cobalt252]

1997 Volvo Penta 7.4GI PLKDCE, drive unit s/n: 4112026411.

My Volvo Penta dealer recommends Volvo Penta p.n. 3853807, which is a greasable bearing. However, they also offer Volvo Penta p.n. 3888555, which is a non-greasable bearing (sealed?).

Which one is better?

Going with the greasable bearing has the obvious advantage that the bearing will receive fresh grease periodically.

However, I understand that the new Volvo Penta engines (and others) all all coming out with non-greasable/sealed bearings these days. Has the technology advanced to the point that the sealed bearing is reliable enough to replace the older version?

On the other hand, doing away with the annoying and unreliable grease tube extension has its benefits too ...

 

[HT32BSX115]

Re: Greasable vs non-greasable gimbal bearing

Howdy,


You'll get varying opinions but consider front wheel drive cars and other 4x4 (front) vehicle wheel bearings are NON-greaseable and ALL 1/2T and 3/4T trucks with semi-floating rear axles have non grease-able "permanently lubricated" rear wheel bearings.

Center drive shaft bearings in trucks with 2 driveshafts have the same type of bearings.

I am not sure I would say "technology" has advanced all that much....... My 1955 Ford truck service manual indicates 1/2T trucks came with permanently lubricated rear wheel bearings and I know of many 55 Ford (and older) trucks on the road with original wheel bearings in the back. (that would be more than 55 years!) ....the forces on an axle bearing is probably more than what any support (gimbal) bearing can muster.......

I would use a permanently lubricated non-greaseable gimbal bearing continue to pull the drive every year to inspect for water etc



Others will have a different opinion.


YMMV,


Rick