Ball or Roller?

[Ian]

I noticed whilst restoring my latest venture that in the parts list for mine and 2 later models of the SRX4 (and also the 6) that Yamaha have gone from using ball bearings for the steering head on the (older) twin shock to using taper rollers on the monoshock model Im doing (3VN1 and also the 3VN2) but on the later 3VN5 they have decided to revert to ball bearings.
My experience of "converting" ball to taper roller has only ever resulted in a bike that handles marginally worse....which is sort of backed up by Yamahas decision on this particular set of bike models.
Anyone else like to share their views/experiences?

Ian

[Richard]

Big fan of taper bearings on chassis components here.  BMWs useage on things like swing arms seems to show that Timken bearings last a great deal longer IF the preload is set correctly.

Richard

[Steve H]

Ball bearings tend to be more prone to brinelling, which results in notchy head bearings and a bike which will tend to wander across the road. Taper rollers have a larger contact area so dont suffer so much from brinelling but at a guess are less free moving When you take into account the resistance of the wiring loom and control cables, around the headstock, I suspect you would be hardpressed to tell the difference.

[guest7]

I've heard people speculate in the past that taper rollers are intended to handle rotating forces, but in applications like steering heads, swinging arms and leading link forks the forces act repeatedly on a small area and this isn't ideal for bearing life.

Thoughts?

GC

[Ian]

I've heard people speculate in the past that taper rollers are intended to handle rotating forces, but in applications like steering heads, swinging arms and leading link forks the forces act repeatedly on a small area and this isn't ideal for bearing life.

Thoughts?

GC

My thoughts exactly  GC, but I also  thought it was unusual for a major manufacturer to revert to "old hat" technology for want of a better expression