EDIT: I TYPED THIS WHILE YOU GUYS WERE TYPING YOURS SO SOME POINTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE BUT I AM TOO LAZY TO FIX IT.....tom
I am not interested in this becoming a contest either, or in having disagreements cost us valuable input from each other later. Perhaps we should look at the situation from a different angle.
We are all familiar with Detroit's need for 40wt., low sulfur oil. That was what was used WHEN THE EQUIPMENT WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED. At some point, other types of engines were designed & used multi-grade oils. Some used multi-grades in old 2 strokes with varying results.
My point is the older model equipment & manuals reflected what the engineers knew & had access to AT THE TIME. Their methods and practices still work as designed. Are there better practices now?.... Sometimes. In the case of wheel bearings, I personally would use the original method because that is how the equipment was designed & I KNOW that will work. Maybe some newer methods will work too. I do think MIXING the two may cause problems, not always obvious at first.
As an old foggy, I probably remember the older stuff & do a better job on it than I do with the newer stuff, just too tired to learn I guess..
I can say this: the first heavy truck I ever pulled a wheel on was a 1950 (or '51, it's been a long time!) Autocar. I am not counting the International gas jobs here. Every truck we ever owned had dry (grease packed) rear wheel bearings until sometime in the late '60s to early '70s. Then I started seeing the wet (oil lubed) rear wheel bearings. There were a few that came with the "new" wet bearings that failed prematurely. Looking back, I think they had a few engineering problems at first. If I ever have the pleasure to meet you guys in person, I will be happy to expand on what we found, "back in the day". Just somebody remind me because I will have forgotten all this conversation by then..
If I took a stronger tone than necessary earlier, I apologize.
You young whippersnappers just get my goat sometimes!!!!!