Bush is to Bushing as Bear is to Bearing

[matsuki]

Totally off topic English dialect question: . . . . . . . . . . . .
The motor mounts are the largest bushings (N. American English)
in an automobile. However, both Japanese engrish and British
slang calls them a "bush" ---WTF! A "bush" is a shrubbery.[/align]

Bush is not slang, it is standard terminology for a kind of thick washer or bearing.

Where it is slang is for pubic hair, but even then it is slang that your great great great great great great great great grandmother knew: it is first recorded in print in that sense in 1745.

A shrubbery is a collection of bushes. Like you see in the onsen.

Origin: 1560-70; < Middle Dutch bussche

I still like "bushing" better...glad they don't call a bearing a "bear" but when it comes to engine bearings, they tend to call them just metal メタル (shortened from oiless metalオイレスメタル）which was quite confusing. (especially when you consider their job is to keep oil flowing around the rods, crank, etc.)

[Wage Slave]

Bush is not slang, it is standard terminology for a kind of thick washer or bearing.

Where it is slang is for pubic hair, but even then it is slang that your great great great great great great great great grandmother knew: it is first recorded in print in that sense in 1745.

A shrubbery is a collection of bushes. Like you see in the onsen.

Origin: 1560-70; < Middle Dutch bussche

I still like "bushing" better...glad they don't call a bearing a "bear" but when it comes to engine bearings, they tend to call them just metal メタル (shortened from oiless metalオイレスメタル）which was quite confusing. (especially when you consider their job is to keep oil flowing around the rods, crank, etc.)

Is that their job? Or do we mean a different bearing?

The bearings hold the crankshaft in place and prevent the forces created by the piston and transmitted to the crankshaft by the connecting rods from dislodging the crankshaft, instead forcing the crank to convert the reciprocating movement into rotation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_bearing

0900c152800709e1.gif

[matsuki]

Let me rephrase, "one of their jobs is to keep oil flowing around the rods, crank, etc."

Depends on the manufacturer and specific engine but most have channels/holes for that very purpose...which is why I found it confusing, calling them "oiless."

[Wage Slave]

Let me rephrase, "one of their jobs is to keep oil flowing around the rods, crank, etc."

Depends on the manufacturer and specific engine but most have channels/holes for that very purpose...which is why I found it confusing, calling them "oiless."

Forgive me but I'm still confused. Channels and holes like this I take it:

fullsize_4032.jpg

If so, aren't the holes and channels there to allow oil into the bearing itself rather than lubricate anything else. I always imagined the crankshaft sitting in a bath of oil with the rotation of the crankshaft and action of the connecting rods lifting and splashing oil up into the cylinders below the pistons. Main bearings are in the bath with the rest and I find it hard to imagine what impact they have on oil flow.

But as is probably obvious, I don't know a lot about about it so I'm curious to learn. What is the mechanism by which main bearings play an important role in lubricating the rest of the crankshaft, connecting rods etc.?

[Taro Toporific]

Ok, ok, I apologize.

Nearly every week in my work as a patent editor I run into this bush-vs-bushing problem (for Mitsubishi and Nissan). By my contract requirements (and my dialect preference), I change "bush" into 'bushing' which drives some Japanese clients livid since the JIS (Japan Industrial Standards) dictionary and katakana says bush/ブッシュ.

My problem is "bush" is a shrub to a North American person and "bush" as a machine part is either incomprehensible or at best looks like a bonehead spelling error of the word 'bushing'.
I am assuming to those folks of the fuck-the-Queen's English persuasion, "bushing" is just an American dialectal abomination and is fully understandable.


PS: This is the first time in 12 years I have ever asked a favor of the FG forum, so please bear(ing) with me.

[Wage Slave]

My problem is "bush" is a shrub to a North American person and "bush" as a machine part is either incomprehensible or at best looks like a bonehead spelling error of the word 'bushing'.
I am assuming to those folks of the fuck-the-Queen's English persuasion, "bushing" is just an American dialectal abomination and is fully understandable.

Not an abomination but certainly a variation and yes, fully understandable as a noun rather than a present participle form. If well over 300 million peiople call the thing a bushing then that is that, it's an alternative name for the thing. There are a few other examples of nouns and pronouns that happen to end in ing but it's pretty rare. Fairing and thing are two that I can think of. Things like duckling are a different suffix with a different meaning.

The thing about ing forms is they are almost always a present participle so they are formed from a verb rather than from a noun. Many English nouns are also verbs, often with small changes in pronunciation but identical in written form.

work working
play playing
record recording

But

apple appling
pear pearing
road roading

etc are all rather strange.

So, bearing is formed from the verb to bear and follows that pattern. Bushing is formed from the noun bush and so seems a bit odd.

I am assuming to those folks of the fuck-the-Queen's English persuasion,

Or alternatively, I suppose I could say that English people were making and using bushes when American and Canadian people were living in tents and firing arrows at each other.

[matsuki]

Let me rephrase, "one of their jobs is to keep oil flowing around the rods, crank, etc."

Depends on the manufacturer and specific engine but most have channels/holes for that very purpose...which is why I found it confusing, calling them "oiless."

Forgive me but I'm still confused. Channels and holes like this I take it:

fullsize_4032.jpg

If so, aren't the holes and channels there to allow oil into the bearing itself rather than lubricate anything else. I always imagined the crankshaft sitting in a bath of oil with the rotation of the crankshaft and action of the connecting rods lifting and splashing oil up into the cylinders below the pistons. Main bearings are in the bath with the rest and I find it hard to imagine what impact they have on oil flow.

But as is probably obvious, I don't know a lot about about it so I'm curious to learn. What is the mechanism by which main bearings play an important role in lubricating the rest of the crankshaft, connecting rods etc.?

If we're talking specifically about the main bearings- yes, the holes on the bearings allow oil into the channels on the bearings direct that pressurized oil to lubricate the surface of the bearing...but no, I didn't mean to imply the main bearings lubricated everything but that the other "oiless metal" bearings in the system functioned with oil lubrication. Basically, my gripe is calling them "oiless metal" implies oil is not used as well leaves out the most important part "bearing" (kinda like studless snow tires simply are referred to a studless)...when they are designed to function using oil. It's like calling a living tree, moistureless wood.

Most of the time, I'm dealing with crankshafts that have oil passages drilled into them. The oil passages inside of the crank outlet to the journals where the bearings/rods are. (labeled crankpin oil hole below) Often times, part of the reason these are an "upgrade" over OEM bearings is because the hole in them is matched to the "crankpin oil hole" whereas often OEM bearings have a smaller diameter hole. (increasing oil flow)

I am assuming to those folks of the fuck-the-Queen's English persuasion,

Or alternatively, I suppose I could say that English people were making and using bushes when American and Canadian people were living in tents and firing arrows at each other.

Going bush deep with a girl who makes bushes...in the bush? It's almost a rival to "nama" in Japanese...

[Wage Slave]

Matsuki. Gotcha - thank you for that. Quite a raised level of sophistication. Would those oil passages be found on ordinary cars or is it more a performance car thing?

[matsuki]

Not really sure but I just googled some OEM cranks and all of them had it so it might be the standard now.

For extra $$$ the manufacturers I work with all offer "cross drilled oil passages" which basically double the holes/passages in a perpendicular pattern. That's definitely a performance car thing though the manufacturer I'm closest to doesn't think it's usually necessary.

[kurogane]

Nearly every week in my work as a patent editor I run into this bush-vs-bushing problem (for Mitsubishi and Nissan). By my contract requirements (and my dialect preference), I change "bush" into 'bushing' which drives some Japanese clients livid since the JIS (Japan Industrial Standards) dictionary and katakana says bush/ブッシュ.

I feel your pain. I have done 100 page documents in American Standard.....it takes me weeks to get over the PTSD With these Japanese clients I wonder if it is any preference for fuck the Queen's English or simply that native anal paranoia of variation and diversity they were told does not exist and so must not or cognitive dissonance will raise its ugly head. As you well know, as a native speaker of no small skill and long term FG, English is a very simple language devoid of the nuance or even regional variations in complex languages like Japanese, .........or so I have been told for the past 30 years as I write in proper Canadian and get corrected by people with neither the linguistic werewithal nor the mental horsepower to presume they could. I met 3 people the other day that strongly disputed the outlandish idea that Denmark and Poland have national languages called Danish and Polish. They though both countries were predominantly white....
And they were the friendly ones.

If well over 300 million peiople call the thing a bushing then that is that,

You stole that from Hijinx!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And well done. It is the simplest and most compelling argument available. Fun as it is to tease, that should always be the first and final word. If only they would get on the teeter totter instead of the bulldozer when it's their turn to be befuddled.
I enjoyed the rest of that too. Very illustrativealicious

[matsuki]

As you well know, as a native speaker of no small skill and long term FG, English is a very simple language devoid of the nuance or even regional variations in complex languages like Japanese, .........or so I have been told for the past 30 years as I write in proper Canadian and get corrected by people with neither the linguistic werewithal nor the mental horsepower to presume they could. I met 3 people the other day that strongly disputed the outlandish idea that Denmark and Poland have national languages called Danish and Polish. They though both countries were predominantly white....
And they were the friendly ones.

what language did they insist was spoken in those countries? Engrish?