SKU: 6119237237

30311-XL FAG

Sale price$46.91 Regular price$52.12
Save 10%

Pay in installments of $13.03 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 19 - Jul 24

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

30311-XL FAGTechnische Basisdaten Hersteller: FAG Synonym: 0883543770000 30311 Auendurchmesser: 120 ueres Breitenma: 29 Gewicht: 1. 63 g Gewicht: 1. 63 Innendurchmesser: 55 Erweiterte technische Daten ueres Breitenmae: mm 120,00 Begrenzungsdrehzahl (n G) "7500. 0000" ueres Breitenmae: mm 31,50 ECLASS number 23 05 09 10 ECLASS2 number 23 05 09 10 Einzelgewicht in (kg): 1. 62 Innenmae: mm 55,00 Radial Dynamic Load Rating Cr (N) 180000 Radial Static Load Rating C0r

Technische Basisdaten

Hersteller: FAG
Synonym: 0883543770000 30311
Außendurchmesser: 120
Äußeres Breitenmaß: 29
Gewicht: 1.63 g
Gewicht: 1.63
Innendurchmesser: 55


Erweiterte technische Daten

Äußeres Breitenmaße: mm 120,00
Begrenzungsdrehzahl (n G) "7500.0000"
Äußeres Breitenmaße: mm 31,50
ECLASS number 23-05-09-10
ECLASS2 number 23-05-09-10
Einzelgewicht in (kg): 1.62
Innenmaße: mm 55,00
Radial Dynamic Load Rating Cr (N) 180000
Radial Static Load Rating C0r (N) 175000
Thermische Drehzahlgrenze (n ϑr) "4350.0000"
XL X Life
-30 °C Betriebstemperatur min.
0,35 Grenzwert für Fa/Fr für die Anwendbarkeit der versch. Werte der Faktoren X und Y
0,96 Statischer Axiallastfaktor
1,63 kg Gewicht
1,74 Dynamischer Axiallastfaktor
120 °C Betriebstemperatur max.
175.000 N Statische Tragzahl, radial
180.000 N Dynamische Tragzahl, radial
2,5 mm Maximaler Hohlkehlradius an der Welle
27.500 N Ermüdungsgrenzbelastung, radial
4 mm Minimaler axialer Freiraum
4.350 1/min Thermische Bezugsdrehzahl
6,5 mm Minimaler axialer Freiraum
7.500 1/min Grenzdrehzahl
71 mm Maximaler Durchmesser der Wellenschulter
C 0r 175.000 N Statische Tragzahl, radial
C a min 4 mm Minimaler axialer Freiraum
C b min 6,5 mm Minimaler axialer Freiraum
C r 180.000 N Dynamische Tragzahl, radial
C ur 27.500 N Ermüdungsgrenzbelastung, radial
T max 120 °C Betriebstemperatur max.
T min -30 °C Betriebstemperatur min.
T2FB055 Vergleichsbezeichnung nach ISO 10317 und ISO 355
Y 0 0,96 Statischer Axiallastfaktor
Y 1,74 Dynamischer Axiallastfaktor
d =a max 71 mm Maximaler Durchmesser der Wellenschulter
e 0,35 Grenzwert für Fa/Fr für die Anwendbarkeit der versch. Werte der Faktoren X und Y
n G 7.500 1/min Grenzdrehzahl
n ϑr 4.350 1/min Thermische Bezugsdrehzahl
r a max 2,5 mm Maximaler Hohlkehlradius an der Welle
≈m 1,63 kg Einzelgewicht
Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 6119237237

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.1 ★★★★★
Based on 22 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
K
Verified Purchase
Kallie
Birmingham, US
★★★★★ 3
Janky
These are very cheaply made and barely stay on. The clasp to keep the diapers closed breaks half of the time when I'm trying to put a fresh diaper on. Won't be buying these again.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 30, 2023
C
Charlotte
Natrona Heights, US
★★★★★ 5
Works Well
These diapers fit well right now, but like any diaper, we will be watching the weight of the baby and move up a size as the weight limit gets close, as that affects the amount of leakage that can occur. They are thin and easy to fit in a small diaper bag that goes anywhere, yet they are also absorbent. The designs are cute, and I like that it has a wetness indicator on the outside. They are absorbent for a few hours, but I wouldn't trust them for more than 4 hours because they are thin; however, that's the negative of any thinner diaper on the market, at least that's what I've found. The baby doesn't suffer from any irritation on his sensitive skin, which is also a big plus and is a necessity, as far as I'm concerned.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on June 24, 2022
B
Verified Purchase
BandC928
Los Angeles, US
★★★★★ 1
I've used babyganics for two children and will never buy again
I've used babyganics diapers for years and have always loved them. They used to be soft, incredibly absorbent and with a minimalist design that didn't show through light colored baby clothes. They were the diapers I recommended to everyone as a cloth diaper alternative and I was willing to pay the extra $ for them. What happened?!?! These have a brightly colored yet faded appearing design on them, they are rough and they constantly leak (like EVERY time). They are also small! I sized up one as I always used to do with babyganics but these size 2 diapers for 12-18 lb babies barely fit my 10 lb baby. I switched to Millie Moon diapers and find them a million times better. They're everything babyganics used to be.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on December 6, 2022
W
Webb
Los Angeles, US
★★★★★ 5
Natural and Soft
Fun colorful patterns that are great for boys and girls and are soft to the touch. They are thin when dry which is great, but they still hold a lot. They have worked great well overnight with zero leaks and the baby stays dry. Fit is snug but not too tight and they move well with baby! Overall very happy with the "Babyganics, Absorbent, Breathable, Triple Dry Protection Diapers".
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 12, 2022
G
Verified Purchase
giovanna
New York, US
★★★★★ 4
Still pretty good
We had their “old version” - different pattern and also apparently a different material? Because these don’t seem as good quality. But they are still more absorbent than most
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on February 21, 2023

recommand products