Wheel Stud Removal

[dparm]

Originally Posted by gills

Go around the paddock and ask the Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, GTR, Z, S2000, 993 and older Porsche's, Subaru, EVO, etc. guys how often they change their wheels studs. Most are always running ARP, some on MSI studs, and most will tell you it's when they service the bearing/hub.

That's pretty much spot on based on what 3 local domestic shops have told me. One of them sorta chuckled when I said every year..."yeah maybe if you are tracking it every weekend and constantly swapping wheels".

[fanatic1]

Originally Posted by gills

Great question and funny you mention the show stuff. That's just how they market them since it's a bigger market, and unfortunately their form factors and how they finish them is geared more for appearance. Especially the Project Kics, Project Mu, and Rays Engineering ones. The actual bodies are alloy steel still and there are other brands that use steel floating collars vs aluminum, which I prefer (steel collar).

BUT, to answer your question, they are fantastic. Their function in how they completely remove the tapered aluminum seat out of the equation when tightening simply cannot be matched by a standard lug nut. I used this lug nut in part of my testing and they were easily the best performing lug nut of the group over dozens, if not over 100 tightening cycles.


Take a look at OEM Porsche wheel bolts for instance. They use the same exact concept, and it's for a very good reason: https://www.suncoastparts.com/product/LUGNUT.html


I'm working on my own proprietary lug nuts with MSI that use this design that won't be all funky like the ones currently available. They will be available individually also, just like all of us who track/race regularly want.

Great information on your website, this is just what I was looking for:

Lubricating the lug nut seat is more important and effective than lubricating the threads in a wheel interface application that uses cone/tapered (60 degree) seats.

[DRLane]

Originally Posted by derbo

gills What are your thoughts on the lugnuts with a rotating ring/seat? I know they were designed for show folks to not scratch their wheels but it seems like that ring is made from Aluminum and that could possibly reduce galling?

I'm running the Muteki SR45R lug nuts which have that rotating ring seat you mentioned. They're great! Sound weird, but they have a nice feeling when torquing down.

gills Very much looking forward to your collab with MSI.

[derbo]

Originally Posted by DRLane

I'm running the Muteki SR45R lug nuts which have that rotating ring seat you mentioned. They're great! Sound weird, but they have a nice feeling when torquing down.

gills Very much looking forward to your collab with MSI.

Oh for sure! My wife's M2 has M14 studs and Project Kics lugnuts which prompted this question to be asked. The collar ring made sense on minimizing the galling while dry but I wasn't sure if anyone really tested on how much more effective.

Thanks @gills for the information! I can't wait to see a non "show" version.

[rhyary]

Originally Posted by DRLane

I'm running the Muteki SR45R lug nuts which have that rotating ring seat you mentioned. They're great! Sound weird, but they have a nice feeling when torquing down.

gills Very much looking forward to your collab with MSI.

me too

[Estoril Blue]

Originally Posted by gills

I'm working on my own proprietary lug nuts with MSI that use this design that won't be all funky like the ones currently available. They will be available individually also, just like all of us who track/race regularly want.

I look forward to it!

[roastbeef]

heres another one for you gills - how often should someone replace lug nuts?

[derbo]

Originally Posted by roastbeef

heres another one for you gills - how often should someone replace lug nuts?

From Core4 Motorsports page, it shows the lugnuts from MSI reduced its effectiveness after 10 cycles.


But if you are using lubricant like anti-seize, I can see it going longer since it basically removes the galling out of the equation. Same goes with the rotating seat nuts.

[roastbeef]

i mean like nuts on studs... i've never heard of nuts failing.

[gills]

Lug nuts are more about thread condition than anything else. If you see any metal shavings or feel any excessive drag when tightening them, toss them in the garbage. Nuts almost never outright fail. The threads/bodies are loaded in compression vs tension on the bolt/stud side, and the fatigue implications of compressive stress are basically nothing. If anything fails on a nut, it's typically the threads.


The dry film lubricant coating on MSI lug nuts is truly not intended for longevity. In fact, moly dry film coatings are typically best suited for single-use applications. A few aerospace fastener manufacturers that I've corresponded with have echoed that. And in the case of NASCAR and IMSA teams, they literally treat lug nuts and studs as disposable items and just toss them in the garbage after very light use.


A particular grade/class nut is also always a few points softer in hardness/strength than it's matching grade/class bolt/stud, but also strong enough to be able to withstand the tension that bolt/stud can generate.

This softer state on the nut is so the threads in the nut yield before the stud threads, which also allows the load distribution to spread across a greater number of threads to minimize concentrations of stress.

It has been shown that the first 6-7 threads of a matched nut and bolt take up over 90% of all the loading in the joint, with the first 2 or 3 taking up the majority of that. This why a typical fastener failure almost always happens in the first or second engaged thread in the nut.

If you use a harder nut than bolt or one of equal strength, it creates a highly concentrated stress zone in the first threads and will be more prone to a failure.


This is also another advantage of press-in studs since they remove the threaded hub material out of the equation. The threaded hub is essentially acting as a nut. Hub material is certainly nowhere near as hard/strong as a nut that is intended for a class 12.9 fastener, yet most people are moving to 12.9 studs into hub steel that has hardness/strength that is better suited for a class 10.9 fastener. To beat a dead horse, if you don't take advantage of the extra clamping force capacity of a higher class fastener, it's a pointless upgrade.

[fanatic1]

Originally Posted by gills

Lug nuts are more about thread condition than anything else. If you see any metal shavings or feel any excessive drag when tightening them, toss them in the garbage. Nuts almost never outright fail. The threads/bodies are loaded in compression vs tension on the bolt/stud side, and the fatigue implications of compressive stress are basically nothing. If anything fails on a nut, it's typically the threads.


The dry film lubricant coating on MSI lug nuts is truly not intended for longevity. In fact, moly dry film coatings are typically best suited for single-use applications. A few aerospace fastener manufacturers that I've corresponded with have echoed that. And in the case of NASCAR and IMSA teams, they literally treat lug nuts and studs as disposable items and just toss them in the garbage after very light use.


A particular grade/class nut is also always a few points softer in hardness/strength than it's matching grade/class bolt/stud, but also strong enough to be able to withstand the tension that bolt/stud can generate.

This softer state on the nut is so the threads in the nut yield before the stud threads, which also allows the load distribution to spread across a greater number of threads to minimize concentrations of stress.

It has been shown that the first 6-7 threads of a matched nut and bolt take up over 90% of all the loading in the joint, with the first 2 or 3 taking up the majority of that. This why a typical fastener failure almost always happens in the first or second engaged thread in the nut.

If you use a harder nut than bolt or one of equal strength, it creates a highly concentrated stress zone in the first threads and will be more prone to a failure.


This is also another advantage of press-in studs since they remove the threaded hub material out of the equation. The threaded hub is essentially acting as a nut. Hub material is certainly nowhere near as hard/strong as a nut that is intended for a class 12.9 fastener, yet most people are moving to 12.9 studs into hub steel that has hardness/strength that is better suited for a class 10.9 fastener. To beat a dead horse, if you don't take advantage of the extra clamping force capacity of a higher class fastener, it's a pointless upgrade.

As usual, this makes a lot of sense.

The question is, why recommend such low torque values from high quality stud manufacturers like MSI?

[Exclusivs]

Another ques: gills

Have some new spare studs around. Threw a new nut on it & felt some catch/resistance.

Is this by design? Once threaded up and down once was fine. Possibly some of the black phosphate coating residual? A sign of a 'cheaper' quality stud manufacturing process perhaps? I'll try out the rest of them tomorrow' maybe this was too small a sample size.

Parts used:

New Turner 75mm
New Turner (though packaged BRS?) 82mm
New ECS nuts (ordered Turner- probably not made any longer)

[roastbeef]

Look at all this crap on these old studs. Apex studs about two years old.

[gills]

Originally Posted by fanatic1

As usual, this makes a lot of sense.

The question is, why recommend such low torque values from high quality stud manufacturers like MSI?

It might be hard to believe, but one word: assumption.

It's based on the idea of how coatings affect friction coefficients of the underhead interface and the threads and hence the torque-tension relationship. Which, is obviously the case and many people chirp about. Lubricate a nut and bolt, and the required torque to tension drops. BUT, basically all the knowledge shared and all the torque tables referenced out there are for standard flat underhead nuts and bolts and steel-steel interfaces.

So, someone suggested the torque values to MSI and they just stuck with it. Testing and validation was never conducted. What I discovered in my testing and then was confirmed from Dr. Eccles in his own previous testing is when I realized something is very off. I'm in the process setting up a testing regiment with a dedicated testing facility to truly verify this and it will likely be a surprise to everyone, maybe even myself. I'm looking forward to it.

[//steve\\]

Originally Posted by roastbeef

Look at all this crap on these old studs. Apex studs about two years old.

I've never in my life owned a car that had studs that looked like that over time. Even for my outside all the time daily drivers.

My Apex studs are about a year old now but they don't see a ton of action or water so maybe that helps.

[derbo]

Originally Posted by //steve\\

I've never in my life owned a car that had studs that looked like that over time. Even for my outside all the time daily drivers.

My Apex studs are about a year old now but they don't see a ton of action or water so maybe that helps.

Mine looked similar after a year. I think it has to do with standing water in spacers and not driving the car/blowing it off post wash to get rid of the water in those areas.

[ayao]

Originally Posted by roastbeef

Look at all this crap on these old studs. Apex studs about two years old.

Did you end up using the dogbone-recommended Amazon stud extractor tool?

[roastbeef]

I had Malek throw the studs in while I was in for an oil change (mrs beef doesn't let me change the oil at home anymore). I do have that tool in case I have to wing it at the track though.

[derbo]

Paging gills!!

Is the lug nut seat galling creating a loss of clamping capacity that then breaks the screw-in studs because of that loss of clamping capacity?

[rhyary]

Originally Posted by derbo

Paging gills!!

Is the lug nut seat galling creating a loss of clamping capacity that then breaks the screw-in studs because of that loss of clamping capacity?

I believe the friction gives you a false torque reading

[derbo]

Originally Posted by rhyary

I believe the friction gives you a false torque reading

I get that! I'm wondering if the actual bad torque reading is what causes the screw-ins to fail. If the galling was not present, would this problem less of an issue?

[gills]

Originally Posted by derbo

Paging gills!!

Is the lug nut seat galling creating a loss of clamping capacity that then breaks the screw-in studs because of that loss of clamping capacity?

Let's put it this way, it certainly is a factor and why I'm very vocal about it. Galling can create so much friction at the nut seat interface that increasing tightening torque significantly will barely increase clamping force, and in some cases make such low clamping force at typical tightening torques that it will kill any stud.

The testing I'm outsourcing will most certainly show this relationship. I have my own data that shows this, but I want independent results from a company that does this all day, every day for almost all the major OEM's. These results will come soon-ish.


What it doesn't explain is why this happens far more often on screw-in studs vs press-in studs, and you all have read my hypotheses as to why. Users of press-in studs are working with the same exact lug nut interface geometry and not doing anything differently, yet rarely experience studs breaking. The "why," with data, is something that I'm working diligently on everyday. Developing a test regiment to simulate wheel stud/bolt fatigue testing at the loads and cycles seen on a wheel joint isn't something easily done. But, it will be done and you will all be the first to see the results.