Opinions on wheel spacers
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
spacer/small offset combo.
As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
DougW wrote:
> Roy J did pass the time by typing:
>
>>Tell me one more time why using a wheel spacer puts any more
>>stress on the wheel bearings than an equivilent offset wheel? In
>>either case, the centerline of the tire (centerline of the load)
>>is the same in relation to the bearing.
>
>
> It has to do with how torsion is transferred to the bearing.
>
> Scuse the ASCII art. :)
>
> __
> | |
> | |
> | |=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Normal wheel puts load almost directly perpendicualr to the axle
> in what is called shear force. There is very little torsion applied
> to the bearings.
>
> __
> | |
> | |_
> | |_=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Stick on a spacer and the load gains a torsion component or the
> equivelent of trying to bend the axle up. (dang this is hard to
> explain with ascii)
>
>
> How about this. Take a pencil, put it in your palm and close your hand
> and hold the pencil horizontal. Now your hand is the bearing and the
> pencil, the axle.
> ===( )
>
> Lets put a wheel on that pencil.
> Push up on the pencil right next to your hand.
> ===( )
> ^
> Now a spacer.
> Push up on the pencil end.
> ===( )
> ^
>
> Notice the pencil is now trying to rotate your hand and you can
> feel the load difference.
>
> This is what spacers do to wheel bearings. They change a shear force
> into a shear and torsion. The torsion is what eats the bearings.
> Bearings will withstand a certain amount of torsion. Another problem
> comes into effect when the torsion is too much for the axle and the
> whole unit starts to distort. (You've probably seen the rice racers/
> hotwheel cars with the bent rear axles.) Same thing, but they space
> out by 4" and shouldn't be allowed on the roads. (personal opinion) ;)
>
for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
spacer/small offset combo.
As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
DougW wrote:
> Roy J did pass the time by typing:
>
>>Tell me one more time why using a wheel spacer puts any more
>>stress on the wheel bearings than an equivilent offset wheel? In
>>either case, the centerline of the tire (centerline of the load)
>>is the same in relation to the bearing.
>
>
> It has to do with how torsion is transferred to the bearing.
>
> Scuse the ASCII art. :)
>
> __
> | |
> | |
> | |=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Normal wheel puts load almost directly perpendicualr to the axle
> in what is called shear force. There is very little torsion applied
> to the bearings.
>
> __
> | |
> | |_
> | |_=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Stick on a spacer and the load gains a torsion component or the
> equivelent of trying to bend the axle up. (dang this is hard to
> explain with ascii)
>
>
> How about this. Take a pencil, put it in your palm and close your hand
> and hold the pencil horizontal. Now your hand is the bearing and the
> pencil, the axle.
> ===( )
>
> Lets put a wheel on that pencil.
> Push up on the pencil right next to your hand.
> ===( )
> ^
> Now a spacer.
> Push up on the pencil end.
> ===( )
> ^
>
> Notice the pencil is now trying to rotate your hand and you can
> feel the load difference.
>
> This is what spacers do to wheel bearings. They change a shear force
> into a shear and torsion. The torsion is what eats the bearings.
> Bearings will withstand a certain amount of torsion. Another problem
> comes into effect when the torsion is too much for the axle and the
> whole unit starts to distort. (You've probably seen the rice racers/
> hotwheel cars with the bent rear axles.) Same thing, but they space
> out by 4" and shouldn't be allowed on the roads. (personal opinion) ;)
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
spacer/small offset combo.
As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
DougW wrote:
> Roy J did pass the time by typing:
>
>>Tell me one more time why using a wheel spacer puts any more
>>stress on the wheel bearings than an equivilent offset wheel? In
>>either case, the centerline of the tire (centerline of the load)
>>is the same in relation to the bearing.
>
>
> It has to do with how torsion is transferred to the bearing.
>
> Scuse the ASCII art. :)
>
> __
> | |
> | |
> | |=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Normal wheel puts load almost directly perpendicualr to the axle
> in what is called shear force. There is very little torsion applied
> to the bearings.
>
> __
> | |
> | |_
> | |_=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Stick on a spacer and the load gains a torsion component or the
> equivelent of trying to bend the axle up. (dang this is hard to
> explain with ascii)
>
>
> How about this. Take a pencil, put it in your palm and close your hand
> and hold the pencil horizontal. Now your hand is the bearing and the
> pencil, the axle.
> ===( )
>
> Lets put a wheel on that pencil.
> Push up on the pencil right next to your hand.
> ===( )
> ^
> Now a spacer.
> Push up on the pencil end.
> ===( )
> ^
>
> Notice the pencil is now trying to rotate your hand and you can
> feel the load difference.
>
> This is what spacers do to wheel bearings. They change a shear force
> into a shear and torsion. The torsion is what eats the bearings.
> Bearings will withstand a certain amount of torsion. Another problem
> comes into effect when the torsion is too much for the axle and the
> whole unit starts to distort. (You've probably seen the rice racers/
> hotwheel cars with the bent rear axles.) Same thing, but they space
> out by 4" and shouldn't be allowed on the roads. (personal opinion) ;)
>
for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
spacer/small offset combo.
As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
DougW wrote:
> Roy J did pass the time by typing:
>
>>Tell me one more time why using a wheel spacer puts any more
>>stress on the wheel bearings than an equivilent offset wheel? In
>>either case, the centerline of the tire (centerline of the load)
>>is the same in relation to the bearing.
>
>
> It has to do with how torsion is transferred to the bearing.
>
> Scuse the ASCII art. :)
>
> __
> | |
> | |
> | |=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Normal wheel puts load almost directly perpendicualr to the axle
> in what is called shear force. There is very little torsion applied
> to the bearings.
>
> __
> | |
> | |_
> | |_=======
> | |
> |__|
> ^
> Stick on a spacer and the load gains a torsion component or the
> equivelent of trying to bend the axle up. (dang this is hard to
> explain with ascii)
>
>
> How about this. Take a pencil, put it in your palm and close your hand
> and hold the pencil horizontal. Now your hand is the bearing and the
> pencil, the axle.
> ===( )
>
> Lets put a wheel on that pencil.
> Push up on the pencil right next to your hand.
> ===( )
> ^
> Now a spacer.
> Push up on the pencil end.
> ===( )
> ^
>
> Notice the pencil is now trying to rotate your hand and you can
> feel the load difference.
>
> This is what spacers do to wheel bearings. They change a shear force
> into a shear and torsion. The torsion is what eats the bearings.
> Bearings will withstand a certain amount of torsion. Another problem
> comes into effect when the torsion is too much for the axle and the
> whole unit starts to distort. (You've probably seen the rice racers/
> hotwheel cars with the bent rear axles.) Same thing, but they space
> out by 4" and shouldn't be allowed on the roads. (personal opinion) ;)
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
What happened when you went over 65 ft lbs? Spin the lug bolt or
pull it through?
MacCheeta wrote:
> I purchased this type of spacer and the couldn't torque the lug nuts
> past 65 ft lbs w/ 3 different type of lug nuts. I decided that they were
> not safe for the road but keep them for when I might need to use chains
> and need extra clearance for my air bags. I do feel I wasted my money.
>
>
> Shadow wrote:
>
>> Group,
>>
>> Check these out. Would I be wasting my money?
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2444355885
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
pull it through?
MacCheeta wrote:
> I purchased this type of spacer and the couldn't torque the lug nuts
> past 65 ft lbs w/ 3 different type of lug nuts. I decided that they were
> not safe for the road but keep them for when I might need to use chains
> and need extra clearance for my air bags. I do feel I wasted my money.
>
>
> Shadow wrote:
>
>> Group,
>>
>> Check these out. Would I be wasting my money?
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2444355885
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
What happened when you went over 65 ft lbs? Spin the lug bolt or
pull it through?
MacCheeta wrote:
> I purchased this type of spacer and the couldn't torque the lug nuts
> past 65 ft lbs w/ 3 different type of lug nuts. I decided that they were
> not safe for the road but keep them for when I might need to use chains
> and need extra clearance for my air bags. I do feel I wasted my money.
>
>
> Shadow wrote:
>
>> Group,
>>
>> Check these out. Would I be wasting my money?
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2444355885
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
pull it through?
MacCheeta wrote:
> I purchased this type of spacer and the couldn't torque the lug nuts
> past 65 ft lbs w/ 3 different type of lug nuts. I decided that they were
> not safe for the road but keep them for when I might need to use chains
> and need extra clearance for my air bags. I do feel I wasted my money.
>
>
> Shadow wrote:
>
>> Group,
>>
>> Check these out. Would I be wasting my money?
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2444355885
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
What happened when you went over 65 ft lbs? Spin the lug bolt or
pull it through?
MacCheeta wrote:
> I purchased this type of spacer and the couldn't torque the lug nuts
> past 65 ft lbs w/ 3 different type of lug nuts. I decided that they were
> not safe for the road but keep them for when I might need to use chains
> and need extra clearance for my air bags. I do feel I wasted my money.
>
>
> Shadow wrote:
>
>> Group,
>>
>> Check these out. Would I be wasting my money?
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2444355885
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
pull it through?
MacCheeta wrote:
> I purchased this type of spacer and the couldn't torque the lug nuts
> past 65 ft lbs w/ 3 different type of lug nuts. I decided that they were
> not safe for the road but keep them for when I might need to use chains
> and need extra clearance for my air bags. I do feel I wasted my money.
>
>
> Shadow wrote:
>
>> Group,
>>
>> Check these out. Would I be wasting my money?
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2444355885
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Just my two cents. I've been running 1.5 inch spacers for a while now. I
have a YJ with a Dana 44 out of a Wagoneer in the front and a Dana 44 out of
a Scout in the rear. Due to the conversion to make it all 5 on 5.5 I put
1.5 inch spacers on the rear to get my axle width close(Still around 1/2 per
side off). They work fine. I'm in the same situation as JimG, around 2k
miles a year. And by the way, most of my time has been spent off-road this
year. So they have been tried and retried.
Daren
"Roy J" <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote in message
news:i7syb.18$Vf2.45355@news.uswest.net...
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
have a YJ with a Dana 44 out of a Wagoneer in the front and a Dana 44 out of
a Scout in the rear. Due to the conversion to make it all 5 on 5.5 I put
1.5 inch spacers on the rear to get my axle width close(Still around 1/2 per
side off). They work fine. I'm in the same situation as JimG, around 2k
miles a year. And by the way, most of my time has been spent off-road this
year. So they have been tried and retried.
Daren
"Roy J" <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote in message
news:i7syb.18$Vf2.45355@news.uswest.net...
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Opinions on wheel spacers
Just my two cents. I've been running 1.5 inch spacers for a while now. I
have a YJ with a Dana 44 out of a Wagoneer in the front and a Dana 44 out of
a Scout in the rear. Due to the conversion to make it all 5 on 5.5 I put
1.5 inch spacers on the rear to get my axle width close(Still around 1/2 per
side off). They work fine. I'm in the same situation as JimG, around 2k
miles a year. And by the way, most of my time has been spent off-road this
year. So they have been tried and retried.
Daren
"Roy J" <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote in message
news:i7syb.18$Vf2.45355@news.uswest.net...
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
have a YJ with a Dana 44 out of a Wagoneer in the front and a Dana 44 out of
a Scout in the rear. Due to the conversion to make it all 5 on 5.5 I put
1.5 inch spacers on the rear to get my axle width close(Still around 1/2 per
side off). They work fine. I'm in the same situation as JimG, around 2k
miles a year. And by the way, most of my time has been spent off-road this
year. So they have been tried and retried.
Daren
"Roy J" <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote in message
news:i7syb.18$Vf2.45355@news.uswest.net...
Probably more due to frame flex than anything else.
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> I used to believe that, until I moved the engine mounts forward
> from the middle to what I believed a stronger position in my old Ford,
> like the old Vettes used at the time. The engine stayed in the same
> position, but now my car pushed rather than drifted on high speed turns.
> Oh well, my old Thunderbird was never considered a sports car:
> http://www.----------.com/thunderb.htm
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Roy J wrote:
>
>>Exactly my point. There is NO difference to what the bearing sees
>>for laoding between a wheel with a large offset and a
>>spacer/small offset combo.
>>
>>As I said above, a large off set is bad for bearings (and rear
>>axle shafts!) but how you get there makes no difference.
