Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
Mike Romain wrote:
> The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> never use them.
Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
to stretch the studs too much.
Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
noodled with.
The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
-JD
> The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> never use them.
Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
to stretch the studs too much.
Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
noodled with.
The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
-JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
Clay wrote:
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
Clay wrote:
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
Clay wrote:
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
Clay wrote:
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
> another downside to grease is if it gets too hot, it will carbonize and
> make them stick worse. Probably not an issue on off road vehicles but
> performance cars can get their discs (and hubs) mighty hot under serious
> braking.
> clean and dry or maybe a little anti-seize...
I agree. I normally use anti-seize on everything else; it must have
been a brain-lazy sort of day. I'll use AS next time around though.
-JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
I live in the rust belt where everything rots long before it wears out
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
I live in the rust belt where everything rots long before it wears out
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
I live in the rust belt where everything rots long before it wears out
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
I live in the rust belt where everything rots long before it wears out
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
and always go dry with capped nuts. With open nuts, I have used grease
on top after it is tightened down.
I have antiseize and use it everywhere else, but still not on wheel
nuts.
We just had to remove all my wheels a couple days ago and they came off
easily. It's been a while since they were removed....
Anyhow, just be aware that antiseize is considered a 'wet' torque.
Mike
JD Adams wrote:
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> > torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> > never use them.
>
> Ahhh yes, the camps are indeed split on this one.
>
> I believe that what the Mfg. is looking for isn't a specific torque
> value, but rather the proper clamping force between wheel and rotor. By
> lubing the stud and torquing to dry specs, I agree that it's possible
> to stretch the studs too much.
>
> Variances with prior galling, torque wrench quality and calibration,
> rusting and thread surface imperfections and relative temperature make
> exact tightening a crapshoot. I went with the low-end spec to avoid the
> stretch problem. I may drop them all down to 75 just to be on the safe
> side. I've never seen automotive studs break off from overtorquing, but
> I have defintely seen nuts spin themselves off from undertorquing, esp.
> when they're not rechecked after a few minutes of driving after being
> noodled with.
>
> The anti-seize does sound like a better option than a dab of grease
> though, and it would not be affected by rotor heat.
>
> -JD
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wheel stud lubrication - good or bad?
An old Polish farmer I did some work for recommended water on truck and
tractor lug nuts. It acts as an assembly lubricant, and then evaporates
before the nuts can back off. On some metals it leaves a protective
coating.
If you live long enough, you will hear most anything.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4421A245.67FA70DE@sympatico.ca...
> You are damaging the studs by over-torquing them. The lugs could snap
> because they have stress fractures or the nuts could come loose because
> the lug is stretched so not stable any more.
>
> The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> never use them.
>
> We were told/taught 'never' to use any lube on the lug threads when I
> worked in garages way back when. Not just one garage either, but coast
> to coast in Canada.
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
>
> JD Adams wrote:
> >
> > Yesterday was a semi-nice day, so I decided to catch up on some
> > maintenance --oil and filter change (M1 the Puro 30001 sure works nice
> > on a 4.0!), TB cleaning, new Puro air filter, front-end lube, powerwash
> > engine and fenderwells, a quick run through the local car wash, the
> > usual. Work is slow right now and I'm bored.
> >
> > I later decided to go the extra mile and do a 4-wheel tire rotation and
> > change out those el-cheapo OEM lug nuts with a good set of heavily
> > chromed, forged steel lugs. While I had one side up in the air doing
> > my thing, a neighbor commented on my practice of applying bearing
> > grease to the studs before torquing the nuts down to 90 ft/lbs.
> >
> > He claims that it's a bad practice, and that the lugs will loosen over
> > time because of it. I politely disagreed, saying that it is the
> > friction between the tapered nut face and the wheel that keeps
> > everything tight rather than friction from fastener threadfaces, and
> > that the only real way to get good, accurate, consistant torque is to
> > put a TINY BIT of lubricant on the threads before reassembly.
> >
> > I know this all sounds petty, but I'm wondering if anyone here has
> > heard of mishaps that were the direct result of 'lug nut greasin'? I
> > like knowing that the nuts will spin off easily many years later and
> > won't rust up, no matter how much muck I plow through. And I make sure
> > everything is cool to the touch before everthing gets tightened down
> > --all pretty common sense stuff IMO.
> >
> > Am I offbase here? Admittedly, this is 'old-school' technology, but it
> > makes a lot of sense to me, much like 'priming' the engine after an oil
> > change before actually firing it up. (Yeah, I do that too; I
> > disconnect the crank sensor, then reset the MIL when I'm done.)
> >
> > -JD
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
tractor lug nuts. It acts as an assembly lubricant, and then evaporates
before the nuts can back off. On some metals it leaves a protective
coating.
If you live long enough, you will hear most anything.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4421A245.67FA70DE@sympatico.ca...
> You are damaging the studs by over-torquing them. The lugs could snap
> because they have stress fractures or the nuts could come loose because
> the lug is stretched so not stable any more.
>
> The specs call for a dry torque of 90 to 115 not a wet torque. The wet
> torque settings are a lot lower. I don't know them because I would
> never use them.
>
> We were told/taught 'never' to use any lube on the lug threads when I
> worked in garages way back when. Not just one garage either, but coast
> to coast in Canada.
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
>
> JD Adams wrote:
> >
> > Yesterday was a semi-nice day, so I decided to catch up on some
> > maintenance --oil and filter change (M1 the Puro 30001 sure works nice
> > on a 4.0!), TB cleaning, new Puro air filter, front-end lube, powerwash
> > engine and fenderwells, a quick run through the local car wash, the
> > usual. Work is slow right now and I'm bored.
> >
> > I later decided to go the extra mile and do a 4-wheel tire rotation and
> > change out those el-cheapo OEM lug nuts with a good set of heavily
> > chromed, forged steel lugs. While I had one side up in the air doing
> > my thing, a neighbor commented on my practice of applying bearing
> > grease to the studs before torquing the nuts down to 90 ft/lbs.
> >
> > He claims that it's a bad practice, and that the lugs will loosen over
> > time because of it. I politely disagreed, saying that it is the
> > friction between the tapered nut face and the wheel that keeps
> > everything tight rather than friction from fastener threadfaces, and
> > that the only real way to get good, accurate, consistant torque is to
> > put a TINY BIT of lubricant on the threads before reassembly.
> >
> > I know this all sounds petty, but I'm wondering if anyone here has
> > heard of mishaps that were the direct result of 'lug nut greasin'? I
> > like knowing that the nuts will spin off easily many years later and
> > won't rust up, no matter how much muck I plow through. And I make sure
> > everything is cool to the touch before everthing gets tightened down
> > --all pretty common sense stuff IMO.
> >
> > Am I offbase here? Admittedly, this is 'old-school' technology, but it
> > makes a lot of sense to me, much like 'priming' the engine after an oil
> > change before actually firing it up. (Yeah, I do that too; I
> > disconnect the crank sensor, then reset the MIL when I'm done.)
> >
> > -JD
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
