A few updated pics murdered out

[Black Dog]

emann, you're absolutely right everything you said. I could be wrong but I think he's talking about the adapters that lug onto the hub, and then they have their own lugs for the wheel. You can tell by my post that I'm still pretty aprehensive about those too, but I suppose they're still better than just spacer plates with the holes in them. I wish I could believe that even the adapters were as safe as without, as I'd like to use them too, but I just can't. What do you think about those anyway? He mentioned that they're hub-centric, meaning the center fits centered around the hub, but I think that just ensures centering and doesn't necessarily mean it relieves the lugs of stress. What do you think?

 

[bad63lac]

Wheel spacers are a bad idea. Put too much stress on the studs.

If they are "hubcentric" spacers (which he stated they are) there is no stress put on the studs, period.

With hubcentric hubs (which our vehicles have) the weight is not loaded onto the studs, it is loaded directly on the hub itself. If you put a hubcentric spacer on the hub, you are retaining that same load point.


With that said....


I am more concerned if this is a 4x4 and now the rear wheels have a wider track than the front ones. This will affect ABS, Traction control, etc...

 

[emann_01]

i dont know where you heard that hubcentric spacers will not stress the studs at all but i dont buy that

they may be less stressful on the studs but you have to think about dynamic stress of when the car is in motion....not just sitting still....i dont care where the stress point is when you are sitting still

i have heard about hubcentric spacers snapping off studs...if you like i can dig up some stories of it on another forum i belong too

basic point is spacers are dangerous when you get too big.....period

 

[bad63lac]

I did not "hear" it. It is fact. I won't sit and argue with you about whether you "buy" the facts or not.

Non-hubcentric (Lugcentric) wheels are centered on the hub by tightening down the lug nuts. The nuts in theory should center the wheel. The drawback is that there is stress on the lugs. As the wheel rotates there is lateral stress exerted on the lugs due to pressure pushing the wheel against the lugs as weight is shifted during the rotation.

Hubcentric wheels do NOT contact the lugs. There is a ring machined onto the hubs which is a specific size. The wheels are fitted onto that ring. All rotational mass is transfered onto the ring. The lugs are compeletely centered within the holes of the wheel and NEVER come in contact with the lugs. As the wheel rotates all force is transfered to the hub, not the lugs. This is why hubcentric hubs/wheels were invented and used on almost all vehicles today.


You can choose to be ignorant to the facts if you choose. For every 1 person you can find that may claim to have had a problem with a hubcentric spacer, you can easily find thousands who have not. Also, I can point you to many a competition rock-krawler sites where many many people use 1 to 3" hubcentric spacers without any problem whatsoever. I have personally used 2.5" hubcentric spacers on a Jeep used for mud-bogging, off-roading and down right nasty abuse of the drivetrain. Have never had an issue.


Again, please understand how it works and the facts before you decide what you "want to buy(believe)". There is a very big difference in the design of Lug-centric vs Hub-centric. One supports the weight via lugs, the other via the hub. For you to believe they both support the weight via the lugs is pretty un-informed.

 

[73shark]

While I agree that with the hub centric, the vehicle weight is supported by the hub and not the studs, what about side loading that comes from turns and curves? Seems like that would stress the lugs more since there is a longer lever arm now w/ a spacer.

 

[bad63lac]

No. Side-loading will place stress on the face of the hub. Again, on hubcentric there is never any load on the lugs. The wheel does not touch the lugs ever. The wheel only touches the ring and the face of the hub.

On lugcentric there is stress on the lugs.

 

[73shark]

Well in that case, one does not need the lug nuts if there is "there is never any load on the lugs."

 

[emann_01]

so do the lugnuts come in contact with the wheels?????

and the lugnuts thread onto the lugs?????

and under load metal never deforms because there is not such thing as elastic deformation?????

I guess everything they ever taught me in 4 years of an engineering degree was wrong????

 

[emann_01]

CIATAHOE,

sorry about all this....bottom line is that any spacer CAN be dangerous....putting them on a rock crawler or offroad vehicle is one thing but buckling in your 4 year old daughter and then hitting the highway is a whole other ballgame

ultimately it is your decision but think about it....why wont any major wheel and tire shop touch your car when they find spacers????

just want you to be informed

 

[Black Dog]

It doesn't matter if the wheel doesn't touch the lugs because the wheels do touch the lug nuts, and so that becomes a defacto point of contact between the wheel and the lug; i.e. they still touch as far as physics is concerned. Being hub-centric only the edge of the spacer is on the hub, and only the edge of the wheel is on the spacer. When it's just wheel to hub there is no lateral distance and therefore really no leverage, but the spacer adds the lateral dimension and therefore the potential leverage. So I have to think that when rolling straight and flat there is little danger, but when you add turning and travel force there most certainly is some leverage. If this was not true then use an example of even the adapter with its own lugs. If there is no leverage then in theory, using normal length studs, you should be able to potentially use a spacer/adapter of limitless width. Would you still think it was safe if it was a foot wide? No, even with 2 sets of normal length lugs, such a wide spacer of any type would create leverage that was beyond unsafe. The question becomes how much leverage is safe and acceptable. So what I've done is exagerrate the dimensions to reveal the physical dynamics that are hidden in the use of even a conservative spacer, but which are still there even though the fasteners are able to "overcome" that effect.
If the assembly was not hub-centric then you would have a new danger of shearing, but being hub-centric does not delete the danger from leverage. And yes, the added dimension of width does make the spacer essentially become a lever. The lugs are tight so it is very controlled, try using a spacer with one or two loose lugs and see how much more quickly it fails than with the same loose lugs without a spacer. I rest my case.

 

[Black Dog]

so do the lugnuts come in contact with the wheels?????

and the lugnuts thread onto the lugs?????

and under load metal never deforms because there is not such thing as elastic deformation?????

I guess everything they ever taught me in 4 years of an engineering degree was wrong????

OWNED.

 

[Black Dog]

Now using it with heavy, large diameter tires makes it all the worse. To use them I would have to have a limited tire size, the strongest lugs money can buy, and if it's a spacer less than 1/4 inch, and if it was an adapter less than 1/2". I would then spend all my free time checking the torque, and even then I would probably be pissing myself every time I drove it. So rather than all that I'd just skip it and get a wheel with a different offset. Which can be dangerous in and of itself.

 

[bad63lac]

so do the lugnuts come in contact with the wheels?????

and the lugnuts thread onto the lugs?????

and under load metal never deforms because there is not such thing as elastic deformation?????

I guess everything they ever taught me in 4 years of an engineering degree was wrong????

I usually do not waste my time and argue with people on message boards but you've compelled me to take your bait...


1st of all I have a Master's degree in Materials Science and have worked at Lockheed Martin for 10 years within this field.

2nd, yes, what you learned in school was either wrong or you did not pay attention well enough. If you believe that elastic deformation plays any part in this equation I am seriously at a loss for words. Would area of study is your engineering degree?

Yes the lugnuts touch the wheel. Yes the lugnuts are threaded onto the lugs, however, the lug nuts in the case of hubcentric wheels are securing the wheel flush against the hub. The ring on the hub is carrying the load. The lugs/lugnuts are not carrying any load.

This is not the same as a lugcentric design that is carrying the load directly on the lugs. You seem to have a fundamental problem understanding why "HUB"centric system was designed to replace "LUG"centric designs.

 

[bad63lac]

Now using it with heavy, large diameter tires makes it all the worse. To use them I would have to have a limited tire size, the strongest lugs money can buy, and if it's a spacer less than 1/4 inch, and if it was an adapter less than 1/2". I would then spend all my free time checking the torque, and even then I would probably be pissing myself every time I drove it. So rather than all that I'd just skip it and get a wheel with a different offset. Which can be dangerous in and of itself.

Listen, I know plenty of 4x4 guys running 37-40" tires on a Jeep or other truck with 2" or greater hub centric spacers.

You are kidding yourself.

 

[Black Dog]

No you listen, I didn't get to be the owner of a corporation with 100+ employees, and having started working as a mechanic when I was 11, by going through life kidding myself. I'm about as practical/ logical as they come. I do not kid myself. I think I indicated in my other posts that it is possible if ones parts are on the right side of the dynamics equation. Best of luck to your friends, tell them to wear their seatbelts.

 

[Black Dog]

At best you're partaking in a calculated risk, how much actual calculation I don't know. All I know is math and physics have never lied.

 

[emann_01]

CIATAHOE,

Im not going to give this other guy the time of day and jack your thread.

I already told you my final word.

When they fail, you can ask this guy why and considering he is a "materials science" guy, he will probably tell you it was hydrogen embrittlement. (what all metallurgists blame everything on)

 

[lawrencesor]

too sicck jeremy!

 

[Black Dog]

hydrogen embrittlement. (what all metallurgists blame everything on)

Hahaha! Yeah i'm sorry to mess up the thread too, and normally I won't go back and forth with it, but I gotta say it's more than just a difference of opinion, it's a safety issue. The guys gonna use scientist status and friends experience to endorse someone right into a bad accident.

 

[emann_01]

have you considered dropping that grey looking fascia or whatever they are called under the front bumper cover?

just a thought

and maybe the running boards too?