Which pad is "better?" Ceramic or semi-metallic?

If the disc had shifted enough to mark the lugs, Vic didn't specify but it would be logical to assume that it had done so in the forward direction, not the reverse - so hard braking in reverse to bust them loose would probably be the best plan, as they wouldn't have had any more room to move in the forward direction.

nate

To clarify my previous comment, I put the anti-seize on the protruding part of the hub, not the face of it. That will hopefully prevent the corrosion that tends to actually lock the rotor to the hub, and at the same time maintain the steel to steel contact between the rotor and the hub where the torque is actually transferred.

nate

so it never occurred to you but you won't admit it. got it.

no you didn't. have another go. at least two.

idiot.

That settles that, I guess... -----

- gpsman

Prove me wrong or STFU. Nonsensical unsupported claims get ignored.

nate

Good to know. Now, with your gracious permission, I may justifiably ignore each and every of your heretofore and future nonsensical, undocumented, unsupported and thoroughly ridiculous claims. My thanks.

Cheers.

he's no engineering grad - he's completely clueless. it can only be that he's a legacy and daddy paid to get him graduated with a bunch of make-ups in wine tasting and math history - the only way some uni's get their dead-cert failures to ever pay their fees.

On 02/01/2012 05:18 AM, N8N bleated:

so you really are a retard and you never graduated. excellent clarification.

you "missed" this one retard. name at least two.

You do it. One good reason is all you need. Clearly you haven't a clue what you're talking about and any explanations that I give are falling on deaf ears.

Additionally, please explain why it would not be undesirable to have the lugs loaded in shear. Remember that that would imply displacement of the wheel on the hub.

nate

Obviously, you are an expert on wheels and hubs, and engineering in general.

It has the convenient benefit of being factual.

nate

Hit send too soon. However, lug nuts are usually shaped to engage the wheel. Either a bevel or shoulder into slots. This would make for a load path without the members of the joint slipping.

Thanx for the input, genius. Here's another non-equivocal, common example of shear on a bolt, replete with rubber bushing interface to allow for slippage between the tie rod and bolt joint, as used on LH body style chryslers. Oops. Thanx for playing nonetheless.

Is that a lug stud or lug bolt? No, it is not.

nate

nonetheless.http://media.photobucket.com/image/intrepid%20steering%20rack/hanyou_... >

Is that a lug stud or lug bolt? No, it is not.

nate

-----------------------------------------------------------

What a total bullshit artist you are. Do you REALLY think you're kidding anybody?

Now you leave no mystery to the degree of your intelligence.

What a wonderful display of your ignorance. This joint has nothing in common with the one being discussed beyond both of them using threaded fasteners. It is a completely different system. Thinking that it matters to this discussion at all demonstrates a profound ignorance. What are you attempting to argue here? That some bolted see shear loads? Well gee, the sky is blue. Thank you capt. obvious.

I don't understand your point. I said that LUG STUDS (and lug bolts) were designed to be loaded in tension, and that the shear force of braking, acceleration, etc. was taken up by the friction at the interface, not by loading the studs in shear. Any loading of the studs in shear is either small and unimportant, or else a sign of a failure, improper assembly, etc. If that were not true, in a typical FWD/4WD front disc brake setup, you'd see grooves in the studs from the rotor physically contacting the studs, and you'd also see evidence of fretting or wear at the rotor/hub and rotor/wheel interfaces. Since this is not a usual occurrance (and is obviously undesirable,) QED.

How does posting a picture of a steering something-or-other in any way relate to my original statement? Everyone knows that TRE studs are loaded in shear, that's not news. Neither I nor anyone else said that no threaded fastener was ever loaded in shear, that would be demonstrably false. However, you'll note that TRE studs are significantly beefier than lug studs, and are also generally tapered so that they cannot move WRT their sockets. There's a reason for that... Also, it is generally a true statement that a typical bolted joint of any type typically transfers load in what would be the shear direction WRT the bolt not by directly loading the bolt itself but through the friction between the two or more components that are bolted together, and that the bolt itself is primarily loaded in tension. If that is *not* the case, then more bolts need to be added and/or larger bolts specified and torque/stretch specifications increased as appropriate.

nate

nonetheless.http://media.photobucket.com/image/intrepid%20steering%20rack/hanyou_... >

I don't understand your point. I said that LUG STUDS (and lug bolts) were designed to be loaded in tension, and that the shear force of braking, acceleration, etc. was taken up by the friction at the interface, not by loading the studs in shear.

• Among other inanities, you said, and I quote, "Lug studs are never to be loaded in shear, only tension" and denied the existence of any shear component. Lug studs, lug bolts, cap screws ... makes no difference, the clear implication and argument was that such fasteners were not shear loaded, especially without movement. The example provided you contradicted both points.

Any loading of the studs in shear is either small and unimportant, or else a sign of a failure, improper assembly, etc. If that were not true, in a typical FWD/4WD front disc brake setup, you'd see grooves in the studs from the rotor physically contacting the studs, and you'd also see evidence of fretting or wear at the rotor/hub and rotor/wheel interfaces. Since this is not a usual occurrance (and is obviously undesirable,) QED.

How does posting a picture of a steering something-or-other in any way relate to my original statement? Everyone knows that TRE studs are loaded in shear, that's not news. Neither I nor anyone else said that no threaded fastener was ever loaded in shear, that would be demonstrably false. However, you'll note that TRE studs are significantly beefier than lug studs,

• There are always multiple studs/bolts, there is but one TRE lug/bolt of approximately the same diameter as that of a large passengar car lug/bolt/stud, call it what you will, this isn't about semantics.

and are also generally tapered so that they cannot move WRT their sockets.

• Again demonstrably wrong as the lug/bolt - TRE joint is restrained (except axially) only by flexible bushings and is not tapered in this application (it is NOT the common tapered TRE stud protruding through an also tapered steering knuckle hole, for instance).

There's a reason for that... Also, it is generally a true statement that a typical bolted joint of any type typically transfers load in what would be the shear direction WRT the bolt not by directly loading the bolt itself but through the friction between the two or more components that are bolted together,

• WRONG! (in this case).

and that the bolt itself is primarily loaded in tension. If that is *not* the case, then more bolts need to be added and/or larger bolts specified and torque/stretch specifications increased as appropriate.

• Which is conspicuously contradicted in this application and clearly shown to NOT be the case in the pix. If you continue to doubt this, simply contact ANY competent mechanic familar with the application (LH body style Chrysler) and he/she will set you straight.