Oiling Wheel Studs

B

bartz paul

New member
Dec 3, 1997
1,225
0
0
So just what happens if one oils their wheel studs? If it's considered a
problem, is there some source documenting the problem??

Paul Bartz

From: Steven D. Ferguson [mailto:botiemad]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 10:33 PM

Steve, I don't quite follow your train of thought here (Monday morning and I
probably need another cup of coffee), but it's not a good idea to oil wheel.

Patrick,

I guess that's what I said. Two weeks off.......first day back at
work...Monday morning...you know the rest. What I meant was that all my
problems stemmed from lubricating the lug studs. This practice will forever
be a no-no in my fix it book.
 
Paul,

The problem is that torque specifications are "dry" specs. The oil does
what it's supposed to do - lubricate, and the necessary tension is
achieved at a lower torque. Unfortunately, the torque wrench doesn't
know this and the fastener may be overstressed by the increased tension
imposed when the specified torque is applied to the lubricated
fastener. I don't know that I've ever seen this "documented".

Patrick

>
> So just what happens if one oils their wheel studs? If it's considered a
> problem, is there some source documenting the problem??
- --
Patrick Flowers
Mailto:patrick

The GMC Motorhome Page
http://www.gmcmotorhome.com
 
Paul

My first motorhome was a Flxible bus, just like the one on FMCA logo. One of
the first things I learned was never lub the wheel studs. You may otherwise
start loosing lugnuts, and then the wheel and then things start to become very
dicey and expensive.

Wayne Newland F9300 75 Palm Beach Columbia, Md

> Paul,
>
> The problem is that torque specifications are "dry" specs. The oil does
> what it's supposed to do - lubricate, and the necessary tension is
> achieved at a lower torque. Unfortunately, the torque wrench doesn't
> know this and the fastener may be overstressed by the increased tension
> imposed when the specified torque is applied to the lubricated
> fastener. I don't know that I've ever seen this "documented".
>
> Patrick
>

> >
> > So just what happens if one oils their wheel studs? If it's considered a
> > problem, is there some source documenting the problem??
> --
> Patrick Flowers
> Mailto:patrick
>
> The GMC Motorhome Page
> http://www.gmcmotorhome.com
 
>So just what happens if one oils their wheel studs? If it's considered a
>problem, is there some source documenting the problem??

My understanding is that the wheels are not "hub centered". I think that
means the weight of the vehicle is supported by the friction between the
lug nuts and the wheel, not the center hole in the wheel. So, if you have
loose nuts, oil or grease on the nuts etc. there is not enough friction to
keep the wheels from moving around on the hub. The clicking noise you may
hear is the wheel clanking as it moves up and down on the hub while its
turning.

Something else to keep an eye out for is a dirty, dusty or rusty looking
streak on your wheel, starting at the lug nut and extending out toward the
tire. That streak is composed of tiny metal particles from the nut rubbing
against the wheel. Its usually caused by the nut working its way loose.

I don't know why these wheels are designed this way but it is a common
problem with this design to have the lug nuts come loose. Probably because
they are not tightened properly to begin with. So if you have had the
wheels off, its a good idea to check the lug nut torque a second time after
logging a few miles.

If you use any kind of lubricant to get stuck lug nuts loose, be sure
everything is clean before reinstalling them. Brake cleaner or carb cleaner
works good.

Some of this info is documented in the service manual but I don't remember
what sections.

With regard to oiling the studs, I use a very tiny amount of wheel bearing
grease on the studs to keep them from rusting and to keep the nuts from
getting stuck. The problem is that you can not let any grease get on the
flat surface of the nut (where it presses on the wheel) or on the wheel or
hub. Also keep in mind that oil and grease migrate at high temps.

Dave
Ann Arbor, MI.
73 Sequoia (26'/455/EFI/HEI)
 
Paul,
Not that didn't want to take the net's word for it but I always like lots of
opinions to muddle my mind before taking action :-)

I added Alcoa's opinion to the mix and consequently took all my wheels off
and cleaned studs and nuts with varsol and brake-clean before putting them
back on.

As indicated earlier on the net, exposure to too much torque is the
underlying problem.

Alcoa did fax me some stuff about wheel installation on their heavy duty
stuff (with the caveat to ignore the stuff about 3-400 lbs of torque) but I
lost it already :-) [ cleaning desk off in preperation for departure ]
I would think it's on their website as well.

The total sum of the information was enough for me to redo so that I would
not have to worry about it.

Alco did mention that if oil is required "to get by" to use 1-2 drops at
max, but preferred is not to.

Heinz

> So just what happens if one oils their wheel studs? If it's considered a
> problem, is there some source documenting the problem??
>
> Paul Bartz
>
> From: Steven D. Ferguson [mailto:botiemad]
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 10:33 PM
>
> Steve, I don't quite follow your train of thought here (Monday morning and
I
> probably need another cup of coffee), but it's not a good idea to oil
wheel.
>
> Patrick,
>
> I guess that's what I said. Two weeks off.......first day back at
> work...Monday morning...you know the rest. What I meant was that all my
> problems stemmed from lubricating the lug studs. This practice will
forever
> be a no-no in my fix it book.
>
>
 
>>My understanding is that the wheels are not "hub centered". I think that
>
>Dave- do I read your message as that you are saying that the GMC wheels
are
>not "hub centered"? If so, you are mistaken, as the original GMC wheels
and
>the Alcoa wheels do support the weight of the vehicle on the center hole.

I may be wrong on this point. But I think there is clearance between the
center hole and the hub that allows the wheels to move enough to cause
problems if the lug nuts are not clean and fully torqued.

But either way (hub centered or not), its important to be sure that the lug
nuts are clean and properly torqued. The large offset of the hub puts a lot
of stress on the lug nuts and wheel studs so they require more attention
than on a typical car or light truck.


Dave
Ann Arbor, MI.
73 Sequoia (26'/455/EFI/HEI)
 
You're close. The fit on the hub center is pretty tight, but theres enough
wiggle around the studs to allow big problems to develop if the nuts aren't
tight enough. Some of the early wheels developed cracks radiating out from
the stud holes(it's in the service manual). Wouldn't surprise me if it was
due to undertorqued lugs.

Patrick

>
> I may be wrong on this point. But I think there is clearance
> between the center hole and the hub that allows the wheels
> to move enough to cause problems if the lug nuts are not
> clean and fully torqued.
>
> But either way (hub centered or not), its important to be
> sure that the lug nuts are clean and properly torqued. The
> large offset of the hub puts a lot of stress on the lug
> nuts and wheel studs so they require more attention
> than on a typical car or light truck.
 
Sorry to disagree with all the anti-advocates, however I've been using a
light oiling on all my studs for over 40 years. Never experienced any loose
and have never had any studs stretched on any of my vehicles. So from my
perspective, to me it's a myth

In fact, the only ones I've ever tightened with a torque wrench are on the
coach since I installed and due to concern over galling the Alcoa wheels
where the washer-nut meets the wheel.

I can see where it may be a different story in southern climates, but not in
the North where salt is used liberally on the roads during the Winter.
You'll soon wish you used something on the studs. In fact I remember a
fellow at work a few years ago who had a problem with removal of his lug
nuts due to rust. He couldn't break them loose due to rust setting in until
heating with a torch, in spite of being over 260# and using a breaker bar,
which he bent.

Again, in this climate, any time I haven't used lubricant on the studs, the
next time I try to loosen the lug nuts, they break loose with a screeching
ping that reverberates through the wrench into your hands, almost akin to
getting electrically shocked. More than gets your attention.

Boy, now watch the admonitions!!!!!!!

Paul Bartz

From: Wayne Newland [mailto:wayne]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 1999 6:13 PM

Paul
My first motorhome was a Flxible bus, just like the one on FMCA logo. One
of the first things I learned was never lub the wheel studs. You may
otherwise start loosing lugnuts, and then the wheel and then things start to
become very dicey and expensive.

Paul,

The problem is that torque specifications are "dry" specs. The oil does
what it's supposed to do - lubricate, and the necessary tension is achieved
at a lower torque. Unfortunately, the torque wrench doesn't know this and
the fastener may be overstressed by the increased tension imposed when the
specified torque is applied to the lubricated fastener. I don't know that
I've ever seen this "documented".

So just what happens if one oils their wheel studs? If it's considered a
problem, is there some source documenting the problem??
 
Try a quart of vinegar instead!!!!!!!

Paul Bartz

From: Gcbr [mailto:Gcbr]
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 3:25 PM

WOW

All of this talk about oily nuts made me thirsty. Then I thought OMG I dont
know the right beer to put in my new reefer.
 
And for those of us who have changed to Alcoas, the suggested torque is 140'#.
Since the original steel wheels were to be tightened to something over 200'# I
see little danger in stretching the studs at 140'# plus a little oil.
Gary
North Bend, Oregon Coast
 
I thought I'd pass along some information I found in my copy of
"Fastener Facts," a 100-page -publication by Bowman Distribution, a
manufacturer of high quality fasteners. The book is available from Bowman -
the price on the cover is $20, but a bunch of us here at work got them for
free when we had a manufacturers rep here to put on a training seminar. It
has a huge amount of information in it concerning bolts, including
tightening torques.
I just measured the wheel studs on my '73 Sequoia - they're
9/16-18 thread. According to the Bowman book, the torque for this size grade
8 bolt is 171 ft-lbs with dry threads, and 102 ft-lbs with lubricated
threads. Their notes for the torque values include: torque values are based
on the use of a through-hardened flat washer to provide a uniform, hard
bearing surface; "dry threads" is defined as the zinc plating they put on
their bolts; "lubricated threads" is defined as having Bowman Anti-Seize
Compound applied to the threads; and the torque value is calculated at 75%
of the "proof load" to provide a safety factor.
Proof load is "the load that can be applied to a bolt without
causing permanent set greater than .0005". This is the maximum SAFE load
that the bolt can support." For this size bolt, the proof load is 24,350
lbs. This proof load x the 75% safety margin is 18262 lbs.
Tensile strength is "the load required to cause failure in
tension (stretch)." For this size bolt, the tensile strength is 30,450 lbs.
Doing the calculation with the formula in the book, sure enough,
tightening a dry bolt to 171 ft lbs puts the load very close to the 75% of
the proof load (18240 lbs), and tightening a lubricated bolt to 102 ft lbs
puts you at the same place, very close to 75% of the proof load (18133 lbs).
Now, suppose that you lubricate the bolts, but tighten them to
the torque for dry threads. Doing the calculation for this scenario, you
wind up with a load on the bolt of 30400 lbs, which is way past the proof
load and the 75% margin of safety, and almost right at the tensile strength.
Which means that the bolt is way overloaded.
I don't have my GMC manual with me, and I've never looked up the
torque specification for the wheel studs, but by what I've read here, the
torque value is up around 200 ft lbs, and likely for a dry stud. If you're
of the "oil them" group, it might be wise to go with a lower torque value,
perhaps no more than 120 or 130 ft lbs.
For what all that is worth to anyone, that's what I think I
think.

Robin
Corning NY
73 Sequoia

 
Our GMC manual states 250 ft lbs. torque for our steel wheels.
Marlene Meineken
77 Palm Beach

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Balcom, Robin S
To:
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 7:03 PM
Subject: RE: GMC: Oiling Wheel Studs

> I thought I'd pass along some information I found in my copy of
> "Fastener Facts," a 100-page -publication by Bowman Distribution, a
> manufacturer of high quality fasteners. The book is available from
Bowman -
> the price on the cover is $20, but a bunch of us here at work got them for
> free when we had a manufacturers rep here to put on a training seminar. It
> has a huge amount of information in it concerning bolts, including
> tightening torques.
> I just measured the wheel studs on my '73 Sequoia - they're
> 9/16-18 thread. According to the Bowman book, the torque for this size
grade
> 8 bolt is 171 ft-lbs with dry threads, and 102 ft-lbs with lubricated
> threads. Their notes for the torque values include: torque values are
based
> on the use of a through-hardened flat washer to provide a uniform, hard
> bearing surface; "dry threads" is defined as the zinc plating they put on
> their bolts; "lubricated threads" is defined as having Bowman Anti-Seize
> Compound applied to the threads; and the torque value is calculated at 75%
> of the "proof load" to provide a safety factor.
> Proof load is "the load that can be applied to a bolt without
> causing permanent set greater than .0005". This is the maximum SAFE load
> that the bolt can support." For this size bolt, the proof load is 24,350
> lbs. This proof load x the 75% safety margin is 18262 lbs.
> Tensile strength is "the load required to cause failure in
> tension (stretch)." For this size bolt, the tensile strength is 30,450
lbs.
> Doing the calculation with the formula in the book, sure enough,
> tightening a dry bolt to 171 ft lbs puts the load very close to the 75% of
> the proof load (18240 lbs), and tightening a lubricated bolt to 102 ft lbs
> puts you at the same place, very close to 75% of the proof load (18133
lbs).
> Now, suppose that you lubricate the bolts, but tighten them to
> the torque for dry threads. Doing the calculation for this scenario, you
> wind up with a load on the bolt of 30400 lbs, which is way past the proof
> load and the 75% margin of safety, and almost right at the tensile
strength.
> Which means that the bolt is way overloaded.
> I don't have my GMC manual with me, and I've never looked up the
> torque specification for the wheel studs, but by what I've read here, the
> torque value is up around 200 ft lbs, and likely for a dry stud. If you're
> of the "oil them" group, it might be wise to go with a lower torque value,
> perhaps no more than 120 or 130 ft lbs.
> For what all that is worth to anyone, that's what I think I
> think.
>
> Robin
> Corning NY
> 73 Sequoia
>
>
>
 
Robin

Well done. This is the best explination I have ever heard.

Wayne Newland F9300 75 Palm Beach Columbia (wet) Md

> I thought I'd pass along some information I found in my copy of
> "Fastener Facts," a 100-page -publication by Bowman Distribution, a
> manufacturer of high quality fasteners. The book is available from Bowman -
> the price on the cover is $20, but a bunch of us here at work got them for
> free when we had a manufacturers rep here to put on a training seminar. It
> has a huge amount of information in it concerning bolts, including
> tightening torques.
> I just measured the wheel studs on my '73 Sequoia - they're
> 9/16-18 thread. According to the Bowman book, the torque for this size grade
> 8 bolt is 171 ft-lbs with dry threads, and 102 ft-lbs with lubricated
> threads. Their notes for the torque values include: torque values are based
> on the use of a through-hardened flat washer to provide a uniform, hard
> bearing surface; "dry threads" is defined as the zinc plating they put on
> their bolts; "lubricated threads" is defined as having Bowman Anti-Seize
> Compound applied to the threads; and the torque value is calculated at 75%
> of the "proof load" to provide a safety factor.
> Proof load is "the load that can be applied to a bolt without
> causing permanent set greater than .0005". This is the maximum SAFE load
> that the bolt can support." For this size bolt, the proof load is 24,350
> lbs. This proof load x the 75% safety margin is 18262 lbs.
> Tensile strength is "the load required to cause failure in
> tension (stretch)." For this size bolt, the tensile strength is 30,450 lbs.
> Doing the calculation with the formula in the book, sure enough,
> tightening a dry bolt to 171 ft lbs puts the load very close to the 75% of
> the proof load (18240 lbs), and tightening a lubricated bolt to 102 ft lbs
> puts you at the same place, very close to 75% of the proof load (18133 lbs).
> Now, suppose that you lubricate the bolts, but tighten them to
> the torque for dry threads. Doing the calculation for this scenario, you
> wind up with a load on the bolt of 30400 lbs, which is way past the proof
> load and the 75% margin of safety, and almost right at the tensile strength.
> Which means that the bolt is way overloaded.
> I don't have my GMC manual with me, and I've never looked up the
> torque specification for the wheel studs, but by what I've read here, the
> torque value is up around 200 ft lbs, and likely for a dry stud. If you're
> of the "oil them" group, it might be wise to go with a lower torque value,
> perhaps no more than 120 or 130 ft lbs.
> For what all that is worth to anyone, that's what I think I
> think.
>
> Robin
> Corning NY
> 73 Sequoia
>
 
Alcoas are to be torqued at 140 lbs with the special lugnuts - dry.

Wayne Newland F9300 75 Palm Beach Columbia (raining) Md

> Our GMC manual states 250 ft lbs. torque for our steel wheels.
> Marlene Meineken
> 77 Palm Beach
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Balcom, Robin S
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 7:03 PM
> Subject: RE: GMC: Oiling Wheel Studs
>
> > I thought I'd pass along some information I found in my copy of
> > "Fastener Facts," a 100-page -publication by Bowman Distribution, a
> > manufacturer of high quality fasteners. The book is available from
> Bowman -
> > the price on the cover is $20, but a bunch of us here at work got them for
> > free when we had a manufacturers rep here to put on a training seminar. It
> > has a huge amount of information in it concerning bolts, including
> > tightening torques.
> > I just measured the wheel studs on my '73 Sequoia - they're
> > 9/16-18 thread. According to the Bowman book, the torque for this size
> grade
> > 8 bolt is 171 ft-lbs with dry threads, and 102 ft-lbs with lubricated
> > threads. Their notes for the torque values include: torque values are
> based
> > on the use of a through-hardened flat washer to provide a uniform, hard
> > bearing surface; "dry threads" is defined as the zinc plating they put on
> > their bolts; "lubricated threads" is defined as having Bowman Anti-Seize
> > Compound applied to the threads; and the torque value is calculated at 75%
> > of the "proof load" to provide a safety factor.
> > Proof load is "the load that can be applied to a bolt without
> > causing permanent set greater than .0005". This is the maximum SAFE load
> > that the bolt can support." For this size bolt, the proof load is 24,350
> > lbs. This proof load x the 75% safety margin is 18262 lbs.
> > Tensile strength is "the load required to cause failure in
> > tension (stretch)." For this size bolt, the tensile strength is 30,450
> lbs.
> > Doing the calculation with the formula in the book, sure enough,
> > tightening a dry bolt to 171 ft lbs puts the load very close to the 75% of
> > the proof load (18240 lbs), and tightening a lubricated bolt to 102 ft lbs
> > puts you at the same place, very close to 75% of the proof load (18133
> lbs).
> > Now, suppose that you lubricate the bolts, but tighten them to
> > the torque for dry threads. Doing the calculation for this scenario, you
> > wind up with a load on the bolt of 30400 lbs, which is way past the proof
> > load and the 75% margin of safety, and almost right at the tensile
> strength.
> > Which means that the bolt is way overloaded.
> > I don't have my GMC manual with me, and I've never looked up the
> > torque specification for the wheel studs, but by what I've read here, the
> > torque value is up around 200 ft lbs, and likely for a dry stud. If you're
> > of the "oil them" group, it might be wise to go with a lower torque value,
> > perhaps no more than 120 or 130 ft lbs.
> > For what all that is worth to anyone, that's what I think I
> > think.
> >
> > Robin
> > Corning NY
> > 73 Sequoia
> >
> >
> >
 
Thanks Arch
When we had a blow-out and limped into a tire shop the guys there would not
believe me as to the torque, had to drag the manual out to prove it. they
only wanted to go to 160#
Marlene Meineken
77 Palm Beach
AKA Big Jim

- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: GMC: Oiling Wheel Studs

> In a message dated 9/15/99 9:15:48 PM Central Daylight Time,

>
> >
> > Our GMC manual states 250 ft lbs. torque for our steel wheels.
> > Marlene Meineken
> > 77 Palm Beach
> >
> Marlene
>
> Love it when the ladies read the books.
>
> Take Care
> Arch
>
 
Rick

As the proud owner of a classic GMC Motorhome, you have money left over to buy
beer?

Wayne

>
> > OMG I dont know the right beer to put in my new reefer.
> >
> Arch,
> May I suggest Coors Extra Gold? Aside from being the best beer I've found
> yet, both my GMC and I crave "extra gold". IMHO this should be the official
> beer of GMCers.
> My .02. ;-)
>
> Rick Staples
> '75 Eleganza
> Louisville, CO
 
I'll fess up too. I use never seize. I just had to change a tire on the
turnpike, and I'm sure glad I did. I'll also agree with the removal
skreeeeech.

I'm still steel wheels... but changing, perhaps then I'll go clean and dry.
Have to wonder about the materials difference with the aluminum nuts and the
steel studs. What is the Alco recommended torque spec for this combination?
The same as the original nuts? I'd think that much torque would be kind of a
strain on aluminum nuts, or am I missing something here?

Mark

| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-gmcmotorhome
| [mailto:owner-gmcmotorhome]On Behalf Of Bartz, Paul
| Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 1:24 PM
| To: 'gmcmotorhome'
| Subject: RE: GMC: Oiling Wheel Studs
|
|
| Sorry to disagree with all the anti-advocates, however I've been using a
| light oiling on all my studs for over 40 years. Never
| experienced any loose
| and have never had any studs stretched on any of my vehicles. So from my
| perspective, to me it's a myth
|
| In fact, the only ones I've ever tightened with a torque wrench are on the
| coach since I installed and due to concern over galling the Alcoa wheels
| where the washer-nut meets the wheel.
|
| I can see where it may be a different story in southern climates,
| but not in
| the North where salt is used liberally on the roads during the Winter.
| You'll soon wish you used something on the studs. In fact I remember a
| fellow at work a few years ago who had a problem with removal of his lug
| nuts due to rust. He couldn't break them loose due to rust
| setting in until
| heating with a torch, in spite of being over 260# and using a breaker bar,
| which he bent.
|
| Again, in this climate, any time I haven't used lubricant on the
| studs, the
| next time I try to loosen the lug nuts, they break loose with a screeching
| ping that reverberates through the wrench into your hands, almost akin to
| getting electrically shocked. More than gets your attention.
|
| Boy, now watch the admonitions!!!!!!!
|
| Paul Bartz
|
 
Mark,

The Alcoa nuts are steel not aluminum. 140ftlbs is the spec.

Patrick

>
> Have to wonder about the materials difference with the
> aluminum nuts and the steel studs. What is the Alco
> recommended torque spec for this combination? The same
> as the original nuts? I'd think that much torque
> would be kind of a strain on aluminum nuts, or am I
> missing something here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Get your shine on at www.cruzingear.co
Applied GMC

Share this page

Share this page
Top Bottom
Back