- 1. RE: Lug Torque (score: 1)
- Author: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 20:22:09 -0700
- Slow day at UCSD? You've got that right. School doesn't start until next week. Looks like after reading my post maybe you dozed off for a couple of days Allan. Can't say I blame you though. I think
- /html/tigers/1999-09/msg00013.html (6,907 bytes)
- 2. Lug Torque (score: 1)
- Author: Lon Walters <lon@sedona.net>
- Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 12:23:32 -0700
- Saw the question and confirmation, agree that 45-50 lbs for a wheel lug seems mighty low to hold a wheel on...have been doing mine at 80 lbs. Is that way too tight? Is there a down side too this, mak
- /html/tigers/1999-08/msg00479.html (6,579 bytes)
- 3. Re: Lug Torque (score: 1)
- Author: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
- Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 13:48:11 -0700
- The question you pose; "Is there a down side too this, making the lug snap easier than it already does while motivating?" is an interesting one that I found myself mulling over a few years back in r
- /html/tigers/1999-08/msg00480.html (10,473 bytes)
- 4. Re: Lug Torque (score: 1)
- Author: CoolVT@aol.com
- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 19:22:53 EDT
- I saw some specs from an aftermarket wheel manufacturer. They listed the torque value based on the diameter of the stud. The Tiger's , according to them, should be at 40-50. Mark L.
- /html/tigers/1999-08/msg00496.html (6,472 bytes)
- 5. RE: Lug Torque (score: 1)
- Author: "Allan Connell" <alcon@earthlink.net>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 00:46:53 -0700
- So, ah, Bob.....I guess what you are saying is that we should probably stick to 40-50 lbs. Of torque on our little 7/16 studs, right???? Slow day at the University or what?? Just funn'in ya Regards A
- /html/tigers/1999-08/msg00506.html (11,005 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu