What did you do to your FX / QX70 today?

what should i plasti dip?

---------- Post added at 12:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 PM ----------

JD ill plasti when u plasti!
 
Chedman13 said:
Ah you did this because the WRX studs are much stronger than OEM? For safety reasons?
Click to expand...

Yes, for safety. They are ARP studs (made for the WRX), and they are pretty universally accepted to be "as good as it gets" as far as wheel studs go. In all honesty I don't know if they are any stronger than the extended studs that come with the spacers, but it puts me at ease to have the best studs possible when using spacers.
 
^^ I was thinking the same thing such as the Ichiba V2 hubcentric spacers like this
yhst7468432653927620183sw0.jpg
.
[h=3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0BJhvEOyl4[/h]
 
Chedman13 said:
Why not bolt on spacers? I think those are safer.
Click to expand...

They're not. With the bolt on version the aluminum spacer is inserted into the load path and thus assumes the full load (dead and live) imparted on the vehicle by the wheel, as opposed to the DRS version where the aluminum spacer is acting only as a spacer and the load path remains wheel->studs->hub. If the materials were uniform throughout the assembly then the bolt on kind would *probably* be better (too close to call without calcs), but they're not, and the aluminum spacer is by far the weakest link. Realistically neither is probably going to fail under normal conditions, but in a stress test the DRS spacers are better, assuming a properly assembly and a stud that is up to the task. Hence the ARP upgrade...

One thing the bolt-on version has over the bolt-through kind is a lower sensitivity to faulty assembly, due to the reduced length of the studs that are NOT pressed into the spacer (less potential for torsional flexibility at the spacer).


Sent from my BlackBerry 9800
 
Good info here. What are your thoughts on DRS type adding an extra frictional plane (is that even right or the right word)? The stress on the studs that far away from the hub scares me and hence my choice for DRM type.

I also heard you shouldn't change the studs more than a few times as it wears out something in the back of the rotor/hub?

I agree both are safe if done right, but just curious.
tchuck said:
They're not. With the bolt on version the aluminum spacer is inserted into the load path and thus assumes the full load (dead and live) imparted on the vehicle by the wheel, as opposed to the DRS version where the aluminum spacer is acting only as a spacer and the load path remains wheel->studs->hub. If the materials were uniform throughout the assembly then the bolt on kind would *probably* be better (too close to call without calcs), but they're not, and the aluminum spacer is by far the weakest link. Realistically neither is probably going to fail under normal conditions, but in a stress test the DRS spacers are better, assuming a properly assembly and a stud that is up to the task. Hence the ARP upgrade...

One thing the bolt-on version has over the bolt-through kind is a lower sensitivity to faulty assembly, due to the reduced length of the studs that are NOT pressed into the spacer (less potential for torsional flexibility at the spacer).


Sent from my BlackBerry 9800
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top