Jump to content

3/8 wheel studs, nuts?


Recommended Posts

On 02/02/2021 at 10:09, Pete Lewis said:

some wired the ignition to be earthed by the oil LP switch    car starts   psi builds  car cuts out 

dont do what my dad did in the war   remove rotor arm  put in pocket, car wont start so push it all the way home,

puts hand in pocket for house key and there's the rotor    well it worked this was a wartime requirement to immobilse cars parked 

 i guess it happened a lot 

 

 

A HELL of a Lot. If you believe the (Really) old Guys.🤣 Father told (virtually) the same story, with ref; to the old Bedford (Petrol) 3 Tonner, they used as transport. He was a "layer" on the Big Ack-Ack guns. As his penance for being "reserved". 6 blokes pushing a 3 tonner, until the driver "found" the `arm in his gas mask bag!.

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/01/2021 at 18:18, Roger K said:

Just tried one - looks fine and should work.  My tap set is pretty good quality so hopefully the nut will take the torque OK.  

I've had another rethink on this.  Having machined down a stud to fit nicely in the hub, I've drilled and tapped a wheel nut to 7/16 UNF.  I'm not sure it's really going to be strong enough - I've measured the thread outside diameter and the overall diameter of the wheel nut, and the wheel nut wall thickness is around 2.5mm.  They don't seem to be made of the highest quality steel, either, being very soft to machine.  I really want to keep the chrome wheel centres, so I'm leaning towards the originals again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm going to be able to use the correct GT6 chrome centres, I have to use the original-style wheelnuts with the shoulder and plastic washer.  I doubt I could get those in 12mm.  12mm is slightly wider than 7/16" anyway.

1 minute ago, NonMember said:

What torque are you intended to windy-gun them up to? You only need 45lbft.

I never use those for wheelnuts.  It's not so much the tightening torque, it's the forces on the nut in service.  Probably over-thinking it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I figure it, the standard wheel nuts are 3/8" thread with 11/16" AF. A normal 3/8" UNF nut would be 9/16" AF. A normal nut of 11/16" AF would be a 7/16" thread. So a nut of that size is probably good enough for the loads one would expect on a 7/16" fixing, and the 11/16" diameter is enough for the loads Triumph expected the wheels to encounter. So it should be OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I would always worry about teh quality of new studs (as Roger has discovered) and the history of old ones.

http://www.grayston.biz/wheelnutmenu.htm has a selection of sleeve nuts, though the ends are usually flat. Maybe pop a 60 degree taper on them. ANd open the covers up a little? I would feel happier with that. Or find some decent quality new studs. Genuine NOS would be nice. But no idea on a source. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NonMember said:

The way I figure it, the standard wheel nuts are 3/8" thread with 11/16" AF. A normal 3/8" UNF nut would be 9/16" AF. A normal nut of 11/16" AF would be a 7/16" thread. So a nut of that size is probably good enough for the loads one would expect on a 7/16" fixing, and the 11/16" diameter is enough for the loads Triumph expected the wheels to encounter. So it should be OK.

That makes complete sense - but these are shouldered bolts and the spanner size does not really relate to the diameter of the nut where it contacts the wheel, i.e. where all the work is being done.  The original bolts are 16.5mm in the narrower working diameter, whereas the TR6 bolts, designed to work with the bigger 7/16 studs, are 20.5mm.  This is quite a big difference.

The original, 16.5mm bolts, are fixing over the 7/16 stud (11mm approx.). This means the wall thickness is only 2.25mm in the highly-stressed area.  If I could use the TR6 nut, designed for the 7/16 stud, it would have a wall thickness of 4.75mm, which is what Triumph designed to work with the larger stud.  I'm not sure halving that thickness is a good idea.  And I can't use the bigger nuts if I want to retain the chrome trims on steel wheels, as it is the conical nut that locates the wheel on the hub.  Re-machining the cone on the nuts to fit the smaller wheels would result in a knife-edge to the end of the thread, which I'm also not comfortable with (quite apart from trying to machine an accurate 60˚ taper!).

Sorry, making a bit of a meal of this!  Why can't these people make decent reproduction parts?

On a side issue, there's a great article in the Courier that's just arrived about cross-matching parts from other manufacturers.  One suggestion that I strongly advise you not to follow is that Mini wiper wheelboxes are the same as ours, so those can be fitted.  Please, only use NOS, if you can find them - the wiper wheelboxes currently sold by all the Mini specialists are complete rubbish.  Only buy these if you feel confident that 8 almost-invisible splines are enough to retain a wiper blade.  I had new boxes on my Cooper S for a rally in Europe a couple of years back, and they failed completely after 10 minutes of light rain.  Rain-X, a drill and self-taps (thereby trashing my wiper arms) were the only way to complete the next week.  I asked for replacements, which were exactly the same.  The suppliers response to my complaint was 'sorry, but they are a very good price....'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like you've talked yourself full circle to reverting to the original 3/8 studs Triumph designed the car to have in the first instance and that have been adequate for the past 50 years! The main trigger for people changing tends to be the fitting of alloy wheels, which in many cases results in the original studs being too short for the new nuts; couple that with wider tyres and longer 7/16 or 12mm studs make sense. If you're set on original steels and centre-retaining nuts...

Gully  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gully said:

Sounds like you've talked yourself full circle to reverting to the original 3/8 studs Triumph designed the car to have in the first instance and that have been adequate for the past 50 years! The main trigger for people changing tends to be the fitting of alloy wheels, which in many cases results in the original studs being too short for the new nuts; couple that with wider tyres and longer 7/16 or 12mm studs make sense. If you're set on original steels and centre-retaining nuts...

Gully  

I know - got myself tied right up in knots on this one!

It wouldn't even have crossed my mind if the new Bastuck stud hadn't snapped on me before reaching specified torque.  I've decided to test a couple more new studs to way over torque to see what happens (but not use them subsequently!).  I have a long-standing and well-founded distrust of modern reproduction parts.  Unfortunately the original studs on my hubs, though not broken, are so badly bent I struggle to get the wheels on over them, and the nuts sit at some strange angles.

The new rear stud that broke was mounted in a new Bastuck rear hub supplied by the biggest supplier.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/02/2021 at 09:52, Roger K said:

On a side issue, there's a great article in the Courier that's just arrived about cross-matching parts from other manufacturers.  One suggestion that I strongly advise you not to follow is that Mini wiper wheelboxes are the same as ours, so those can be fitted.  Please, only use NOS, if you can find them 

I'll agree with that: buy NOS if you can, or a good modern version; like any part for our cars, don't buy the cheap foreign-made versions, they're poorly made even though they are an approximate match for the originals. I think the part number is 37H6100, 22-tooth, which is what I bought in 2018 for my early 1200; a straight fit and used on many British cars between 1968 and 1970. If you look at the photos below you'll see a marked difference in the splines, some of which seem to have used a badly worn unit as a template. I wouldn't expect the first one to grip a wiper, the centre is NOS Lucas with fine splines, and the one on the right is an improved modern version currently available, but at a fairly high price.

931734612_ScreenShot2021-02-08at13_32_06.png.d9496b0741079591fbefdd6465ff9da7.png 1452618298_ScreenShot2021-02-08at13_33_29.png.66f94847af53c281455e1896a156e9b2.png  640744950_ScreenShot2021-02-08at13_31_53.png.57844976ff30f4a940d27af4341e9419.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colin, interested to know what your more expensive repro is - when I contacted Minispares to complain about the one top left, which is what they sent me and failed spectacularly quickly, they told me there were no others available anywhere and this one was all they could get.  The guy did tell me they couldn't be beaten on price - my reply was unprintable.  I'll happily pay double for something that works and doesn't leave me in the middle of Europe unable to drive if it rains.

Are you sure the lower one with the big splines is the Lucas original?  All the genuine Lucas ones I've had have continuous fine splines all around the shaft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Pete Lewis said:

you could cut the spline off and fit one of these adaptors to the old shaft

available  https://www.vintagecarparts.co.uk/products/ca395-wiper-convertor-shaft-to-spline

wiper convertor (shaft to spline)

Plus one for those Pete, they work really well but do look better if you can find a hex grub screw instead of the bolt.

Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Roger K said:

Colin, interested to know what your more expensive repro is - when I contacted Minispares to complain about the one top left, which is what they sent me and failed spectacularly quickly, they told me there were no others available anywhere and this one was all they could get.  The guy did tell me they couldn't be beaten on price - my reply was unprintable.  I'll happily pay double for something that works and doesn't leave me in the middle of Europe unable to drive if it rains.

Are you sure the lower one with the big splines is the Lucas original?  All the genuine Lucas ones I've had have continuous fine splines all around the shaft.

Centre photo is genuine NOS Lucas, it's currently available as NOS from Holden as a 22-teeth 77m length wheelbox (but no photo); version to the right is a modern version with upgraded splines from Somerford Mini, costing £51.66, but also available from AutoElectricalSpares. You can almost tell from looking at the splines on some of the cheaper versions that they won't grip.

https://www.holden.co.uk/p/wheel-box-1

https://www.somerfordmini.co.uk/wheelbox-wipers-pre-1970-22-teeth

https://www.autoelectricalspares.co.uk/wiper-wheel-box-replaces-72851-37h6100-3723-p.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.... be careful, Holden sell a lot of items marked as 'Lucas' but they are not.  No Lucas wheelbox of the sixties had splines like that.  It may work, but it may not...  the other problem, of course, is the wiper arm that fits onto it.  A lot of those are now made of cheese as well.

Golden rule?  Never throw out original parts for new!  Even if they look trashed it's worth keeping them in a box somewhere just for reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what we need is a cord drive wheel box witha modern splineans nut arm fixing then you can use a hook type arm and the aero type squegee blades

upgrade from 5m to 7 mm arms gives better screen pressure but any modern blade has such 

large one size fits nothing adaptor box its like having a sparrow dashing across the screen 

and then the blade flies off as they are hopeless 

just a way to improve 40mph wipers ability 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roger K said:

No Lucas wheelbox of the sixties had splines like that.


Are you reading the post correctly? Jumps up and down in exasperation! :)

THE CENTRE PHOTO IS LUCAS. None of the rest are. The photo to the right is a modern version of the wheelbox, as it says - NOT a version of Lucas. Sorry if it was confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Colin Lindsay said:

THE CENTRE PHOTO IS LUCAS. None of the rest are. The photo to the right is a modern version of the wheelbox, as it says - NOT Lucas.

The trouble is, on my screen it's rendered on two lines, so the one you think is on the right is actually below, and the one you think is centre is actually to the right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...