Dont buy cheap wheel spacers...or else!
Discussion
Kent Border Kenny said:
Mave said:
Which of my post is made up? Do you design and stress analyse bolted joints for a living?
Is that actually your job?What happened?
What happened? I don't know, we don't have enough information.
Edited by Mave on Sunday 1st November 00:09
OP, you still had one stud too many left, this was my rear wheel after a small incident on a German autobahn while my wife was driving our old Toyota 4x4
I'd like to blame chocolate wheel spacers but in reality pretty sure it was my own doing, finger trouble when swapping from winter to summer wheels
Took the rear spacers off, used the spacer mounting nuts as wheel nuts, checked all the other nuts and we were back on our way. As we were a long way from home we stopped a few hours later for a tasty burger lunch and I also removed the front spacers too just in case it was a chocolate spacer problem
Wanted to do one lap for the win but thinking I'd pushed my luck far enough for one day I decided not to
I'd like to blame chocolate wheel spacers but in reality pretty sure it was my own doing, finger trouble when swapping from winter to summer wheels
Took the rear spacers off, used the spacer mounting nuts as wheel nuts, checked all the other nuts and we were back on our way. As we were a long way from home we stopped a few hours later for a tasty burger lunch and I also removed the front spacers too just in case it was a chocolate spacer problem
Wanted to do one lap for the win but thinking I'd pushed my luck far enough for one day I decided not to
Edited by marine boy on Sunday 1st November 00:32
ddom said:
Elatino1 said:
If you think a road car can't be improved on at all in any way as "manufacturers spend millions on R&D" then you are simply incorrect and obviously not at all into modified cars which is fine but luckily not everyone is the same.
Anyone saying 5mm extra track enhances stability on a road car is deluded. Manufacturers often widen the track on their sportier models too.
A1VDY said:
Elatino1 said:
If you think a road car can't be improved on at all in any way as "manufacturers spend millions on R&D" then you are simply incorrect and obviously not at all into modified cars which is fine but luckily not everyone is the same.
Not into modified cars? Modifying a car properly is fine, dodgy wheel spacers isn't..
It is true that manufacturers often widen the track on sportier models so there must be something in that.
However the main reason for my use of spacers over the years is looks. I’ve used many many times without issue. Both bolt on and bolt through.
For example the front wheels on my Jag Xkr were really a long way in and spoiled the look for me. Spacers solved that.
They do need to be hubcentric though and of course fitted with care
However the main reason for my use of spacers over the years is looks. I’ve used many many times without issue. Both bolt on and bolt through.
For example the front wheels on my Jag Xkr were really a long way in and spoiled the look for me. Spacers solved that.
They do need to be hubcentric though and of course fitted with care
I thought wheel spacers died out with Max Power. "but but but OEM do it it too" who will have more interest in using the correct materials? The big corporation will billions to lose through law suits or some faceless knob churning things out for a few pennies profit, with no regard for quality or safety? You'd have to be a moron to use spacers on a road vehicle.
Colonel D said:
I thought wheel spacers died out with Max Power. "but but but OEM do it it too" who will have more interest in using the correct materials? The big corporation will billions to lose through law suits or some faceless knob churning things out for a few pennies profit, with no regard for quality or safety? You'd have to be a moron to use spacers on a road vehicle.
This is probably the most stupid post on this thread. To think that manufacturers only use the best materials and standards for construction of the vehicles is moronic. Proper hubcentric spacers with the correct longer bolts are not a risk at all. Plenty of components are made by aftermarket manufacturers and are vastly superior to oem. Obviously there are also vastly inferior components made by unscrupulous companies but to consider everything that is not oem as unsuitable and not manufactured to good standard is just plain wrong and ignorant.
Elatino1 said:
Who said 5mm? Mine had 20mm each side so 40mm overall. It looks noticeably better amd physics would point to a wider track being more stable.
Manufacturers often widen the track on their sportier models too.
What do you mean by more stable though, and why would more stable be better.Manufacturers often widen the track on their sportier models too.
Don’t you want a sporty car to be less stable in yaw, not more?
Pebbles167 said:
Interesting to know that. Wonder if there were any other manufacturers that have done that? Can't imagine it's common at all.
It is more common than you think, but a vehicle manufacturer would have the spacer made to the same dimensions as the face of the brake disc/drum/hub (if inboard brakes are fitted) so the majority of people would never notice.The issue of longer bolts really isn't a problem if the wheel is located on the correct size spigot on the spacer, and the spacer itself locates on a well-fitting spigot on the hub.
When 'the norm' for wheels changed from steel construction to alloy, wheel bolts and studs had to get longer to take into account the need for more metal to be between the wheel mounting face and the bolt locating point on alloys to compensate for the reduced strength of the material. When you think about it that is no different from increasing the offset of a wheel and then using a spacer and a longer bolt to get back to where you were.
Cheap, universal spacers that do not have spigots and rely on the sideways strength of the bolts to keep things on and pointing the right way are crap, rightfully criticised and should never be used, but unfortunately their existence gives properly engineered spacers a bad name.
Edited by Evercross on Sunday 1st November 08:49
Kent Border Kenny said:
Elatino1 said:
This is probably the most stupid post on this thread.
No, I think your attempt to use physics above probably was.You don't agree that a wider track/stand/base on everything makes a structure, animal, object or car etc more stable?
Think of a pyramid vs a tower, which would be most likely to topple? Yes that is physics for you, a wider base gives more stability.
Maybe stand with your feet together, a child could push you over, stand with your feet apart and you are vastly more stable and it would take proper force to push someone over. That's the basic physics of it assuming geometry is all aligned accordingly.
You don't agree? Lets hear your physics rebuttal then........
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 1st November 08:57
Christ, this thread is a bit of an embarrassment. This is a car enthusiast site right?, where folk have some basic knowledge beyond “what Clarkson said”?
Nothing wrong with high quality hub centric spacers, with longer bolts.
Personally never been comfortable with the other, bolt on, type. And anyone that buys cheap car parts should know what they are getting...
Nothing wrong with high quality hub centric spacers, with longer bolts.
Personally never been comfortable with the other, bolt on, type. And anyone that buys cheap car parts should know what they are getting...
Elatino1 said:
Sorry but which bit don't you agree with?
You don't agree that a wider track/stand/base on everything makes a structure, animal, object or car etc more stable?
Think of a pyramid vs a tower, which would be most likely to topple? Yes that is physics for you, a wider base gives more stability.
Maybe stand with your feet together, a child could push you over, stand with your feet apart and you are vastly more stable and it would take proper force to push someone over. That's the basic physics of it assuming geometry is all aligned accordingly.
You don't agree? Lets hear your physics rebuttal then........
If you were talking about a solid structure, you’d have a point, but you aren’t, and moving the wheels wider isn’t going to reduce the roll at any point up to when the inside one lifts. You aren’t moving the suspension out any further, just the point at which it transfers its force to the road. Move the wheel even a metre further out and you’ll still have exactly the same roll for a given speed and radius of curve.You don't agree that a wider track/stand/base on everything makes a structure, animal, object or car etc more stable?
Think of a pyramid vs a tower, which would be most likely to topple? Yes that is physics for you, a wider base gives more stability.
Maybe stand with your feet together, a child could push you over, stand with your feet apart and you are vastly more stable and it would take proper force to push someone over. That's the basic physics of it assuming geometry is all aligned accordingly.
You don't agree? Lets hear your physics rebuttal then........
Edited by Elatino1 on Sunday 1st November 08:57
I suppose with a simplistic view of physics what you are saying can feel true, but if you study the subject in depth it’s often more complex than covered in your A-level.
You still haven’t explained why you think that you want stability in something that you want to change direction rapidly. The reason the engine is stuck right in the middle of my “sporty” car is to make it unstable, not stable.
What car are you fitting your spacers to, and have you actually measured any improvement in performance? I suspect that it’s more psychological than physical.
Kent Border Kenny said:
Elatino1 said:
This is probably the most stupid post on this thread.
No, I think your attempt to use physics above probably was.The OEM will have done a whole heap of material science analysis to optimise the effect of the spacers and the materials involved resulting in the “best” material and design selection. The design may also by adapted depending on the market being sold to. I know that certain VAG parts have additional processing to improve fatigue life but only to certain markets.
I very much doubt that the aftermarket has done such analysis. They may have copied an existing design but unless they had access to the OEM prints then the design will be compromised. Fillet radii, break edge size, material surface and core hardness, positional accuracy of the holes and (my personal favourite) surface texture all effect to location and loading on the bolts. Get these wrong and even otherwise correctly rated and fastened bolts will fail.
Elatino1 said:
Who said 5mm? Mine had 20mm each side so 40mm overall. It looks noticeably better amd physics would point to a wider track being more stable.
Manufacturers often widen the track on their sportier models too.
Stability is more to do with toe, but keep telling yourself whatever you want to hear. Manufacturers often widen the track on their sportier models too.
Kent Border Kenny said:
If you were talking about a solid structure, you’d have a point, but you aren’t, and moving the wheels wider isn’t going to reduce the roll at any point up to when the inside one lifts. You aren’t moving the suspension out any further, just the point at which it transfers its force to the road. Move the wheel even a metre further out and you’ll still have exactly the same roll for a given speed and radius of curve.
Sorry you're not quite right about that part - there ARE performance improvments to cornering, although they are very very small when applied to a "regular" car - here's a good explanation:+ wider track = small benefits to cornering / stability / lateral grip , only around 1-2%
- quite a lot - bearing / tyre wear increased , geometry changes etc...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWijfooeSyU&li...
and here's the maths behind the (very small) cornering benefits:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8CCFF3kJPc&li...
As with all vehicle parts - if you buy decent parts from a reputable company and install them correctly then you will likely have no problems at all, aside from in this case a potential reduction in the life of "consumable" elements like wheel bearings etc.., although whether these effects would be felt would depend upon how many miles the vehicle does and how it's driven etc... along with the condition of those other parts in the first place.
People would have to balance that potential extra cost with the benefits - in this case it will be mostly a (subjective) visual improvement. If it means replacing a wheel bearing a couple of years earlier or whatever then IMHO that's the choice of the person fitting them.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 1st November 11:29
JimSuperSix said:
Sorry you're not quite right about that part - there ARE performance improvments to cornering, although they are very very small when applied to a "regular" car - here's a good explanation:
+ wider track = small benefits to cornering / stability / lateral grip , only around 1-2%
- quite a lot - bearing / tyre wear increased , geometry changes etc...
It depends how the wider track is achieved, and what the original geometry is, which affects the dynamic weight transfer. Decreasing the transfer onto the outer wheel does not necessarily improve turn-in; it’s far too complex a question to have one simple outcome like that.+ wider track = small benefits to cornering / stability / lateral grip , only around 1-2%
- quite a lot - bearing / tyre wear increased , geometry changes etc...
Edited by JimSuperSix on Sunday 1st November 11:29
Reduce weight transfer and you change all sorts of secondary things as well.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff