racer7x

iTrader: (1)

Picked up an 85' TA and after poking around here for a month or so, looks like a lot of people run spacers. I can understand why with all the selection of rims out there.
My question is how durable or strong are they for anything more severe than just street cruising.
I plan on running at the local oval track and I just don't see them being the best choice.
Looking for your experiences good or bad. Thanks.

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

The factory used 3/8" slip on ones, but those are "thin" & there is still plenty of threads to engage.....

Too thick & you lose lug nut thread engagament, so you hafta go to the bolt on spacers (or install longer studs?) 40 lug nuts instead of 20 plus the extra weight of the adapters. Even with longer studs, I'm not a fan of adding the extra weight nor the leverage imposed by the wheel hub sitting further out.

I'm not a fan of them, somepeople are. IMHO, I say buy wheels that fit CORRECTLY & do not require anything extra added on.

Dangerous topic, in that debates about them can get a bit heated. Tread lightly!

racing geek

iTrader: (5)

Let me put it this way, they are strong enough to meet the needs of pretty much every customer. It gets hot once you start talking specifics.

iansane

iTrader: (1)

Weight is hardly an issue. The extra lugnuts would be the only weight addition. The spacer+wheel would weigh no more than a wheel with the proper offset.

Not THAT arguement again.

Bottom line, I've had good experiences with spacers. I have spacers on both the front and rear of my bird. 2" in the front, 1" in the rear. My car is a DD and seen maybe 50k HARD miles with these. I beat the crap out of the car. Not to mention the shock loading from it's 35mph 4x4 adventure. I'm confident in them. Others have many reasons to not be confident in them

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

there is no issue with the spacers themselves, you just need to make sure you torque them down properly initially and over again after driving a few times. I have only ever seen them fail from loose lug nuts.

Guest

There will be more load on the outer studs on a wide (say 2") spacer than the studs on the rotor experience, but I'd say its a non issue. The reason is that there are cars that run these offset hub wheels with 5 similarly sized lugs and similar loading and they're fine. For example the newer Camaros and Corvettes. So as long as they're torqued down properly, should have no issues.

iansane

iTrader: (1)

Why? With our lugcentric wheels/hubs if the lugnuts are properly torqued wouldn't the load be on the flange and not the studs?

Guest

At the hub face on our cars with a zero offset rim and tire combination, the load path from the average force placed on the tire in a static situation is in line with the face of the hub so the load is purely a vertical load. Once you create an offset from this like with an offset rim and a spacer, you have the load and a moment at any location offset from the hub face like the face of the spacer itself. This moment is only counteracted by the outer studs on the spacer. On a wheel without a spacer, this force is internal in the wheel itself if the wheel face is offset from center. Keep in mind this is also only applicable when the average load force on the tire is equally distributed like when the car is just sitting there in your driveway. Once the car is moving, going around a corner, and placing the average force at a location other than right in the center the studs are going to be counteracting the offset load without a spacer anyway. The only way the studs would see no load or be otherwise useless is if the wheel was press fit to the hub, creating a basically solid part or if you consider it two the compression force between the two press fit parts takes over the job the studs were doing.

iansane

iTrader: (1)

The whole point of the spacer is to put the tire back into place of being centered around the hub. The traction surface doesn't move anywhere with a proper spacer/wheel combo vs. proper offset wheel. The load stays vertical.

Why wouldn't the only load the studs see be the torque applied from the nuts themselves? When you tighten down the lugs they make that press fit spacer/wheel flange to hub flange.

Guest

If you have a wheel setup in which the tire patch does not move, then the load at the hub face of the rotor is the same, ignoring the weight of the components themselves. However, that does not mean the load within the wheel is the same load. Imagine if you will a wheel that the load is transferred directly from the center of the rim, through the center portion of the wheel that is centered on the rim, and directly to the hub. There is no stress other than compression. Now, move the center portion of the wheel to the outer face of the rim. The force placed on the center of the rim not only places a compression force on the center portion, but also tries to rotate the rim about the center portion. The rim is essentially a cantilever to the center of the wheel. This is in any one piece wheel an internal stress. If you were to cut the wheel between the center portion and the hub you would find this combination of forces and that is the difference in an offset wheel with spacer, and a wheel with no spacer but same offset as the wheel and spacer combo.

Secondly, the load is not always vertical. Once the car is in motion and you place a side load from cornering you have created a non vertical load that must be acted against. Also, the vertical load is not always centered. This should be easy enough to see if you note that race teams take tire temperature readings across a tire. I have also seen cars with camber settings so far out that portions of the tread did not touch the ground. While this is a case we shouldnt see, it does happen when the vehicle is being used. Uneven roads, bumps to move the suspension out of place, etc.

A little bit of info/reading on a moment:
http://web.mit.edu/4.441/1_lectures/..._lecture5.html

Keep the bolded portion in mind.


As I said, once the car is in motion things change. Then put the car into a corner, and you have non-vertical loads. The wheel studs are what react against this loading. Wheel studs really are not any different from any other torqued bolt, like a connecting rod bolt, head bolt, etc. Sure the parts are held together by the fastener and ideally never move, but sometimes they do, and also the load being transferred through that area is not only transferred by the parts but the bolt as well. Also note that from a cornering load, one half of the rim and hub will be in compression, and one half in tension, with zero in the middle of the two. The tension load since this is not a press fit is ONLY carried by the studs. I will post up a generalized (its a lot more complicated and this is not absolutely accurate) picture of this for you.

Generalized:
1.0g of cornering force
typical rim and tire package (I used 26" tire in the example, 4.75" bolt circle)
The 10lb force at the tire from cornering creates a moment (force) at the hub (see bolded portion of moment definition above as to why) of 10lbx13" or 130lb.in. This is counteracted by a force couple at the 4.75 bolt circle, so 130lb.in/2.375in is ~54.7lb and divide that by 2 since its a force couple or ~27.4lb at the bolt circle. One side will be compression, and one in tension. The tension side can only be reacted against by the bolt/s. With the spacer, the studs that are almost always offset from the vertical load experience this same moment (force) just from the vertical load because they are not on the same line the force is on.

iansane

iTrader: (1)

That's a hell of a writeup. Thank you. I'm reading the link you provided. I think I'm just stuck on the notion of how can there be excess movement and cause a moment if things are bolted down. But obviously the forces are still there and acting. Is there an easy way to calculate a scenario of X cornering force (say a typical thirdgen .85g or something?) and figure out a realisitic difference in load on the hub/spacer flange vs on the spacer/wheel flange?

racer7x

iTrader: (1)

Just to simplify in my mind, If I would imagine a 6" spacer but the tire still centered on the rwheel hub, the load still has to come through the spacer which now has 6"s more moment arm or leverage pulling on the lug studs and nuts.

I guess my question is- how many of you have had a problem with a say 1-1/2 or 2" spacer and under what driving conditions.
I also assume a high quality spacer would center on the hub and not only on the lug nuts?

Guest

I dont know of anyone who has had a failure. As long as the studs are tightened properly it should not be an issue. Why? Take for example any 1993-up Camaro/Firebird with the wider wheels. The wheels are ~2.1" offset. They still use the same bolt circle size, same stud size, and same number of studs as our cars. That alone should instill enough confidence that even having 5 studs at that location is fine if the factory is doing it and not having issues, calculations completely aside. I think where people get really hung up on spacers is that most if not all forms of racing do not allow them. The reason is pretty basic, there are 5 studs and lug nuts you cannot see and therefore cannot check for proper torque or even see if the lug nuts are on there, broken, whatever. So they just say no spacers allowed.

As far as the loading, no really easy way to calculate it... at least I would not call it easy if you wanted it to be really accurate. You'd want to factor in the weight of the car, the load from the CG (something you'd assume the location of), calculate the loads on each of the tires, and then you could just use the ratio of forces above if you have the same size tire. And you'd have to factor in if the road is flat or not as well, besides trying to determine the coefficient of friction for the tires and surface in question. However, even if you figure all of the weight on one tire and consider that the friction (μN) is some factor less than that (for overkill assume its not less) you would have a maximum of ~3500lb at that one tire. Thats about 9,600lb at the wheel studs. A typical wheel stud, just one, can more than easily handle that degree of load in either the horizontal or vertical direction.

RED_DRAGON_85

OMFG BATMAN!!!!
if you have a 56mm offset wheel (4th gen or corvette for example) and you install a 2.2" spacer, you have the EXACT SAME THING as a zero offset wheel.
none of these force diagrams are correct at ALL

instead of thinking about the spacer bolting to the hub, think about it bolting to the wheel and modifying the wheel itself because when its all bolted up, its essentially the same thing.

stephen, we have been over this before, and you are spreading mis-information like no tomorrow.

OP
as long as the spacer is made of high quality aluminum and is of the same or higher quality as the wheel, you will have ZERO PROBLEMS with strength.
you will have extra lug nuts, but as long as you torque them down properly, you will be fine.
as for using them on an oval, if it were me, id get a set of lightweight wheels in the proper offset so i could save my street tires from excess wear, and use track only tires on the track... thats me.

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

We'll never agree....Let's just leave it at that, OK? I spread no information here. I merely presented the FACTS.

But you wanna start it up again? We can...

Do you want to stand on the edge of a box? Or in the middle?
Does my little weight distribution pic make ANY sense to you? If not, your blind!

Guest

not again.

Stephen, lemme explain the problem with your drawing. See the red line and the green line on the "positive offset" side? If the system is in equilibrium, that is nothing is moving, then the sum of all forces MUST be zero. Your diagram shows a system that the sum cannot be zero. That is where you are wrong.

I sure hope you are not talking to me.

RED_DRAGON_85

mostly not, but if you put the correct offset back into the wheel with a spacer, then you have no moment as you have drawn

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Your "explanation" makes no sense.

My lines show WHERE the body weight will be applied to a wheel, transferred through the hub (and spacer in one pic) then down to the ground.

Facts are facts. An object sitting on the ground has equal weight distribution acros it's surface. A positive offest wheel WILL have the weight loaded one one side of the wheel.

My pics have ZERO to do with movement. Purely static.

Again I ask...Do you stand on the edge of a box? Or in the center? I notice you avoided that question.

Guest

No moment from the vertical load at the hub, but there is certainly one at the end of the spacer 2" from the line of action of the average force from the tire.

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Here's another question.....

Where is a diving board stronger? At the end or closre to the point that is directly in vertical contact with the ground? (like the center of a wheel)

Guest

I avoid irrelevant questions. Like this one (EDITED IN)
As far as your diagram and whatever you want to call the force and where its from and where its going, your diagram physically incorrect and impossible to analyze as static because as you drew it, it cannot be static. Dont trust me, go read. Look up equilibrium of forces or Newtons First law. Stop reading my post, do it now. This is not my rule, I'm only trying to explain it to you.

And as far as distribution and wheel loading and all that nonsense, did you ever think why there is air in a tire? Ever notice that a ZO6 or ZR1 has a very large offset wheel, but will wear the tires evenly?

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Look....In my FIRST POST here, I said MY OPINION & others have THEIR OPINION. YOU felt the need to turn it into another arguement. I will NEVER agree will your babbling, continued ignorinig of my questions (hate to have them show ME right?) so just STOP.

I'm f***** g done with you max....No more.....Babble all you want. Claim all the s**t you want. I DO NOT CARE!!!!!!!!!!

Your explanations never make sense & I show a pics proving my point. Pics that cannot be argued.

To the OP....I'm sorry max chose to go off on a tangent. I tried to keep it civilized & say that opinions are different. I'm sorry max came in here & screwed up your post.

Guest

Keep your shirt on, going to put you on a ride real soon.

Guest

The hub will load differently even if the offset is identical overall. Its how the spokes of the wheel attach from the rim to the hub = the stress on the hub.

Overall though, there is so much safety built into wheel specs that you need not worry. I run about as extreme a case as you will find on my 1/2ton Chey truck that is so modified performance and load capacity wise that it bares 4x the load any 3rd gen f-body ever will. It is all done on C6 Z06 wheels and 2.25" hubcentric aluminum spacers carrying 3000lbs payload on a 4800lb truck. That aprox 8000lbs on wheel adapters. I DO NOT CORNER HARD THOUGH at capacity. I worry about lateral forces upon the wheels and spacers when loaded to capacity, but when empty? You ain't gonna catch me (smiles)

Guest

I have to say that I see the point you are argueing and I can see what you are getting at and I agree. You just labeled your drawing wrong and was note drawn precisely enough to back your arguement.

Guest

No, he's wrong.

Guest

You know, I'm going to go ahead and explain this. Maybe you'll get it, maybe you wont. I'm not positive, but I think someone else is lost as well and this should help.

First of all, you can take your board on a fence, your box, and your diving board and forget about them. They have nothing to do with your misunderstanding of the force on the suspension. They are not a car, a tire, a wheel, a spacer, a suspension, or anything else of relevance to the discussion. They are also not bait for me to explain to you I know more than you about statics, dynamics, engineering, physics, calculus, or anything else of that realm. Forget about them. You're going off into something I tried to explain but you were too busy being angry to get it.

CAVEATS:
I'm going to stick with a STATIC situation for now.
I'm going to ignore component masses.

The only force between a car and the ground originates from the tires. Here's an image I stole from Dean's post

Thats your contact patch. The average force being transmitted can be assumed to be in the center of the patch, or the center of the tire where it rests on the ground. It is not anywhere else. It is not 2" over from center because you have some offset wheels. Take a look at the photo again, notice what you CANNOT see in the photo. There is no wheel, no spacer, no hub, no suspension, no car. So the sum of all the forces from the contact patch, or the average force on the tire, is in the center of the patch. Give me a day or two I am going to add a photo from my garage, it shows a contact patch from one of the tires on my 86 Trans Am quite clearly just to confirm the photo above.

So, how is the weight of the car transmitted to the contact patch? Via the suspension. There are various locations that resist the body from falling to the ground and I may miss a few but you have a few components attached to the spindle so lets start there.
1. Tie rod ends: Not a factor. There is a joint that does not resist vertical motion.
2. Ball joint: Large factor. Transmits forces to A-arm.
3. Strut: Large factor. Transmits forces to strut mount.
What else ya got? Nada.
So if you break down the forces on the A-arm, you have the sway bar end link, the spring, and of course the bushings.

These items are the only items that transfer load from the body to the tire contact patch. Forget everything in between. IRRELEVANT. Why? Simple. The only part of the car that resists movement of the tire is the suspension, and those components are the spring, the strut, and the sway bar. These are the components that transfer the weight of the body to the tire contact patch. So you can have whatever offset wheel you want, with whatever spacer you want, and change absolutely nothing IF THE TIRE CONTACT PATCH DOES NOT MOVE RELATIVE TO THE SUSPENSION. Got that? The reason is the force from the contact patch that is the counteracting force of the weight of the car... its the NORMAL force... does not care what is in between the contact patch and the spindle. It only knows the magnitude and the direction of the forces created by the suspension, and these do NOT change if the suspension pieces are the same distance from the contact patch. You have no more W or weight from the car, the weight is being transmitted on the same lines of action from the strut, spring, bushings, a-arm, sway bar, and ball joint to the spindle, and IF the tire did not move, NOTHING CHANGED. No leverage, no rotating wheels, no nothing.

Now, what tangent STEPHEN is going off into and absolutely misguiding him right off into oblivion is stress. He's confusing stress with load. I think our other poster might be forgetting about stress and what happens if you essentially cut a part and piece it together. So lets see if we can explain the problem:

You have two wheels, one with a 56mm offset, one with 0 offset. You attach a 56mm spacer to the 56mm offset wheel. I omitted the wheel lips for simplicity. Its going to look something like this:

No forces, no movement, both items at equilibrium. Sum of forces=0
Now lets place the force from the brake rotor/hub, and the normal force from the ground. Both forces=10lb, no movement, both items at equilibrium. Sum of forces (Fy -10lb at hub, Fy 10lb at ground) is zero:


We are in agreement, right? You have an offset wheel with a spacer, on a car, install it, the car is STILL NOT MOVING. Right? Static. Contact patch is the same, because... millions of cars with offset wheels are not wearing tires unevenly, RIGHT?

Notice that in the diagram, the only thing that matters is the LINE OF ACTION of the forces. Those forces do not care where the wheel center is, that there is a spacer or not, what the suspension is doing... it does not matter.
Now lets take off the spacer, pretend we own a 4thgen or something.

This diagram has a problem, it is not in equilibrium. Assume, for a moment, there is no ground where the wheel was previously resting. Put it in outer space. Its rotating, about an axis halfway between the two forces. Basically, this means that the diagram pictured is not stable, it is not static. The sum of the forces is NOT zero. What we have here is the creation of a moment. You have a force, acting at some distance offset from the object. I explained moment above, and with a link if you want to learn it. The moment acting at the hub face of the offset wheel is 10lb*2in or 20 lb*in. This is an added stress at the hub/mounting face that the offset wheel will see that a non offset wheel will not see.

Now, I think we can all agree that having seen plenty of 4thgens in parking lots that they are in fact in equilibrium. I think their owners can testify to the fact the tires wear fine. I think your 16mm offset rear wheel tires wear fine. I think all these 18 wheel rigs driving across the country do not have front tire wear problems and look at where these wheel faces and hubs are located!!!

Guest

So... whats the deal? The deal is the counteracting force to the normal force from the ground at the tire contact patch is NOT AT THE FACE OF THE HUB. Its in that void to the left on my diagram, right here:


So what is the difference in the offset wheel? STRESS. There is more load, that added moment, at the mounting face of the offset wheel. I tried to explain this weeks ago with one simple word, so here it is again:
I N T E R N A L
That is, the added stress, the added force, the silly would you rather stand ON a wall or on the END of a board on a wall argument is simply the INTERNAL STRESS of the system. If you have a wheel with an offset wheel face but no overall offset, like this:


The stress at the green line is INTERNAL to the wheel itself. Say you bought that wheel from ROH, one would hope that ROH designed the wheel with enough material in the right places to handle these internal stresses. Or say you were to analyze the stress in the face, by cutting at the yellow line...



Do you think its just a 10lb vertical force acting in that wheel face? No, it isn't. You can test this for yourself using the misused 'box' theory from above. Get a cardboard box, press on it in the middle, and watch the side bow out. Why does it do that? Remember what I said about LINE OF ACTION? That edge of the box, or the wheel face, is NOT on the LINE OF ACTION. It is offset from the force, and it sees a moment. A BENDING MOMENT. That is why it bends, and why it bends in the direction it does. Remember the old RIGHT HAND RULE from physics? Know about torque? A force applied offset from the object tends to rotate that object. In the case above, the Fy=10lb at the bottom of the wheel tries to rotate that outer rim in what direction about the face of the wheel? Clockwise. Since the two are attached, what direction does that outer face below the yellow line want to rotate? Clockwise. What happens to that cardboard box you pressed on the middle of? Bowed out? INTERNAL STRESS.

Now, take that same imaginary ROH wheel with the green line, and cut it at the green line making it a.. oh... lets call it 3" offset wheel. Attach a 3" spacer to the wheel.



Even though it does not matter, for purposes of removing stupid thoughts, weld it into place. What changed? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! You have the same force at the hub on your car, you have the same force at the tire, you have the same force in the wheel face, the rim. You might want to have concern about the strength of your weld and that it can handle the INTERNAL STRESSES at that point, but that is it.

Is that clear enough? Does everyone in class understand?

To summarize the facts:
1. If your tire contact patch does not change, does not move, then the load the suspension sees does not change.
2. If you change from a zero offset wheel to a 2" offset wheel with 2" spacer and the rest of the wheel is identical, the load on the suspension is the same.
3. If you change from a zero offset wheel to a 2" offset wheel with a 2" spacer, the stress that was INTERNAL on the zero offset wheel at 2" from the hub is the same stress at the end of the spacer on the 2" offset wheel 2" spacer combo. It is not equal to the normal force at the tire, because it is not on the LINE OF ACTION.
4. YES, the end of a spacer or a flush wheel face or both are parts that are MORE STRESSED than a wheel with no offset and a wheel face centered. HOWEVER, that does NOT CHANGE THE COUNTERACTING FORCE OF THE SUSPENSION. PLEASE... refer to Newton's laws. EQUAL AND OPPOSITE. EQUILIBRIUM. STATIC. SUM OF FORCES ZERO. SAME LINE OF ACTION. K?

Now I am going to answer the stupid questions of the day:

1. Would you rather stand on a wall or on the end of a board attached to a wall?
A. If the board is attached to the wall, and it can handle the load from my weight and of being a cantilever, then I do not care. If its not attached, YOU go stand on the end. Obviously, for the cheap seats, standing on the end of the board is more stressful to the board than standing on the wall. DUH. However, I want to point out to you that even though I may be standing on the end of the board, and if its all STRESSED OUT from it but only bends... that I weigh the same, and that the Earth thinks I weigh the same. Go test my scale theory if you do not believe it, put a weight at the end of a stiff board cantilevered off a scale and put it directly on the scale. Same weight. To tie it in, same weight=same suspension load. Got it? Board STRESSED? Do not care. It can stress all it wants, I weigh the same, Earth sees same weight.
2. Would you rather stand on the edge of a box or the middle of a box?
Wow sounding an awful lot like a repeat stupid question. Presuming this box is something strong enough to even carry my weight, like say plywood, I don't care. Again, same explanation. Again, you are going off on a tangent referring to INTERNAL STRESSES of the box and trying to explain to me that the stress in the top of the box is less if I stand on the edge (more like zero) and a whole lot if I stand in the middle. DUH. That does not change my weight, nor does that change the weight the Earth sees.
3. Where is a diving board stronger?

OH MY ---
Is that all you got, the same stupid questions? Ok, I can play that game. I've got a completely valid but stupid answer for you. If its my parents board, the BOARD ITSELF is strongest at the very end where there is absolutely nothing below it but air. If you want to know where the whole group of objects that compromise the diving board is best to stand on as if the board itself is a piece of scratch paper there are actually TWO places its strongest. I can post a picture of the proof of this. So much for your question having the answer you wanted.

Guest

That'll be my last attempt to explain this to those who don't get it. You either read that, understood it, and get it.. or you don't. If you don't... please... do not ever take a physics class and expect to pass it. This type of physics is a freshman course. You will fail miserably. These are basic rules, basic laws. I did not create them. Sir Issac Newton explained them so long ago his laws are written in Latin. They are the cornerstone of physics. If you cannot understand them and how they are applied, forget physics and move on to something else.

I am going to leave the [BS credential waving] off but I have a laundry list of backup for knowing simple physics like this.

Guest

I thought this discussion was about rim strength and not suspension load. I fully agree suspension load does not change. the stress as you put it of the wheel mount face changes and it all boils down yo wheel load rating in wheel design. I will again state I see where Stephen is trying to go but he is wrong about what he is blaming based on his labeling, Your #4 pretty much sums it all up.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Very informative, Max. Thanks for the clarification.

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Like I said in my FIRST post....Can of worms & bottom line? We can all agree to disagree. Sorry that Madmax chose to go off on the subject.

I explained WHY I don't like spacers in the very beginning, Madmax explains (i guess) why he likes them. I just feel better about centering my loads rather than having them hang off to one side.

In the end, it is up to EACH INDIVIDUAL PERSON to do what they want to THEIR CAR. I'll run wheels that are made to fit, do not require 20 extra wheel studs, 20 extra lug nuts & wheel spacers. Y'all do what you want.

Guest

Agree to disagree, thats funny. The only disagreement it seems is coming from you, because apparently you have zero understanding of physics. If you did, you'd know and admit you were wrong and that your previous statements about leverage on a suspension are wrong. And *I* did not start this up again, go up, read, see who started it up... You and Red did in replies 14 and 15. I did not address your lack of knowledge again until post 16 after you posted up your EPIC FAIL free body diagram yet again. Next time it goes up, I will just post a link to this post and apparently everyone but you will get it.

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

My response in #14 was to being called out by Reds post, #13! My initial post (#2) said the OP was opening a can of worms, and I sure was right!


Just drop it will you? You have your opinion & I have mine. I will continue to stand by the PROFESSIONAL SANCTIONING BODIES that do not allow spacers. Unlike a public forum poster...YOU.

YOU build YOURS your way & I'LL build MINE my way, OK?

Guest

You say spacers, but then you talk about adapters. They are two different things. Adapters are safer than spacers if the spacers are not hub centric. You do mention the word adapter correctly once but jump around mixing the two terms by saying "bolt on spacers with 40 lugs instead of 20 lugs".

Here's the skinny-
wheel spacers are not the safest thing to use when they are not hub centric (If anyone does not know the term Hubcentric the look it up). It is the difference in wheel asembly safety so as to have the load rest on the hub and not the studs. Typical wheel spacers take the wheel or hubcentric off the hub and put additional lateral pressure on the studs- very bad. The factory did this? YES- they know better now, we have better gripping tires now, we have advanced technology now....should I go on? The factory was wrong. The factory also put two different offset wheels on one car and screwed up the IA (Included angle) engineering with a new wrong scrub radius just to clear the brake caliper assembly with the sportier aluminum wheels. Again, the factory was wrong- don't trust the factory as being almighty good.

The problem with the picture stephen has drawn is it is basically a stick drawing (like a stick figure) and does not show engineered support of the actually positive offset wheel of today. See my attached photos for acurrate drawings) This shows wheel strength and how even a positive offset wheel can have "centered load". It is all in new technology wheel design. It boils down to wheel load rating. Hub face has nothing to do with safety as long as the wheel can handle the stress. Its NOT the adapter that takes the load, it is the wheel (as long as the load is still centered on the same scrub radius to the chassis- in other words the same overall offset. It does not matter.

As for 20 lugs compared to 40 lugs? Stephen, what does you wheel and lugnuts weight? I run C6 Z06 wheels 19x10's/ 295/45-19 tires with 2.25 aluminum adapters and ARP studs, with 40 titanium studs that are still aprox 4 lbs lighter than the original steel 15x8 wheels and 275/60-15 tires it had.

All of that, might I add, is on a truck that weighs 4800lbs and carriers heaver payloads in the bed of 3000lbs constantly on a weekly basis- they are Sklute adapters he made custom to my specs and hub centric.

Here's the most important note:
Even though the hub face is essentially pushed outward, IT IS NOT when bearing load is a concern. Bearing load is still determined by the scrub radius of the tire footprint- which of course remains the same whether the wheel is zero offset or the wheel is 56mmoffset with a 56mm adapter. IT BOILS DOWN TO WHEEL STRENGTH AND LOAD RATING OF THE WHEEL.

A hubcentric adpter is just as stong as the wheel when bolted together properly and torqued.

The reason why new wheels have gone to positve offsets? You get less polar weight of suspension motion and unsprung weight. You can keep the IA (included angle) more vetical to retain a zero scrub radius and opick up more caster to get steering rotation through chassis lift rather than SAI lift (Steering angle inclination)...Ever wonder why different cars have different alignment specs? Its all in suspension design especially pertaining to track width, SAI, IA scrub radius, and wheelbase. They are all engineering tools in initial design. Wheel offset is used in that design- thus why wheel offset must always remain unaltered in a car (unless you know how to tinker with it to 'fudge things" like I address in "the ultimate 3rd gen suspension."

Dean

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Problem always seems to be if a person says "adapters", others assume a different lug pattern.

If a person says "spacer", others assume a slip-on fit.

So I USUALLY call (like Skulte's stuff) "adapter/spacers". It covers both views.

Bottom line (AGAIN)....Y'all run yours your way, I'll run mine my way. Simple as that. And we'll both feel safe with what we have for ourselves, OK?

iansane

iTrader: (1)

At the risk of turning myself into fodder...

http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums...ad.php?t=41682

http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums...ad.php?t=23853

http://www.skulte.com/info_pages.php/pages_id/3

Guest

Stephen, The reason why sactioning bodies do not allow wheel spacers or adapters is quite simple-
Most people(racers included) do not understand the geometry of wheel offset and bearing load. Sactioning bodies do this for the SIMPLE reason that it keeps everyone from running more track width on a 8" wheel and loading the hub bearing wrong-Thus dangerously burning up bearings and causing a catastrophic failure.

People under rules like 8" wide rims will generally think by spacing out a car from 70" track width to 74" track width with 2" adapter/spacers on each side will make the car more stable and handle better. Generally yes it will---BUT it will burn up wheel bearings.

99.9% of people have no clue as to vehicle dynamics- That 99.9% INCLUDES race car drivers. If you think racers know what they are doing? then you need to come to the track with me and let me point out car after car that has the same problems- Monkey see monkey do- they mostly have no clue. Money problems is 2nd to this.

Now to anyone that will come intohere and say," I've been driving my car around for years with greater track with and scrub radius and I have never had wheel bearing issues!" My answer to you is you have never had grippy race coumpound tires on and you have never run even one full lap on a major race course at speed to see that 1) your brakes will go to h*ll, and 2) your wheel bearings will go to h*ll in two minutes on a road race course like Willow Spirngs, Sears Point, Laguna Seca, Etc.
lap 2, more parts start breaking and falling off, or burning up. You little street cars will niot make it 5 laps...YES I Say FIVE LAPS! Yet you can drive from here to newyork at surface speeds fine.

Guest

Its not opinion, its fact based upon the laws of physics. You have an opinion, based on your lack of knowledge and your opinion is wrong.

Guest

There are a few more reasons in racing why wheel adapters are frowned upon.

*wheels are constantly removed and replaced with tire changes. Aluminum is not the best to be constantly torquing on

*not all adapters and or spacers are hub centric

*You have an unvisual 4 or 5 lug nuts that track officials can not see are all on there on each wheel based on lug count underneath the outer 4 or 5.

*You have high heat that also comes in cycles with cooldowns, things need to be retorqued and the inner ones can come loose if everything is not pulled down after the first run to recheck them.




This is a perfect example how rumors start. People read or hear spacers are not good for racing so I will not use them on my car because they can break. NO, it is not only breakage, it is geometry problems that cause other parts to fail.

People start rumors when the THINK they know what they are reading- There is often alot more to the picture than people think they know. It is why I try and help on this board. I arrogantly do know about a whole lot more than most people do. I can see when people think they understand something and know when they actually do or not by what they write.

Smart people learn from this and take no offense. The dumb ones will continually fight you trying to save face that they are never wrong. heck I learn things daily. I just learned this week that the brain floats in cerebraspinal fluid. Call me dumb? No, just was not educated in the body. Dumb would be to argue with the doctor. most of you may have already known that, I did not. I just assumed it floated in blood.

GAWD IS WATCHING YOU....

.....LOL I had to write that.

kowalzekc

I HATE THE ARGUMENTS ON THIS TOPIC.

I hate to say it but if you want to know if they are going to hold up, put them on (correctly) and try them. Any sign of trouble, take them off. I have a set on the front and I have no issues, not even loosening issues. I know people run them and do autocrossing which does a very fair share of beating things up with know issues at all.

RED_DRAGON_85

you know, max, its funny, i drew nearly the exact same diagram you drew in #28 and #29 last time stephen tried to argue this point...
i deleted it yesterday but it should still be hosted on TGO somewhere if you care
ill try and find a link

racing geek

iTrader: (5)

Can we just get a mod to lock this thread and any more that have arguements about spacers/adapter whatever the heck you want to call them. It is always the same people argueing, and there is rarely any new information that comes up. People just keep rehashing the same material hoping to sway the other to their way of thinking. This is out of hand and needs to stop! Just agree to disagree and move on with your lives. Next time this topic comes up please just tell them to keep checking the torque of all 10 lug nuts per wheel if they absolutly insist on using them and that they should just do a search if they want more technical information. This must stop!

Mike

DeanJ

I read this thread and it makes my head hurt. Let me try to explain this my way LOL. If the tire contact patch doesn't move, in or out, the car could care less what kind of wheel/spacer combo it has. As long as the TIRE stays in the same place, the loading does NOT change period... Stephen don't say any more please, you are wrong on this one... later, another Dean.

DeanJ

Oh and if your worried about the spacers failing, just buy a quality billet spacer. They will be much stronger than any cast wheel. 6 yrs, 80,000 miles on mine, no problems. Mods please lock this thread, Dean.

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Bottom line....Adding spacers & increasing leverage reduces strength to ANYTHING, regardless.

DeanJ

If you do not move the tire from its original placement leverage is not increased. I was trying to get everyone to understand this. It's not a good idea to move the tire out on a street car anyway. Dean

Stig427

DO NOT USE WHEEL SPACERS!!!! I have a 92 firebird with late model trans am wheels and 3" spacers on it when i bought it and the car has allways shook at highway speeds so naturally i thought i needed new tires. Come to find out the wheels spacers have it thrown all outta whack and cant be fixed but with new wheels