• Registered users are encouraged to enable MFA/2FA to add an aditional layer of security to their account. More information can be found here: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/collection/top-tips-for-staying-secure-online/activate-2-step-verification-on-your-email

blueguy's CW Facelift DC5 -Return to Track Pg 33

TypeRiter said:
If they're hub-centric; are these the bolt on spacers 'that bolt to your existing hub' then the wheels mount to the spacer? If so, that's not meant to be the safest way to space (apparently) - especially as you'll be tracking yours. Other thing is, if they're longer replacement studs - which is simply a case of replacing the existing studs for longer ones; this is the safest way apparently
Click to expand...

No, above you said that hubcentric adapters/spacers 'aren't the safest way' and said that longer studs are.

I'd dispute that until the cows came home.

The type that bolt to the hub, then the wheel bolting to the spacer are the safest.

Longer studs would then require a 'bolt-thru' type spacer. Far from safe IMHO
 
I can't edit - that reads incorrectly... and is not what I meant (I wouldn't argue that they're not safe because hub-centric is) my issue is not with hub-centric or not (Hub-centric is the ONLY way to go IMO) My issue concerns bolts ons vs. longer studs.... bolting wheels to a spacer, to bolt to a car - doesn't inspire with me confidence; longer studs, to employ a hub-centric 'thru' spacer does.. My feeling is based on, ultimaltely knowing that the wheels are attached to the bolts that go through the hub, not the spacer which is bolted to the hub.. When I had spacing issues... I read the bolt on types produced the most horror stories... TBH Engineering wise, I don't know which is the safest (bolt-on or 'thru' spacer.. I've employed both set-ups in the past though - and to clarify I would NEVER argue that hub-centric is not safe....
 
OK, so as an engineer, in my opinion, the hubcentric bolt ons are safer.

Longer studs create greater shear loads and with longer studs, there is more chance of failure.

When the hubcentric bolt ons are used correctly, all torqued to spec, they are extremely safe.
The only exception to that, In my opinion, is the purely aluminium type.

Ie, purely steel, or aluminium with steel threaded inserts are the safest option here.
 
Stoo. said:
OK, so as an engineer, in my opinion, the hubcentric bolt ons are safer.

Longer studs create greater shear loads and with longer studs, there is more chance of failure.

When the hubcentric bolt ons are used correctly, all torqued to spec, they are extremely safe.
The only exception to that, In my opinion, is the purely aluminium type.

Ie, purely steel, or aluminium with steel threaded inserts are the safest option here.
Click to expand...

I was just doing a paint illustration of this when the shopping turned up. Nm didn't make for a good figure to prove a point Nmm (don't even know if it is used!) will have to do. Also just put a figure in for stock stud length, it will be more than 40mm but the example still stands.

Image5.jpg


The bottom stud is going to snap first as the load is further away from the fixing point, assuming same material and spec etc.
 
I'll go with it, you're qualified in this field afterall, but im not convinced TBH and wouldn't run either - that pic Justin posted on the previous page looks worrying, torqued up or not... If they're the safest kind, they'll only be the better of two evils. Wider/lower offsets over spacers always. :)
 
The one Justin posted is a tad extreme, but it'd still be safer than running studs to the same length..
 
Image7.jpg


I couldn't be fecked thinking about whether the load on the hub stud was less than 50 N or not. Still shows that each stud is within OEM tollerances etc.

Spacer in red. Example is dependant on where studs align for the load, but if the hub turns 36 degress then the example is reversed as hub stud load is spread over two studs etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TypeRiter said:
Wider/lower offsets over spacers always. :)
Click to expand...
Agree with this Sun, but I'm happy with the dimensions of my rear wheels and want to swap my fronts and rears occasionally. I want a staggered set up, but don't want staggered wheels (unless I have a separate set of track wheels) :)
 
Wider wheels > spacers - is the best from any stand point. If you go with spacers, the bolt-ons are better... for every bolt-on thumb up you get, you'll find another thumb up somewhere else for the longer studs.

And if you end up changing a stud on a DC5 - you'll need to remove the hub to seperate the bearing as there is not 'slot' to 'spin round' and knock out the existing OEM studs.

I think that's the important parts summed up, oh and signifcantly - whcih is also the reason for why I decided to question spacers; Justin won't be selling me his Volks LOL.
 
Jermal said:
I prefer the yellow space saver tbh.
Click to expand...
The primary reason for getting this was for convenience. If I ever get a front flat, the space saver or the OEM wheel wouldn't be able to fit over the caliper. This would mean swapping over one of the rear wheels and thus two wheel changes. Do not want, as you never know where and under what circumstances you could be changing a tyre. I have tyre weld but I've seen it being used and was not impressed.

Edit - this was a second hand bargain if it wasn't obvious from the picture. It made perfect sense to me when I saw it :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This has always been the case with the EP3 space saver. That doesn't fit over the front caliper and needs to go on the rear. I speak from experience.

DSC02091.jpg


No disputing though, blooming nice wheel you've got for a spare! :lol:
 
The DC5 Space saver is the same with the OEM Brembo caliper.

Plus, It's only recommended to go on the rear anyway as it may damage the LSD if on the front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top