That resistance sound about right for me but it is hard to put into words what you experiencing with the turning effort.
What did I Do Wrong? My Bets the Fish Scale (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter MH_Stevens
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Thread starter
- #22
I'll be sure to check the hub temps as you say. When you mention warm and not too hot, do you mean under the plastic hub caps where the cone washers are?
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
While I agree that setting by hand is the way to go, hub temp is a poor way to check if it's too tight. The hub is connected to the rotor, so any braking at all will generate tremendous heat, transmitted directly to the hub to which the rotor is bolted.
I think overall, Landtank's method is best, and the most repeatable for consistant results. Torque the inner nut to 10 ft/lbs, tighten the lock nut, and then test by hand (or scale if you must) for the correct preload.
I think overall, Landtank's method is best, and the most repeatable for consistant results. Torque the inner nut to 10 ft/lbs, tighten the lock nut, and then test by hand (or scale if you must) for the correct preload.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,205
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
MH_Stevens said:
Correct, on the hub near where the races are on the inside, touch the hub close to the wheel.
- Thread starter
- #25
"Torque the inner nut to 10 ft/lbs" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My FSN say 43/48 ft lbs? Please confirm before I test drive.
My FSN say 43/48 ft lbs? Please confirm before I test drive.
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
MH_Stevens said:
I wasn't clear. Sorry. You must first torque the inner nut to 48 foot pounds to set the bearings. Then spin to distribute the grease, then back off. Do that several times. The final time, set the inner nut to 10 foot pounds and I'll bet your preload will be very close to specs. My 80 got new bearings last year, I set it up using Landtanks method, and after 2 trips to Moab, a trip to Death Valley and a trip to Anza Borrego, pounding hundreds of miles of washboard, they are still set correctly.
- Thread starter
- #27
Thanks Cruiserdrew:
In the AM I will go in and back it off a bit because I know my final setting on the tension nut was a lot more than 10ft lbs.
Now I'm looking at it again, as I don't need test pre-load or spread grease, it seems I might be able to do this without removing the wheels. This so?
In the AM I will go in and back it off a bit because I know my final setting on the tension nut was a lot more than 10ft lbs.
Now I'm looking at it again, as I don't need test pre-load or spread grease, it seems I might be able to do this without removing the wheels. This so?
The weight off the wheel and tire may influence your reading. I would for sure remove them. If they are to tight and you take a ride down the freeway. The hubs near the cone washers will get very hot. Much hotter than normal breaking heat. The heat will soak into the hubs.
- Thread starter
- #29
I'm not taking any readings - Fish Scale 's sold.
I'm just using the torque wrench to back the inner nut off a few ilbs.
I'm just using the torque wrench to back the inner nut off a few ilbs.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,205
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
The procedure I use is all about feel and doing it hundreds of times. Assemble everything, put the inner nut on tighten it with a ratchet way too tight, spin the tire a few times, back off the nut, retighten by hand on just the socket, spin the wheel and give it just a hair more with the ratchet. Put the tab washer and outer nut on, snug the outer nut up with a 1/2" impact, bend the tabs and test drive.
The fish scale thing is probably in the FSM because it's impossible to define "a hair more" and "snug up", so it gives an idea of the "feel". Lots of times I have seen the fish scale method result in loose bearings.
A lot of people freak the first time they see an impact used on adjuster nuts, if you know your impact it works very well. The impact action on the outer nut has way less tendency to move the tab washer and inner nut adjustment. The whole process takes longer to talk about than to do.
The fish scale thing is probably in the FSM because it's impossible to define "a hair more" and "snug up", so it gives an idea of the "feel". Lots of times I have seen the fish scale method result in loose bearings.
A lot of people freak the first time they see an impact used on adjuster nuts, if you know your impact it works very well. The impact action on the outer nut has way less tendency to move the tab washer and inner nut adjustment. The whole process takes longer to talk about than to do.
Well, I've only set front bearing pre-load a grand total of 5 times now, so I am a rookie compared to many. But I don't understand all the fuss, and I don't understand blaming a scale (assuming it is accurate of course) for loosening bearings.
Whether you do it strickly by feel, strictly by the scale, or a combination of feel verified by the scale - it should not matter.
If you are having problems with the pre-load changing (as in Michael's original post) , I'd look somewhere else, other than the method used to verify the original pre-load (again - the assumption here is that his pre-load was correct to start with and only went south over time). Such as my first time, when I stupidly forgot to bend the star tab washer on the PS...and the bearing loosened after a few thousand miles
Whether you do it strickly by feel, strictly by the scale, or a combination of feel verified by the scale - it should not matter.
If you are having problems with the pre-load changing (as in Michael's original post) , I'd look somewhere else, other than the method used to verify the original pre-load (again - the assumption here is that his pre-load was correct to start with and only went south over time). Such as my first time, when I stupidly forgot to bend the star tab washer on the PS...and the bearing loosened after a few thousand miles
Tarbe, on my old FJ60 I had a chronic problem with the front bearings loosening up. I then went to the 10 lb thing and everything was fine. I think if they are slightly on the loose side driving exacerbates the problem.
landtank said:
So, you are saying they were loose to start with? Perhaps your issue is not with the method of determining the pre-load, but the specification?
tarbe said:
The only effort I'm willing to put into bearing preload is to explain my situation and how I dealt with it. I've used the 10lb thing for a long time on multiple trucks with no bearing issues at all. If that spring scale works for you, great, it never did for me.
tarbe said:
Agreed: I too do not understand the fuss but I too am not an expert. The way I sorta see this it that as long as your scale is accurate (sounds like many or most scales here are not accurate), your races are properly pounded down to the full seat, your bearings are good and greased, and you follow the proper procedure (there are alot of recommendations here on this thread and on other threads that are not at all what the FSM recommends) you should have no problem.
In my case my problem was pretty silly; I was getting 12.8 to 13.2 lbs with replacement OEM bearings. That looking back on it was silly, almost stupid, to try to worry about. But the lesson learned from my stupidity is that time after time I exactly repeated the exact recommendation from the FSM and time after time I got the same exact preload. I never did this "tighten up real tight", "just use ten pounds", "just use an impact" stuff; I simply exactly repeated the exact recommendations. I will check the preload a little later like at 5K or so and i imagine it will show up around 10 pounds or so when those tight new bearings relax a little.
tarbe said:
Disagree: I think it matters a lot. I would argue that only the experts like Robbie are actually able to "feel" anything. I think people should strictly follow the FSM. Realize that 10lbs on that first nut after it is torqued and loosened is 6lbs over the 48 in-lbs recommended (that's 250% over what the FSM recommends
). Realize that using an impact wrench on that first nut could put the torque on by as much or more over (if your impact wrench is like mine - up to 450lbs with steps starting at 80, 160, etc you could also be 200% or more over ) I realize you promptly loosen this nut but still with two or three times over the first torque you might squeeze out too much grease or mar the bearings or mar the races! Why do that? I would recommend people follow the FSM explicitly unless they are truly expert at this process. tarbe said:If you are having problems with the pre-load changing (as in Michael's original post) , I'd look somewhere else, other than the method used to verify the original pre-load (again - the assumption here is that his pre-load was correct to start with and only went south over time).
Agreed: Something else's screwed up: either the scale was wrong to start with (folks, pullleeeaaassseee dont expect that old corroded stinky fish scale you used on all your assorted fishing trips to work well) or the races were not seated fully, or the bearings were not worked full of grease, or you were already at the lowest end of the scale with new bearings and as those bearings relaxed a little they took the preload lower than the lowest end of the scale, or something.
I think what most of the people who are advocating tightening them up way way way past the point the FSM recommends are really saying is that their bearings are not too loose anymore. I agree, but what I'm saying is that their bearings might actually now be too tight forever. Me, I'd rather have them "just right" instead of loose or tight. Anyway, JMHO!
Having been there and done it. You can " feel " when it's right. I wouldn't hesitate to do a front end without a scale of any kind. The 10 pound torque method is a good rule of thumb. I also like the comment on the impact. It will lock the nut tight and quick. Something that's really hard to do by hand.
Last edited:
Turbo
You have separated my statements in a way that allows for a misunderstanding.
The statement that you say you disagree with is only referring to the losening of bearings, not the pre-load that one ends up with. Do you see the error?
How you determine whether the pre-load is between 9 and 12 lbs, by scale or by feel, should not matter in the problem we are discussing...the soon drastic loosening of the bearings within a few thousand miles.
It matters in terms of the actual pre-load (at least for those of us without calibrated wrists), but not the changing pre-load.
So, I think we really agree on all points
You have separated my statements in a way that allows for a misunderstanding.
The statement that you say you disagree with is only referring to the losening of bearings, not the pre-load that one ends up with. Do you see the error?
How you determine whether the pre-load is between 9 and 12 lbs, by scale or by feel, should not matter in the problem we are discussing...the soon drastic loosening of the bearings within a few thousand miles.
It matters in terms of the actual pre-load (at least for those of us without calibrated wrists), but not the changing pre-load.
So, I think we really agree on all points
tarbe said:Turbo
So, I think we really agree on all points
Ohh, okay, I see what yer sayin. You point stands that it should not loosen up, I think my point stands that people are rewording and rewriting the FSM procedure and really relying on things (like their wrists, impact guns) that are not at all accurate. Anyway, good points all around!
- Thread starter
- #39
It's all redone the LandTank 10lb way. Test drive tommorow. I'll let you know if it get hot.
MH_Stevens said:
I really respect LT, but again, 10lbs is way too tight IMHO.
120 in-lbs vs. the 48 in-lbs called for!!!
Why are we so against following the friggin FSM on this???
