Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

go to nissan to get new studs, theyre not much few bucks.

the stud is not in your rotor, it is in your hub. just hit it with a hammer with the rotor and caliper off and it will fall out the back. dont be scared if you need to hit it hard.

get a new stud, feed it through from behind and then get a washer and a nut and tigheten the nut to pull it all the way through.

for this you either need hold the hub still, like with someone holding the other studs with a big screw driver and tighetening the nut, or put everything back on and get someone to hold the brakes or use a rattle gun

Edited by salad

Since one has snapped i'd consider replacing all of them if it were me. Some dumbass has probably overtightened them and they're all suspect. I couldnt believe how much over-tightened stuff i found on my car.... At the very least hold the new stud up against the other old ones to see if the threads "intermesh" perfectly. If they dont it will mean that the stud is stretched and about to fail.

FWIW its very important torque you wheel nuts correctly, you can get rotor warpage if you dont. IIRC its 100-110Nm. Also remember to use the "pentagram" order when you tighten them up.

HTH,

Kot

Thanks for the replies guys, I thought for a second I was going to have to replace the whole thing :D

This may be an stupid question but hey, how do you apply an specific amount of torque to a nut? I mean is there an special torque measurement device thingy :D

Thanks again guys

Thanks for the replies guys, I thought for a second I was going to have to replace the whole thing :rofl:

This may be an stupid question but hey, how do you apply an specific amount of torque to a nut? I mean is there an special torque measurement device thingy :(

Yep the thingy is a torque wrench. I got a half inch drive Kinchrome (which is a good brand) for $70 at Bunnings, no doubt you could get one cheaper if you shopped around - just get a good brand. Your car will love you for treating her nice.... Next thing you need is one of those .pdf's of the workshop manuals so you can lookup the torque setting of whatever you're doing up.

Rgs,

Kot

soon people will need torque screwdrivers, seriously its not hard to know when its tight enough lols

this is a lil bit wrong, with a good example being the exhaust studs on the manifold.

If u do it with a torque wrench u will fin it takes bugger all to get to the required specs. If u do it by hand u will over-tighten the nuts guaranteed. Which is why all RBs end up with snapped studs on the exhaust manifold....

Which is why all RBs end up with snapped studs on the exhaust manifold....

RB25s and RB30s not RB26s, they break because they have a long manifold that warps not because they are overtighten.

Don't forget using a swivel ( uni) is not going to be the same tention as the nut you didn't use it on .

I guarantee all home mechanics who re fit exhaust studs overtighten the nuts.

I don't dispute that but i know thats not the reason they break. They don't brake on RB26s, only RB25 and RB30s , the manifold is so long ....

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
    • With all the rust on those R32s, how can it even support all the extra weight requirements. Probably end up handling as well as a 1990s Ford Falcon Taxi.
    • Yes...but look at the numbers. There is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of Joules available, compared to what is used/needed. Just because things are "possible" doesn't make them meaningful.
×
×
  • Create New...