Okay...Got a pair of Avalanch 60 high steer arms...Nice.

What are you guy's using to attach your arms? Grade 8 bolt or stud? Also are you running cone washers with your arms?

I'm gonna' go for it and run full hydro off these arms behind the axle...Should I bolt or stud.

--D

studs ... parts mike sells the whole bag of parts for 39.99

http://www.partsmikeparts.com/knuckles.htm

- jack

Bitchin...Just got off the phone with Mike...Good guy, and the studs are on their way...Makes more sense to use studs for sure...Wonder why Avalanche (who's usually so concerned with over building) was way-okay with bolts? O'well...That's why we're on this rockin' site eh?

--D

I used new Grade 8 bolts and cone washers on my 60 hy steer.

dont use bolts. studs are way stronger.

I used bolts on mine...cone washer will be difficult to use as you need to get the correct taper height due to the cover being on top versus underneath...

Originally posted by coyote
I used bolts on mine...cone washer will be difficult to use as you need to get the correct taper height due to the cover being on top versus underneath...

Yup...The Avalanche arms don't have any taper at the base...No cones'. I did a test fit and the holes in arms are damn near an interferance fit anyway...Don't think cone washers would be of any use.

--D

Factory a D60 uses studs with a tapered nut, lug nut.

dont use bolts. studs are way stronger.

Huh? Why say this? Assuming same material, size, threadform....there's no difference. They're both just clamping devices, and studs are usu. only used when an assembly is bolted to some sort of casting, but requires "frequent" (relative term) dissasembly...such that if you used a bolt or cap screw the dissasembly - reassembly cycle would cause unnecessary risk to the internal threads in the casting that would be difficult and expensive to repair. But that's it...other than that...no difference, certainly no strength advantage.

Seems to me I heard somewhere that the heads of bolts aren?t' as strong as fine tread nuts when bending moments are applied in a given situation. Of course if the steering (tie rod/drag link) is set-up right this would be a minor point, however I think in the real world, there is a lot of bending moment placed on hy-steer arms especially on hydro set-ups...Hence studs over bolts....Either that or I'm all fawked up this Saturday eve...

--D

I used bolts at first untill they loosened up just enough to give a tiny bit of playthen POW!!! they broke. Now I hogged out and tapped the holes for 9/16 studs and tapered the holes in the arms for cones and have never had a problem. Go with studs and cones...they just dont loosen up.
Oh yeah, I run full hydro as well.

RockRover,

I do know that a general design principal is that when designing a threaded assembly, it is preferable for the bolt/screw/stud to break rather than have either the external or internal thread strip, so that when desiging the joint, the length of engagement of mating threads should be sufficient to carry the full load necessary to break the bolt without the threads stripping.

But this is chiefly governed by selection of components, and is not the same as saying that the stud is stronger than the bolt.

TJFlex - what you're talking about is the difference between proper zero-clearance fit (in this example achieved with a cone washer) and not, and definately the former is better. However, the stud is not the reason, the conical washer is....you could use a bolt in place of the stud...the stud itself is just a clamp and is not inherently superior to a bolt.

Originally posted by BillaVista
RockRover,

I do know that a general design principal is that when designing a threaded assembly, it is preferable for the bolt/screw/stud to break rather than have either the external or internal thread strip, so that when desiging the joint, the length of engagement of mating threads should be sufficient to carry the full load necessary to break the bolt without the threads stripping.

But this is chiefly governed by selection of components, and is not the same as saying that the stud is stronger than the bolt.

TJFlex - what you're talking about is the difference between proper zero-clearance fit (in this example achieved with a cone washer) and not, and definately the former is better. However, the stud is not the reason, the conical washer is....you could use a bolt in place of the stud...the stud itself is just a clamp and is not inherently superior to a bolt.

I fully agree. I feel that in this application it doesnt matter one bit. Sure a stud/nut has more clamping force than a bolt but a side load is a side load. If the nut is loose on the stud it will break just the same as if the bolts are loose. Except that if the bolts are loose it will probably kill the threads in the knuckle.

I am fully satisfied with the bolts, although I do check them (along with ALL of the other bolts on my Jeep) from time to time.

assuming you use a conical washer:

will you have a binding effect as the washer clamps onto the bolt as you torque the bolt ??

verses the stud being stationary (not twisting) and you have the nut on top pushing down onto the top of conical washer..??

sorry its in my head difficult to xpln.

Tony,

I know exactly what you're saying. And yes, the cone will cinch down fine with a bolt.

Reason Chebby used the studs, like I said, was to "protect" the threads tapped into the cast knuckle. You wouldn't want to bugger them up, as you ruin the whole knuckle. So best to locktite a stud in the knuckle, then just use a nut on the stud.

Perfect example of why a stud, actually.

But again, NO strength advantage to a stud, per se.