Lug nut torque?
03-23-2010, 10:50 AM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: 43°38'N / 79°52'W
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EuroCharged 2012 C63 BS Coupè
03-23-2010, 02:04 PM
#6
Member
Thread Starter
03-24-2010, 04:00 PM
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63
Trending Topics
05-19-2010, 06:30 PM
#8
Super Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Shanghai, Long Island(NY)
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63
sorry for ressurecting this thread.
I tried to search for the socket size for C63 lug nut and socket size for engine oil cap, but I couldn't find any. So does anybody know?
Thanks in advance!
I tried to search for the socket size for C63 lug nut and socket size for engine oil cap, but I couldn't find any. So does anybody know?
Thanks in advance!
05-19-2010, 07:19 PM
#9
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
n/a
The recommended value is there to achieve the correct amount of grip/stiffness/life on the nuts and studs. Over-tightening can cause stud breakage. As an engineer, I am quite sure the m-b value is there for a reason and has taken into account load cycles, part life and of course safety.
Most of the time, however, the recommended torque can seem a little low. This is mainly because if the threads are not clean then the recommended torque is sometimes barely more than the resistance of the (dirty) bolt/nut thread interface.
I strongly recommend removing the nuts, cleaning the threads (on both male and female parts) thoroughly and tighten them to the recommended value. Needless to say, please follow the correct sequence when doing so.
I have actually witnessed three different occasions where wheels have come off a car (twice on-track) because of some enthusiastic nut-tightener.
05-19-2010, 07:28 PM
#10
Administrator
05-19-2010, 07:35 PM
#11
Super Moderator Alumni
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,189
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
2011 GLK 350, 2013 GT-R, & 2013 RAM 1500
05-19-2010, 08:02 PM
#12
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
05-19-2010, 08:39 PM
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: 43°38'N / 79°52'W
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EuroCharged 2012 C63 BS Coupè
Bolts are cleaned with ethanol and wire brush at every change
Last edited by NORTH 44 C63; 05-19-2010 at 08:46 PM.
05-19-2010, 09:14 PM
#14
To each their own, I guess. I take the mfr's recommended torque, undertorque by 2lb/ft, drive 50 miles and retorque to the recommended value. In 250k miles of doing this over the past 10 years I've never had a lug nut or bolt loosen. One thing I also do is apply a superthin layer of anti-sieze to the tapered face of the nut or bolt - it helps to save the finish on the mating surface of the wheel IMO.
05-20-2010, 08:55 AM
#15
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
n/a
Yes there is. The higher recommendation came from my AMG Shop foreman and backed by a contact in the Performance Studio in Affalterbach. This was in reference to the 19" 16 Spoke wheels I had ordered from Germany pre delivery...as well as the stock 18" 5 spokes.
Bolts are cleaned with ethanol and wire brush at every change
Bolts are cleaned with ethanol and wire brush at every change
Anyway, thank you for sharing
05-20-2010, 09:43 AM
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: 43°38'N / 79°52'W
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EuroCharged 2012 C63 BS Coupè
That is really quite strange. I would have thought that the recommended torque (the published figures) would be the safest for the particular thread size and (mostly) road application. I would be very interested to know why they'd recommend owners to torque to under what they think works best. Humm...
Anyway, thank you for sharing
Anyway, thank you for sharing
05-20-2010, 10:28 PM
#17
I assume you mean threads only because that is not the place I am talking about and the threads are the only thing that matters, so no lube on the threads is correct. That said, IMHO 130 lb/ft is just plain crazy, it runs counter to EVERYTHING I've ever heard or read about torquing lug nuts/bolts.
Last edited by bhamg; 05-20-2010 at 10:33 PM.
05-20-2010, 10:45 PM
#18
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2021 Taycan Turbo, 2018 Radical SR3, 2021 Lincoln Aviator
I tracked the car at 96lbs and the bolts did slightly loosen up, however 130 seems a lot! I'll try 100 next time and go from there.
05-20-2010, 10:48 PM
#19
Super Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Shanghai, Long Island(NY)
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63
05-21-2010, 12:29 AM
#20
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
n/a
I look forward to hearing from you guys!
Thank you NORTH 44 C63
05-25-2010, 02:56 PM
#21
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2021 Taycan Turbo, 2018 Radical SR3, 2021 Lincoln Aviator
Ok good too know. They weren't that loose but did require tightening about twice a day, which isn't that much for track use. However it was extremely cold so I can imagine it will be much worst under hot weather.
09-26-2010, 08:05 AM
#23
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'14 911S (garage queen) '13 X3 (family hauler)
96 ft lb = 130 nm
I think that was what was going on here.
Here inthe US "we" use ft lbs and in most of Europe they use nm for torque numbers
If you compare the two values they are the same and MB lists both figures as correct.
I would guess that the MB techs in NA use nm and the metric system in general when working on our cars, so that is my guess.
Just make sure you know which one you're using and you should be okay
96 ft lbs is correct
130 nm is also correct
I think that was what was going on here.
Here inthe US "we" use ft lbs and in most of Europe they use nm for torque numbers
If you compare the two values they are the same and MB lists both figures as correct.
I would guess that the MB techs in NA use nm and the metric system in general when working on our cars, so that is my guess.
Just make sure you know which one you're using and you should be okay
96 ft lbs is correct
130 nm is also correct
09-26-2010, 12:16 PM
#24
Out Of Control!!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: OC
Posts: 18,677
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
9 Posts
a quarter mile at a time
96 ft lb = 130 nm
I think that was what was going on here.
Here inthe US "we" use ft lbs and in most of Europe they use nm for torque numbers
If you compare the two values they are the same and MB lists both figures as correct.
I would guess that the MB techs in NA use nm and the metric system in general when working on our cars, so that is my guess.
Just make sure you know which one you're using and you should be okay
96 ft lbs is correct
130 nm is also correct
I think that was what was going on here.
Here inthe US "we" use ft lbs and in most of Europe they use nm for torque numbers
If you compare the two values they are the same and MB lists both figures as correct.
I would guess that the MB techs in NA use nm and the metric system in general when working on our cars, so that is my guess.
Just make sure you know which one you're using and you should be okay
96 ft lbs is correct
130 nm is also correct
09-26-2010, 12:26 PM
#25
MBWorld Fanatic!
This is funny, because my AMG Tech told me to torque the lugbolts to 110 ft lbs. And he's the Master AMG Tech at Amercian Service Center.
The following users liked this post:
silversleeper48 (02-25-2019)
