94-97 how to replace front wheel stud? DIY?

yeah, a 3 leg (crow's foot) puller is usually for anything riding on a
central shaft... they work by putting pressure against the backside of
the object you're trying to remove, which is done by applying pressure
to the front side of the object it's riding on... simply put, there is
no center "shaft" in a hub bearing.... so no, it wouldn't work w/o
modifying the design of the pulling... which completely defeats the
purpose of using it.


--
Dr0pZ0n3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr0pZ0n3's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=471715
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=739008

http://www.automotiveforums.com

I apologize for saying that incorrectly, I should have mentioned that
the pressure spec is 100-115 lb/ft^2 (the amount of pressure applied to
release the bolt)

Jim Beam, before posting an arguement, whether you're right or not,
read your own posted links... b/c you're actually right about the
torque versus pressure thing, but wrong about the factor of
multiplication.

taken from wiki article "torque":
Since energy can be thought of as the result of "force times distance",
energy is always a scalar whereas torque is "force cross distance" and
so is a (pseudo) vector-valued quantity.

Force cross distance refers to a 1:1 relationship, hence, no
multiplication or division, no adding or subtracting.


--
Dr0pZ0n3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr0pZ0n3's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=471715
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=739008

http://www.automotiveforums.com

Dr0pZ0n3 wrote:
> I apologize for saying that incorrectly, I should have mentioned that
> the pressure spec is 100-115 lb/ft^2 (the amount of pressure applied
> to release the bolt)
>
> Jim Beam, before posting an arguement, whether you're right or not,
> read your own posted links... b/c you're actually right about the
> torque versus pressure thing, but wrong about the factor of
> multiplication.
>
> taken from wiki article "torque":
> Since energy can be thought of as the result of "force times
> distance", energy is always a scalar whereas torque is "force cross
> distance" and so is a (pseudo) vector-valued quantity.
>
> Force cross distance refers to a 1:1 relationship, hence, no
> multiplication or division, no adding or subtracting.

You are still adrift here.

100 ft.lbs of torque (turning moment) may be acheived by pulling
1 lbforce on a 100ft bar or 100lbforce on a 1ft bar or 25lbforce
on a 4ft bar or ANY combination which results in a PRODUCT
of 100ft.lbs..

HTH


--
--
Graham W http://www.gcw.org.uk/ XP1800+ Page added, Graphics Tutorial
WIMBORNE http://www.wessex-astro.org.uk/ Wessex Astro Society's Website
Dorset UK Info, Meeting Dates, Sites & Maps

The "confusion" that I experienced when I misquoted was that I
transposed the theories of "torque manipulation" and "force exertion"
since torque can be displayed as an application of pressure, in terms
that pressure can be translated as force...

Either way, this thread has reached it's pinnacle of usefulness, and
we're way off topic...


--
Dr0pZ0n3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr0pZ0n3's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=471715
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=739008

http://www.automotiveforums.com

By the way, simple equation for a math scholar to check out algorithmic
programs for accuracy: [(e^(pi)) - (pi)]

The answer should always come to 20... unless your Floating Point
Handlers have rounding errors. This is standard to test your system for
data compliance.

(.ti evol attog ..romuH .979990999.91 ot emoc dluohs rewsna eht ...ekoj
a si siht ,yaw eht yB)

And in case you're wondering, about 10 seconds.


--
Dr0pZ0n3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr0pZ0n3's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=471715
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=739008

http://www.automotiveforums.com

Dr0pZ0n3 wrote:
> I apologize for saying that incorrectly, I should have mentioned that
> the pressure spec is 100-115 lb/ft^2 (the amount of pressure applied to
> release the bolt)
>
> Jim Beam, before posting an arguement, whether you're right or not,
> read your own posted links... b/c you're actually right about the
> torque versus pressure thing, but wrong about the factor of
> multiplication.
>
> taken from wiki article "torque":
> Since energy can be thought of as the result of "force times distance",
> energy is always a scalar whereas torque is "force cross distance" and
> so is a (pseudo) vector-valued quantity.
>
> Force cross distance refers to a 1:1 relationship, hence, no
> multiplication or division, no adding or subtracting.
>
>

no dude. you're confusing force with pressure. when you wrench, that's
/force/. torque is force times leverage. pressure is force /divided/
by sq ft. at some time or other, we've all had teachers we've
subsequently learned to have gotten stuff wrong - you had one of those.

Look... you're now argueing with yourself... that little blurb came
right from the article that you pointed me to... on wiki... meaning
that you didn't even know what you were posting...

"Force cross Distance" is the proper terminology for torque... meaning
that the relationship is 1:1.

As far as what you're saying, I understand that, and I already
corrected myself for... The place that confused me isn't on you to
decide, I'm quite well aware of what I mistook.


--
Dr0pZ0n3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr0pZ0n3's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=471715
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=739008

http://www.automotiveforums.com

Dr0pZ0n3 wrote:
> Look... you're now argueing with yourself... that little blurb came
> right from the article that you pointed me to... on wiki... meaning
> that you didn't even know what you were posting...

do you always insult people trying to help you?


>
> "Force cross Distance" is the proper terminology for torque... meaning
> that the relationship is 1:1.

it's not "Force cross Distance" it's 'force x distance' or 'force times
distance' or 'force multiplied by distance' or even 'force.distance'.
it's a math thing. and there's no way that means "1:1".


>
> As far as what you're saying, I understand that, and I already
> corrected myself for... The place that confused me isn't on you to
> decide, I'm quite well aware of what I mistook.
>
>

also, life would be easier if you used a proper news reader to access
this group - the web forum portal you're using is not threading properly.

dude... that "force cross distance thing" CAME FROM THE ARTICLE THAT YOU
POSTED... could you be more ignorant? Since it came from the article
that YOU POSTED WHILE TRYING TO PROVE ME WRONG, that must mean that you
also were wrong, since you were quoting an unknown or unchecked source..
*and yes, when you post a website for research purposes, you are, in
fact, quoting it.* And now, after all, to add to the stupidity, you're
debating with material taken IN CONTEXT from your source... you may be
smart enough to catch the follies of those who don't stay up late at
night planning every single word they type, like you, but you're still
not intelligent enough to realize that A) your kind of help isn't
welcome, and B) no matter how much you want to believe that you're
always correct about everything, you're not.

Did I hit pretty close to home there? GOOD. Stop tearing this thread to
**** b/c you feel like making yourself look smarter than you actually
are... ffs, I mis-posted a single damn word, and you're jumping all
over it like someone is going to die as a result of my inherent
penchance (sp) for mistyping small bits of info when I've just woken
after long nights of not sleeping BECAUSE I HAVE A LIFE, outside of
calling the most sophomoric mistakes of those attempting to save
someone some money becuase for ****'s sake, we all know that noone in
this country needs any more of that... <./sarcasm -off>

as far as using a better portal to access the thread... lmao.. I'm
using the site the damn thing is hosted on... it can't get much better
than that.

and as far as insulting the ppl trying to help me, YES I insult those
who give unsolicited help and then proceed to condescend the one who
didn't ask for the help in the first place....

so in closing, I"d just like to ask one thing... ARE YOU DONE YET?


--
Dr0pZ0n3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr0pZ0n3's Profile: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...?userid=471715
View this thread: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=739008

http://www.automotiveforums.com

Dr0pZ0n3 wrote:
> dude... that "force cross distance thing" CAME FROM THE ARTICLE THAT YOU
> POSTED... could you be more ignorant? Since it came from the article
> that YOU POSTED WHILE TRYING TO PROVE ME WRONG, that must mean that you
> also were wrong, since you were quoting an unknown or unchecked source..
> *and yes, when you post a website for research purposes, you are, in
> fact, quoting it.* And now, after all, to add to the stupidity, you're
> debating with material taken IN CONTEXT from your source... you may be
> smart enough to catch the follies of those who don't stay up late at
> night planning every single word they type, like you, but you're still
> not intelligent enough to realize that A) your kind of help isn't
> welcome, and B) no matter how much you want to believe that you're
> always correct about everything, you're not.
>
> Did I hit pretty close to home there? GOOD. Stop tearing this thread to
> **** b/c you feel like making yourself look smarter than you actually
> are... ffs, I mis-posted a single damn word, and you're jumping all
> over it like someone is going to die as a result of my inherent
> penchance (sp) for mistyping small bits of info when I've just woken
> after long nights of not sleeping BECAUSE I HAVE A LIFE, outside of
> calling the most sophomoric mistakes of those attempting to save
> someone some money becuase for ****'s sake, we all know that noone in
> this country needs any more of that... <./sarcasm -off>
>
> as far as using a better portal to access the thread... lmao.. I'm
> using the site the damn thing is hosted on... it can't get much better
> than that.

newsgroups are not web portals. you email client almost certainly
contains usenet reader capability - and it will support threading.

>
> and as far as insulting the ppl trying to help me, YES I insult those
> who give unsolicited help and then proceed to condescend the one who
> didn't ask for the help in the first place....
>
> so in closing, I"d just like to ask one thing... ARE YOU DONE YET?
>
>
no, "cross product" means "multiply". "force cross distance" means
"multiply" but as a vector - which is not of interest in this case.

but if you don't want to know, you don't want to know.