Toyota good engineering

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Messages
3,462
Location
Coastal South Carolina
Was in costco today- they had a chart of lug nut torque numbers. GM had 60 80 100 120 and maybe more
The Toyota chart said 1990-2008 all models - 76 ft pounds-
Good work Toyota -same number
 
I really wouldn't call it "good engineering".

The lugnuts on my Tundra (for trucks) calls for 83ft lbs. 76ftlbs must be for the 5 lug patterns (cars and small pickups).
 
Originally Posted By: edwardh1
Was in costco today- they had a chart of lug nut torque numbers. GM had 60 80 100 120 and maybe more
The Toyota chart said 1990-2008 all models - 76 ft pounds-
Good work Toyota -same number


Is it for a specific model? Probably for cars they need less torque compared to heavy duty trucks.
 
Yeah, the GM numbers probably include high torque for the lugs on heavier duty vehicles. I don't remember the exact number but I was looking up the ratings for the wheels on our 3/4 ton Suburban and the torque values were different for the 3/4 ton with the heavier duty axles and 8 lug wheels vs the 1/2 tons.

The consistent 76 ft*lbs seems more like convenience than specifically good engineering. (Not saying it's bad engineering...)
 
Originally Posted By: edwardh1
Was in costco today- they had a chart of lug nut torque numbers. GM had 60 80 100 120 and maybe more
The Toyota chart said 1990-2008 all models - 76 ft pounds-
Good work Toyota -same number

I also wouldn't automatically call it 'good engineering'; maybe GM is more specific, has done stress analysis on each specific application? maybe toyota specs one lug to keep down the SKU count?
if your wheels don't fall off, it's good engineering.
 
Well thats conclusive enough for me. Toyota is the greatest vehicle on earth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems that people will find any excuse to praise Toyota.

There's no free lunch, though. What were the tradeoffs made to standardize the torque?
 
If that makes them greatest then Mazda could also be king. Almost all of Mazda's engines (their in-house designs) use one of two different oil filters and they are interchangeable!

back on topic, using a standard lug stud with a standard torque is a very efficient design for assembly. Toyota has random configurations of vehicles coming down the line, if all of them get the same lug nut and same torque then there are less screw-ups and less time wasted identifying the configuration.

I'm not praising Toyota, just stating that it is an efficient way to engineer the assembly process. As far as I know there are no issues with Toyota and their wheels/lug nuts/lug studs.
 
Originally Posted By: tom slick
Toyota has random configurations of vehicles coming down the line


I could be mistaken, but I thought there was a separate line for each vehicle model.
 
Similar GM vehicles probably take similar wheel torque. I've noticed most 4 and 5 lug passenger cars are around 80ft-lbs. That's why I bought an 80ft-lb torque stick, it works with what I own.

I found this on Tire Rack's website. Does Toyota even make anything with a 9/16 stud bolt size???

Hardware Bolt or
Stud Size Typical Torque Range
in Ft/Lbs Minimum Number of Turns
of Hardware Engagement
12 x 1.5 mm 70 - 80 6.5
12 x 1.25 mm 70 - 80 8
14 x 1.5 mm 85 - 90 7.5
14 x 1.25 mm 85 - 90 9
7/16 in. 70 - 80 9
1/2 in. 75 - 85 8
9/16 in. 135 - 145 8
 
I think the OP needs to check that chart again:

Toyota
Highlander 2001-05 80 ft-lbs
Land Cruiser 1999-05 100 ft-lbs
Land Cruiser 1994-98 *105 ft-lbs
Land Cruiser 1989-93 115 ft-lbs
Pickup 2WD (SRW) 1989-94 100 ft-lbs
Pickup 2WD (DRW) 1989-94 170 ft-lbs
Pickup 4WD 1991-92 80 ft-lbs
Previa/Rav4/Sienna 1991-05 80 ft-lbs
Sequoia 2001-05 85 ft-lbs
Tacoma 1999-05 85 ft-lbs
Tacoma 1995-98 80 ft-lbs
Tundra 2000-05 85 ft-lbs
T100 1995-98 80 ft-lbs
4 Runner 1999-05 85 ft-lbs
4 Runner 1988-98 80 ft-lbs
* With aluminum wheels 80 ft-lbs

http://www.discounttire.com/dtcs/infoWheelTorque.dos
 
Incidentally, most GM passenger cars except the ones they don't make (Vibe, Aveo, etc) are 100 ft/lbs:

Pontiac
LeMans 1989-93 65 ft-lbs
Vibe 2003-05 75 ft-lbs
All other models 1990-05 100 ft-lbs

Buick
All models 1982-05 100 ft-lbs

Chevrolet / Geo
Aveo 2004-05 90 ft-lbs
Metro 1991-99 50 ft-lbs
Prizm 1989-02 80 ft-lbs
Storm 1990-93 85 ft-lbs
All other models 1987-05 100 ft-lbs
 
Originally Posted By: mpvue

if your wheels don't fall off, it's good engineering.


crackmeup2.gif
 
So, what can we conclude:

Toyota passenger cars use one torque value. Their trucks are varied, like GM's.

GM passenger cars mostly use one torque value except for the cars they didn't make or design, such as the Aveo or the Vibe.

Torque requirements go up as the size of the wheel stud goes up.

Bigger vehicles need bigger wheel studs.

GM makes bigger vehicles than Toyota does, therefore the larger GM trucks for which there is no Toyota counterpart need higher torque values.

This concludes your lesson in how to critically interpret the data you see instead of drawing an erroneous conclusion and posting it on BITOG for everyone to see.
 
Brian, why would we want good data and logical conclusions? you know we like to argue about things we know nothing about!

back on topic; I'd bet the Vibe has a spec of 76 ft-lbs, same as a Corolla.
 
Originally Posted By: tom slick
I'd bet the Vibe has a spec of 76 ft-lbs, same as a Corolla.


That's what my owner's manual says. However, the tire change info sticker next to the spare advises "65-87 ft-lbs".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top