Question to all Vision 19.5 wheel users

[Tamnative]

I was doing my pre-camper load up tire pressure ,check lug nuts torque etc. when I came to 2 lugs that didn't seem right. I was not able to get them to spec's. As it turned out it appears that the shop that did my front end alignment over tightened the nuts to the point that they are almost 1/4" deeper than the rest and that is without getting them to torque spec's. I will be taking the truck back to the shop that did this tomorrow. These are brand spanking new wheels and tires and this is the only time that they would have been removed. I had checked the torque on them right after I got them and all was good then.I have had problems in the past with tire shops that is why I always check.
My question is what type of lug nuts did they use on your Vision wheels? Here is a link to the ones that they used on mine: http://www.visionwheel.com/accessories/
I didn't think it would be possible to bury a lug nut into a rim like this without snapping the lug.
Any other suggestions would be helpful as I we planned on leaving Thurs. of next week but it may not happen.
I forgot to mention that the part no. on the lug nut is 3809L

[jimh406]

Yeah those Porches will never work. 😉

[HMS_Beagle]

BigToe wrote:


GM's oem PYO wheels are forged, not cast aluminum.

.

And the Visions? Highly doubtful....

Alcoa forged wheels use 6061 alloy, if properly heat treated it can be about 60 percent stronger than cast. Even so, I'll bet a beer that an uneducated finger on a modest impact gun can pull the stud land out of them. Bring yours over and we'll give it a try? 🙂

[BigToe]

HMS Beagle wrote:
shear failure in cast aluminum

GM's oem PYO wheels are forged, not cast aluminum.

.

[HMS_Beagle]

It's kind of like Porsche hanging the engine out in the back trunk. Not a good idea, but you can get it to work. I wonder if GM has better engineering resources than Vision?

Rough calculation: 1" diameter by 3/8" thick (as estimated by the OP) is 1.17 sq in cross section, shear failure in cast aluminum 10,000 psi, so shear failure at 12,000 lbs, clamping force on 5/8-11 bolt torqued to 150 ft-lbs is 14,400. This is why I am suspicious.

[Buzzcut1]

three years now on my Visions with no problems and of all the guys on this board running them only one has reported an issue.

[BigToe]

HMS Beagle wrote:
In reading the thread and looking at the pictures, I kind of figured that retaining washer was what the spot faces were for. The problem with them is that the aluminum surrounding the hole will be loaded in bending stress because the aluminum directly under the nut has been machined away. Normally it would be loaded in compression by the nut. Not a good idea generally speaking, with very careful engineering, attention to fatigue limits, and good controls on exactly how they get mounted and torqued maybe you can get away with it - but here in the real world, not a good idea.

Here, in the real world, GM put literally millions... not an exaggeration, but actually millions... of RPO PYO aluminum truck rims with the back side recess for the retaining washer on new trucks and suvs, sold around the real world, including places without good controls or torque wrenches, for 8 continuous years. These wheels were forged throughout the world, in Alcoa's foundries in the US as well as Superior' foundries in Hungary.

I only speak about these particular aluminum wheels because I happen to own 3 sets of them, and only want to speak from personal experience. 3x4x8=96 hole opportunities to personally observe, and I've never had any of them crack at the nut seat, despite the relief machined into them. In 17 years of reading about the vehicles that originally came with these wheels, I've never read of anyone else's cracking.

I'm just pointing this out because it seems doubtful that an OEM manufacturer as large as General Motors could get away with producing millions of copies of a truck wheel for almost a decade in markets around the world that had to be so "carefully mounted". That's a lot of real world numbers to condemn out of hand the concept of cutting a relief for the retaining washer so that the wheel will mount flat and perpendicular against the rotor flange.

[crosscheck]

Tamnative wrote:

crosscheck wrote:
Just finished 9000km on new 19.5 Michelin XDS-2 245/70r , some rough roads all with the TC. This is my 3rd set of 19.5 tires all on the same Vision wheels. No issues at all. The Visions do not look as pretty as the day I bought them 9 years ago, but i trust them to carry a decent load over rough county.

I would buy them again but looks like they will be buried along with me after my last wilderness camping trip.

Dave

Did yours have the recess in the back around the lug holes or was the back flat like the stock wheels?

Don't know for sure and as they are on the truck as we speak, will not be be coming off in the near future.

Dave

[jimh406]

I'm thinking that if the Visions had a significant problem, we'd be hearing more about it. I had mine on my SRW for around 8 years without issues.

I'm not saying there isn't a bad set out there somewhere, and you actually have to tighten them appropriately and use different lugnuts ... at least on the Fords.

[Tamnative]

crosscheck wrote:
Just finished 9000km on new 19.5 Michelin XDS-2 245/70r , some rough roads all with the TC. This is my 3rd set of 19.5 tires all on the same Vision wheels. No issues at all. The Visions do not look as pretty as the day I bought them 9 years ago, but i trust them to carry a decent load over rough county.

I would buy them again but looks like they will be buried along with me after my last wilderness camping trip.

Dave

Did yours have the recess in the back around the lug holes or was the back flat like the stock wheels?

[crosscheck]

Just finished 9000km on new 19.5 Michelin XDS-2 245/70r , some rough roads all with the TC. This is my 3rd set of 19.5 tires all on the same Vision wheels. No issues at all. The Visions do not look as pretty as the day I bought them 9 years ago, but i trust them to carry a decent load over rough county.

I would buy them again but looks like they will be buried along with me after my last wilderness camping trip.

Dave

[Tamnative]

HMS Beagle wrote:
In reading the thread and looking at the pictures, I kind of figured that retaining washer was what the spot faces were for. The problem with them is that the aluminum surrounding the hole will be loaded in bending stress because the aluminum directly under the nut has been machined away. Normally it would be loaded in compression by the nut. Not a good idea generally speaking, with very careful engineering, attention to fatigue limits, and good controls on exactly how they get mounted and torqued maybe you can get away with it - but here in the real world, not a good idea.

This was my point exactly when I originally posted this,I have since gotten rid of the wheels.

[HMS_Beagle]

In reading the thread and looking at the pictures, I kind of figured that retaining washer was what the spot faces were for. The problem with them is that the aluminum surrounding the hole will be loaded in bending stress because the aluminum directly under the nut has been machined away. Normally it would be loaded in compression by the nut. Not a good idea generally speaking, with very careful engineering, attention to fatigue limits, and good controls on exactly how they get mounted and torqued maybe you can get away with it - but here in the real world, not a good idea.

[BigToe]

Tamnative (Took me a second to figure out that you are a native of a nearby mountain!)...

A small recess machined around each stud hole on the back side of the wheel is not uncommon for aluminum SRW truck wheels. My stock 3/4 ton GM wheels have a similar recess. Rather than try and explain why in words, I found a few photos online that more succinctly explain what the recess is there for...







These spring retaining washers hold the rotor on during vehicle production. There is usually only one or at most two mounted per rotor. They are not mounted on all 8 studs (or all 6, or 5, as the case may be) They are also not necessary in the vehicle's function or service, but if a fully flat faced wheel is mated to a rotor where these production rotor retaining washers have not been removed, then that can present a wheel vibration problem, along with accelerated pad and rotor wear.

Since what a tire shop employee does cannot be controlled (something you are quite aware of), the wheel manufacturers began machining a recess into all the stud holes, so that no matter if the spring retaining washer is removed or not, and no matter which stud it happens to be on, and no matter which way the wheel is clocked, there will be no interference from the washer that would keep the wheel from being flat against the rotor mounting plane.

I think at the very least someone at Vision could have taken the time to explain this to you when you asked.

[Tamnative]

Steelhog wrote:
That photo of the wheel with the missing material around the bolt holes and the cracks is totally inconsistent with how alloy wheels are machined. I sold machine tools for 25 years including wheel lathes and NEVER saw a spotface or counterbore on the face that contacts the hub. To do that would add a machining operation which adds cost and weakens the wheel. I'm wondering if those wheels were altered by a wacko tire shop or a third party. Just looking at the photo it appears the counterbores look freshly machined while the rest of the wheel has some road grime. Something very wrong was done to those wheels either by mistake or on purpose but whatever the case I cannot believe they left the factory like that. ANY manufacturer that would not immediately recall a wheel like that or gives you a run around is crazy. Reporting this "manufacturing error" to the DOT an CC'ing Vision might get somebody's attention.

These wheels are brand new, only a few miles on them.