Team Camaro Tech banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

Please Read. Sub-Standard leaf spring clip nuts

Jump to Latest
80K views 115 replies 56 participants last post by  srode  
B
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
I don't want to be accused of vendor-bashing, so I won't provide personal comment on the images below.. Only factual comments.
The low product quality of "stressed" sub-standard reproduction parts will kill one of us some day and in my view, they should be illegal.

These are "J-nuts" that are used to secure Camaro front leaf hangers to the body of the car. Common-sense would tell us that their strength is important to keeping the car on the road and ourselves alive!

On the left are 2 "OER" packaged, no-name J nuts. On the right is 1 "CIP" branded J nut.



UPC4-B1 of the 1969 Chevrolet Assy Manual suggests 20-30 ft/lbs of torque is required on each of the 6 bolts when fastening the spring hangers in place.
(I'm no engineer, but I know a bolt/nut is to be torqued to ~75% of it's maximum yield strength. This means that if a bolt were to go beyond it's maximum yield strength or "point of elasticity" (permanent deformation) at 40ft/lbs, it's maximum recommended torque capacity will be therefore rated at 30ft/lbs, or of course, 75% of it's maximum yield strength.)

Note the top left J nut. This has permanently deformed at approximately 20-25ft/lbs, in fact 5 out of the 6 OER packaged J-nuts did fail at that torque rating so it can be said that it wasn't just "a bad one". This also means that these particular J-nuts would have a torque rating of 15ft/lbs, or 1/2 of GM's recommended rating for this fastener's application.
The bottom left J-nut is unused.
Note that the "CIP" J-nut on the right has more material around the threaded area. The CIP J-nut is also much stronger if one were to try and pry it open even though design and material thicknesses are somewhat identical.
It comfortably torqued to 30ft/lbs and it's resistance at point indicated it would easily go 40ft/lbs.

Here are some better pics of the failed OER packaged, no-name J-nuts.



Please do not use the J-nuts that come in OER packaging. Apart from the huge inconvenience factor of having to swap them for the higher quality part after installation, they are likely to fail when torquing or worse, when your running 120+ mph at the drag strip.

Pardon me for going on about it, but it's something I feel strongly about and believe some substandard components flooding the resto market are really putting our lives at risk for the sake of literally saving a dollar or two.

www.amkproducts.com , part #B12012. $5 will buy you a packet of 2.
They have the "CIP" stamping and torque to spec no problems.
 
B
#2 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Steve,
I dont think it's wrong to post warnings like this, but ... I think you are wrong in doing so if you have not contacted the seller and the manufacturer first. Most of this stuff is sourced from overseas and the people selling it don't have a clue about the quality.
That being said, have you checked your torque wrench lately ? 25 lb ft is really not a lot of torque. You can do that with a 1/4" drive ratchet. If you are using a large 1/2 " or even a 3/8" drive torque wrench, chances are it is not accurate at all at the real low end of the scale. This is just a thought because I do it all day and really have a hard time believing that 25lbs would pull that fastener through like that.
The other thing is, I wonder if it is the correct size fastener, or if the hole in the frame is too big for some reason. Those types of fasteners are designed to seat against the solid metal of the frame and should not be able to pull through the hole ?
As far as the flood of cheap parts .... we have nobody to blame but ourselves. Very Very Very few people are willing to pay for quality any more. I bet if those bolts cost $2 each, and somebody can make and sell them for $1.95, the majority of consumaers are going to save the five cents :( The bad part about it is that its getting to where you can't find good parts even if you are willing to pay for them.
 
S
#33 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

BillK said:
Most of this stuff is sourced from overseas and the people selling it don't have a clue about the quality.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately is is all to true. And personally, I'm thankful to boards like this and people like Steve to take the time and let us know of issues like these.

Not more then an hour after reading this thread I was putting my front spoiler back on that I bought from OER 2-3 years and ago and low and behold it has the exact same j-clips but they are the higher quality ones with the CIP stamp on them. For a spoiler! Go figure...
 
B
#3 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Thanks Bill. I appreciate your comments.:)
Yes I contacted the seller who I won't mention, and let them know. Whether they choose to do anything about it is up to them, but I'll bet they don't.
The torque wrench I have is a high quality Australian made unit, and I believe accurate enough to destroy the 5/6 of these sub-standard fasteners and confidently torque 6/6 of another brand while on the same setting.
I was also surprised (not the word I really want to use), at the way the no-name fastener had stripped and deformed to destruction in it's intended application.
I would suggest buying one of these fasteners and trying it yourself if you have doubts. (They're only $1.39each.. Bargain!) I guarrantee you'll be as shocked and as disapointed as me.
The bolts I am using here are the correct GM OE #3831892, and they are in good condition.

I am really just concerned that people may install these and they'll fail at the worst possible time. These fasteners fatigue during normal installation and then a hard application of the brakes may pull out the front spring hanger out all together. Remove the 3 bolts only on one side and try it at 60mph. See what happens.

(25ft/lbs is still 300in/lbs. Too much for 1/4" drive stuff in my book)
 
#4 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

BlackoutSteve said:
Remove the 3 bolts only on one side and try it at 60mph. See what happens.
Click to expand...
Disclaimer: NOT a test that is recommended! Do NOT try this at home! Team Camaro absolutely refuses responsibility for anyone dumb enough to dig there spring eyes into the pavement, violently launching their rear axle out the back of the car.

Note to anyone dumb enough to test this: If you loosen BOTH sides, the car is much more likely to remain sunny side up during this ill conceived maneuver!:clonk:
 
#6 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Steve - For not wanting to vendor bash you need to rethink the approach you have taken in saying the information you are providing is factual and you are not interjection personal comment. You are speculating that someone will be killed because of these faulty parts. As well the torque spec's in the AIM are only for factory hardware and may not be correct for the aftermarket J-clips from OER. None of the remarks you made on those two points are based on fact.

I believe if the parts don't fail during installation you have no way of knowing they will fail when the car is being used. The weight of the car is on the suspension and there is spring tension holding the pocket to the frame. You would have to completely unload the rear suspension and all 3 bolts would have to have fallen out before the spring pocket separated from the floor pan. Even lateral g's from cornering would not likely pull the springs and pocket loose from the car. I in no way condone anyone trying it just to see though... I believe this because half the Camaros driving around with stock hardware have some or all of the welded nuts break away from the clips. Ask anyone that has had them break, the bolts just don't fall out and they are a bear to remove for replacing.

Here's a stock GM with the hex nut welded to it, check out the quality weld. The GM's are known to break at the weld. The bolts don't fall out, as I stated already. The one on the right is a Hotchkis which is stamped CIP. Notice the thickness difference in the two. The threaded barrel is stamped out of the clip so I'm sure it's stronger than the OER but most likely the OER are no weaker than the factory clips and nuts...

Image


If we look, we can always find a stronger part. Factory j-clips have worked for 40 years and I don't recall 60 minutes doing a segment on rear-ends falling out of camaros. I haven't even heard of a single failure causing any problem (doesn't mean it hasn't happened) at the track or on the street. This is the first I have ever heard of the OER clips failing but I have heard of the factory nuts breaking off many many times. In fact a local shop will not quote a price for installing sub-frame connectors and states the clip nuts create such a problem all sub-frame connector and spring work is by the hour up front...

Don't get me wrong I understand your concern to some degree and if I didn't I would have closed this thread down. Can I ask how you discovered the bad clips? Were these in use already and you went to remove the springs and found them this way? Did you just install them and they collapsed and you couldn't reach torque on the bolts as you tightened them? Did any of the bolts just let loose and fall out on the ground? None of the example shots you provided look like that happened...

Dealing with facts, I agree the clips have failed but as to what caused them to, over torque vs faulty part, it's really hard to tell without torque spec's for the parts from the manufacture. What the out come is if the parts are faulty might indeed be reason to enlighten others and that's why we are conversing here.
 
B
#7 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Thanks Dennis. :)
The clips were removed from the sealed (OER) packaging (labled as "Rear Spring Eye Bracket Nut") and inserted into position as per the AIM. Then the spring hangers were positioned in place and attempted to torque to spec when all but 1 of 6 failed to get anywhere near the specified 30ft/lbs. The minimum spec is 20ft/lbs where most had failed offering no "safety margin". (The 6th J-nut was not brought up to tension beyond hand tight as to remove and inspect)

Also if a fastener is not torqued to ~75% of it's yield strength -as the inferior clips wont allow, then how can that fastener be expected to securely retain the hanger, remain in place, and not losen over the next several thousand miles?
If you know about torquing rod bolts, you can't ignore this logic.
Look up any text book and see what the minimum torque preload needs to be for any 3/8-16 grade 5 bolt. Even if the manufacturer of these clips said torque to 15ft/lbs, then they are still providing an inferior/incorrect product for the application as use with the grade 5 fastener.

It would only take a hard application of the brakes to pull these hangers downward at a force almost equivalent of the rear braking effort itself. You don't need to be airborne or attempt to pull a G or 2 around a bend.

I accept that maybe my approach is not perfect, but I really wanted to warn people about these clips that I really feel are dangerous. They need to be indentified or my warning is pointless.
There is a very fine line between saying "that Brand makes crap" and "Exibit B is not up to spec". I am really trying my best to remain neutral and un-bias.

I too have had the welded nut break off the factory J-nuts, hence my reasoning to replace them in the first place.

I don't want to vendor bash at all. It's not my desire or intention.
In OER's defense, I have bought loads of their labled products and been very happy with the quality and fit. Unfortunately this particular part is a stressed chassis component and not just an emblem with a lousy appearance or something superficial.

If anyone has any doubts, buy the 2 products and try it yourselves.
 
P
#8 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Mine look like Dennis's pic!!

I have NO problem with them at ALL!!

They are punched spring quality, sheet steel with rolled threads that have been OQT'd!

TO ME!! One h-ll of a lot better that the cheap crap GM used even tho they used real nuts!!

pdq67
 
B
#9 · (Edited)
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Just in case your not aware, both the good and bad clips I am talking about look just like Dennis' clip on the right. That is the style of clip sold today by everyone as far as I know.
Dennis has also mentioned that it has the "CIP" stamp on it indicating it is the better of the 2 types (in my experience) mentioned in this thread.

The clip on the left in Dennis' photo is what was standard on these cars when new (most were actually a square nut), and as we have discussed, the nuts tend break off the actual clip. As far as their torque capacity, they have no problem if the nuts stay intact.

If you have a look at your clips that you've had no problems with, I'll be quite sure it has a CIP stamp on it. If it doesn't, then I doubt you'll be able to pry it open with your fingers AT ALL.
That's what I noticed also about the inferior clips, is that prying them open was really quite easy. (-Possibly just sheet steel like you say.)
:beers:
 
C
#11 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

If a product requires a different installation procedure vs. the OEM specification then it should be provided. The aftermarket parts do not have any supplied instructions, so it should be expected that that part can be installed according to the OEM specifications.

I too have had the exact same problem as shown above with the OER parts.

There's also more to it than just accepting a specification from a supplier that may not have the expertise to correctly understand the ramifications of changing the OEM specification. When each fastener is properly installed according to the OEM specifications there is an expected clamping force that holds the bolted components together. Under light usage a lower clamping force might not result in failure, but if the applied load exceeds the clamping force a significantly reduced bolt fatigue life will result.

Also, in a bolted joint using a standard nut the failure mode due to excessive applied torque is usually not nut failure. Failure will usually occur in the bolt underhead, at the shank-thread interface, or at the thread just under the nut.

Besides, why use a fastener in a critical application that is significantly weaker than the OEM part?
 
B
#12 · (Edited)
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

BlackSS69 or anyone else who would like to know where to purchase the "CIP" clips, you will need to PM me for a supplier and part number.

Because I am trying very hard to remain un-biased, I won't use this thread for any form of promotion.
I will only privately forward details of the superior part in the name of safety.:thumbsup:

Thanks for posting Carl. In a silly way, I am glad I am not the only one with this issue.

..and thanks to the moderators for leaving this thread visible, even though my approach may not have been the best.:)
 
S
#13 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

I was pleased to see this topic as I just installed my rear springs on my 69. I too was supprised to see this type of j-nut in my package from a vendor, and I also thought they might be not as strong as the originals I took off. In torquing mine to 35 ftlbs., they, (bolts) began spinning. I never reached 35 ftlbs. Glad I saved my old ones, as they are what's on the car.

IMHO, the j-nuts were substandard for this application.

I'm not contacting the vendor, or gonna bash anyone. Just gonna use my common sense while rebuilding my car.

Rut :cool:
 
B
#14 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

I just wanted to say that this is an excellent way of voicing an opinion. I congratulate all involved for making clear consice arguments and not using 4 letter words. This kind of discussion is what makes better products for all of us out there with a love of 1st gen cars
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#15 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

blackss69 said:
I need to replace mine. Does anyone know where can you purchase the CIP clips and there cost?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Any Hotchkis distributor should be able to get them and if you have a spring shop in town they should have them or something equilivant.

Steve if you know a company that sells the CIP hardware you can post who it is as it pertains to teh context of this thread. Now if you started a new thread offering the clips for sale that would be another story.
 
#16 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

SS5449 said:
I was pleased to see this topic as I just installed my rear springs on my 69. I too was supprised to see this type of j-nut in my package from a vendor, and I also thought they might be not as strong as the originals I took off. In torquing mine to 35 ftlbs., they, (bolts) began spinning. I never reached 35 ftlbs. Glad I saved my old ones, as they are what's on the car.

IMHO, the j-nuts were substandard for this application.

I'm not contacting the vendor, or gonna bash anyone. Just gonna use my common sense while rebuilding my car.

Rut :cool:
Click to expand...
Not going to dispute the quality of the OER clips but I would like to point out by factory spec's you were over torquing at 35 ft lbs...
 
#17 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

CarlC said:
If a product requires a different installation procedure vs. the OEM specification then it should be provided. The aftermarket parts do not have any supplied instructions, so it should be expected that that part can be installed according to the OEM specifications.

I too have had the exact same problem as shown above with the OER parts.

There's also more to it than just accepting a specification from a supplier that may not have the expertise to correctly understand the ramifications of changing the OEM specification. When each fastener is properly installed according to the OEM specifications there is an expected clamping force that holds the bolted components together. Under light usage a lower clamping force might not result in failure, but if the applied load exceeds the clamping force a significantly reduced bolt fatigue life will result.

Also, in a bolted joint using a standard nut the failure mode due to excessive applied torque is usually not nut failure. Failure will usually occur in the bolt underhead, at the shank-thread interface, or at the thread just under the nut.

Besides, why use a fastener in a critical application that is significantly weaker than the OEM part?
Click to expand...
Hi Carl - It's been a while, how have you been? As usual you add some great input. I'm not trying to come off as defending the OER clips but what I have seen is they are sold in sets with more of a screw than a bolt with a course thread compared to what factory bolts or for example the bolt in my picture above which is from the CIP clip. Note that it thread matches the orig equipment clip I have it threaded into in that pic.

Excuse the poor image quality but this shows what I believe are just like, if not OER clips and bolts. This is why I suggested the torque spec's might not be the same as the factory.

Image



Just a guess but I imagine most of these get installed without the benefit of a torque wrench... You are right though, if the product does require a different fastening torque the information should be supplied.

I looked at the book last night and believe it was 20-30 ft lbs on these as has been quoted. That's not all that much to begin with but for the factory 20 ft lbs must have met the clamping force requirements. I know Steve reports his failing around 15 ft lbs and Rut seems to indicate he got closer to 35 ft lbs when his failed.

From that I think the part is most likely to be on par with the factory supplied in function. For someone doing a spiral shock and bias ply tire restoration they would be fine. For someone building a street strip monster or a "G" machine then go with something better. I know Hotchkis supplies the CIP hardware with their spring kits, I figure that says a little something.
 
C
#18 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Hey Dennis.

If memory serves the OEM bolts are G5. The maximum recommended dry torque for a G5 3/8"-16 bolt is 31 ft-lbs. This installation assumes no plating or thread lubricant. Black oxide coatings do not offer any changes to the torque specifications. Given this the fastener should be at 70% yield strength with a clamping force of 4,900 lbs.

The problem as I see it is that the OER part does not allow a sufficient safety margin. Given that we are gearheads, we're likely going to shoot for the upper end of the torque tolerance range. How close to failure is the OER J-nut at 30 ft-lbs?

If the OEM specification calls out for some type of thread lubricant, it gets worse for the OER part. It's failure mode is not at the thread, it's on the body of the J-nut. Thread lubricant (oil) will cause the J-nut body to fail with an applied torque 20% lower than without any lubricant. Mine failed before 30 ft-lbs using thread lubricant (Bostik Never Seez), and I use a torque wrench that is calibrated. I agree it's not according to specifications using anti-seize, but every fastener on the car gets lubricated before installation. If it fails, to me that says there is not enough safety margin. Yeah, I'm getting really anal....

Dennis, you are correct that the right bolt must be used with the extended body J-nut. For a bolt-nut arrangement, rule of thumb is for the full diameter of the bolt to extend beyond the nut by at least 1/8". This is not as important for solid nuts since their rigid design allows for most of the fastener tension to be applied to the first 2-3 threads. However, the extended body sheet metal J-nut relies on full thread engagement.
 
S
#19 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

I too once ordered the 'sub-standard' J-clips,..sent them back to my vendor in Athens, GA.

The good news is, when you hit a bump, the ends of the leaf spring are pushed 'up' so the strenght of the threads of the J-clips are not challenged.

But on hard braking they would be.

Agree,..find something more worthy.
 
B
#20 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Thanks again Dennis.
I'm sure there are others who sell the "CIP" J-nuts.. I ordered mine through www.amkproducts.com. catalog (pg57) part # B12012. $5 will buy you a packet of 2.
Another friend said he got his through Rick's 1st Gen, so they must be a supplier too.
As customers, we will need to specify the "CIP" branded clip with the vendors when ordering.
 
B
#22 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

I don't think the "CIP" are anything outstanding.. They're just how they should be in the first place. You know, like a glass of water that's drinkable.
The others are just very bad in comparison. :)
 
S
#23 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

DjD said:
Not going to dispute the quality of the OER clips but I would like to point out by factory spec's you were over torquing at 35 ft lbs...
Click to expand...
I made a mistake in what I said I torque'd these bolts to. I realized this after you pointing this out to me, and checking my notes in the barn. I actually had my wrench set to 25ftlbs. Between the recomended torque of 20-30 ftlbs. The bolt spun in the j-clip as reported in my earlier post, before I reached 25 ftlbs. I had misquoted, and was relying on my memory.

It's been said, by my wife mostly, that my memory is the second shortest thing I have. This would be further proof of that.

Rut :cool:
 
T
#24 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Hi All,
You've let the cat amongst the pigions! If I can try and be positve about this, the AMK products are very very good. I purchased a few suspensions kits which contained the type of fasteners Steve seems to be concerned about. I also purchased the complete chassis kit from AMK. The AMK product was visually superior and often made of what seemed to me, the correct metals rather than the other which seemed more generic.

In my experiance the AMK product is worth spending the money on in regards to saftey and originality

My 2C
 
B
#25 ·
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

Here's some good news.. :)

I just received an email from the company who supplied my inferior j-nuts.
"...however we have discontinued the item based on your feedback."

I hope they're telling the truth and not just blowing smoke..
 
D
#26 · (Edited)
Re: Please Read. Sub-Standard Part Awareness.

I just got my clip nuts from ground up and the torque spec said 20-30 ftlbs according to the chevy assembly manual.
the nuts stripped out at 20 ftlbs!
They dont even seem to be hardend?
seem to be more lke body panel clip nuts?
Someone surely can get killed using inferior chinese garbage parts.
I would have gladly paid 3 bucks a piece for a better clip nut.
I surely hope ground up doesnt know anything about this problem or else they would take customer saftey before profits im sure.
Ill be calling ground up on monday and talking to Ken (owner) To shed some light on this subject.
No im not vendor bashing!
Im just bringing to light a defective inferior part that we should be all aware of.
Gee i wish i could find a vendor that had the Original clip nuts.
 
Team Camaro Tech
posts
2.4M
members
90K
Since
1998
A forum community dedicated to 1st generation Chevy Camaros owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, builds, restoration, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, reviews, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Bench Racing Engine Body Shop Performance Brakes, Suspension & Steering