MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGB Technical - Hub angles

Anyone know what the inner and outer angle of a wire wheel hub is supposed to be?

Richard.
RH Davidson

What angles? Other than the wheel taper any suspension angles are going to be the same as for a studded hub, I'd have thought. There is only one wheel taper on a hub that could be considered to have an angle. Not in a position to measure it right now, but I'd expect 45 degrees. http://www.mgb-stuff.org.uk/cl.htm
P Hunt

Hi Paul,

The angles I’m referring to are the angles of the inner and outer tapers as shown in the center-lock wheel hub diagram.

I do not have the means to measure the angles accurately. But by measuring the small and large diameter and the distance between them, I calculate the outer taper as 9 deg., and inner taper as 23 deg.

The numbers seem strange/out and I was hoping to confirm them by finding someone who knows them or has some technical data that specified what the angles are.

Richard.
RH Davidson

Hi Richard,

I had an adaptor for wire wheel balancing on modern wheel balancer machined by my friend few months ago. The outside seating surface angle should be 10 deg and inner one is 30 deg. I got those figure from the following link:
http://www.daytonwirewheels.com/pdf/balancinginstructionsforspline.pdf

The adaptors fit well for Dunlop wire wheel!

Ennio
Hong Kong
Ennio Wong

Hi Ennio,

Thanks for the information and the link.

I did manage to work out and make up a simple and accurate measuring device yesterday. I got angles of 10 and 31 degrees. I then discovered your e-mail. 10 and 30 degrees are what I’m making my balancing cones.

The cones suit the dynamic and static balancing machine used by tyre fitment centres as well as home use for static balancing and checking centre-lock wheels.

I have made a simple engineering drawing and will send a copy to anyone who would like to make up their own set.

Richard.
RH Davidson

Yes please, Richard.
P Hunt

Yes please, Richard. This is a far neater solution than the one I have considered-old hub and spinner. Thanks
Michael Beswick

Attached is drawing of taper cone dimensions

Richard.

RH Davidson

Attached is drawing of the taper cone assembly as used on a phase balancer (wheel balancing machine) found in tyre fitment centres as well as the assembly used for DIY to check balance and rim wobble.

Richard.

RH Davidson

Richard, many thanks . Michael
Michael Beswick

Richard - I would like a copy of your drawing too please. Thank you - Dave
David DuBois

I've been making enquiries in the UK about having these made. Really you only need the outer adapter, as a standard cone and spring will support the inner taper good enough for balancing.

A company near Redditch in the Midlands will make them for £50, I can collect, but others may need to add postage, and as I don't know how heavy they are yet I don't know how much that will be! Anyone interested? If enough are we should get a reduction.
P Hunt

Guys-
All thanks to Richard for his diligence, but this is not a very good design.

There will inevitably be inaccuracies in commercial balance equipment, but there is no point in adding errors in your adapters.

Rules are that:

a)All location is to be taken off controlled surfaces. This means the actual tapers of the wheel, not their corners or edges. In particular, on the tool, the junction of the hub back taper with the cylindrical section (splined part) needs to be relieved, as it is on a hub. Used wheels always have wear that results in raised burrs where the splines run out into the taper.
Paul's contention that "standard cone and spring will support the inner taper good enough for balancing." is also out, since the standard cone will also contact these burrs, if its taper is equal or less than the hub taper. And, if the standard cone taper angle is greater than the 30 deg hub taper, as I believe is usually the case, then it will locate on the outer radius runout of the wheel hub flange, also uncontrolled.
Remember that small errors at the hub result in large errors further out, eg, at the tire circumference, which is what you are really trying to get right.

b) The number of loose fits subject to slop, and surfaces subject to damage, must be minimal.
It is unlikely that balance machine shafts will be exactly 40mm worldwide, and without burrs etc., so it is best to avoid using that as a locating surface for your tool. For the home version, use of threaded rod is also not on, since such is invariably undersized by an indeterminate amount, and threads are always subject to damage.
Cylindrical loose fits are firstly <loose>, and secondly require clearance according to how likely they are to be damaged = <more loose>. If you wanted to harden, grind, and treat with utmost respect all such, you could use them, but it's costly and bothersome and unnecessary.

c) Commercial machines have cones as standard, and tolerances according to the particular shop. There's nothing you can do about this, but use it to your advantage. The tool should locate off the commercial cones, nothing else.

d) It seems to me that it is silly to procure a big chunk(s) of metal, and then machine most of it away, when most of us have a nice 90% finished blank to hand, ie an old hub and cap.

This is what I'd do:
1) Get an old hub and cap.
1a) If you want to be really particular, mount it on a mandrel and take a very light cleanup cut on the back taper, not forgetting to increase the relief mentioned in a), above, to compensate for the relief reduction from the cleanup cut. I'd take the relief back a bit more, to allow for out-of-tolerance wheels; reducing the width of the taper by 20-25% won't hurt a thing.
2) Machine a plug to fit where the inner bearing race goes, pressfit as the race; ID of this to be whatever your local commercial cones are, probably a 45 taper.
2a) If you are a tire shop, or a bored tool freak, harden this so it lasts 20 million years.
3) Check that the ID of the hub at the outer end is concentric to everything else. Machine a plug for the outer end of the hub, again pressfit in the end, and ID a taper suitable for available standard cones, and big enough to clear the machine shaft. OD should be less than the root of the threads, so that you can put the modified cap on over this.
3a) Same option as 2a!
4) Bore the center of the cap out so that it screws on without interfering with plug 3).
4a) Should the balance machine have a very large shaft, there may not be room for plug 3). Remove the chrome from the cap center, bore the cap center out to an appropriate taper. For heavy use, press fit or braze a lump on the cap and bore it to the correct taper. Note that accurately cut V-threads are a centering cone in themselves - the threads will locate on center when tightened.

For home use:
H1) Do all the above if you want to be able to use it both on the home mandrel and a commercial machine.
H2) Make a mandrel with a press fit (on shaft) taper cone to locate in plug 2.
H3) Make a loose fit (on shaft) cone to locate in plug 3 or cap 4a. Bore a 60 deg internal taper on the ID of this, to take a standard taper lug nut, threaded on mandrel shaft. This will center the home mandrel, but allow it all to come apart for use on a machine.
H4) If you want to only use it at home, then plugs 2 & 3 can be press fit on the mandrel shaft.

Of course, you could do what I do. I have all the hubs I usually deal with, mounted on stub axles, with light oil in the bearings, no grease seals, and bearing nuts finger snug. I have a large collection of wheel weights removed from customer cars that were "professionally computer balanced". These invariably had complaints of shaking, sometimes after a half dozen paid balance jobs, and repeated diagnoses of "Bent wheels". Every car leaves here with no shakes up to near as fast as it will go, 99% on the same wheels they came in on.

FRM
FR Millmore

So, FR, are you saying that you get good results from static balancing with the wheels mounted on a very free running hub? The motor bike people balance their wheels that way, but I thought we had to cope with imbalance between the outer and inner faces of the wheel as well as the relatively simple balance around the axis.

I've got one of the motorbike set ups, and it looks easy to adapt it to take a wire wheel hub and a drilled out wheel nut. They use a ten millimetre shaft resting on two ball races at each end, so friction is very low. Just needs two parts turned up to fit inside the hub.

David

D Balkwill

Like this

http://www.nomartirechanger.com/videos/29
D Balkwill

If you are going to static balance on a hub, why not do it on a front hub on the car? With the car jacked to make that wheel vertical and the pads pushed back.
P Hunt

Paul,

The reason for the development of the inner cone is that our local phase balancers have standard cones of which two fit the inner cone. One with an angle less then 30deg that aligns on the crest of the splines and could peen them. It also appears to pick up miss-alignment from worn spines. The other greater then 30deg that aligns on the outer radius of the hubs cone. Better to have a gentle radius aligning on the centre of the inner cones taper or a copy of the axels hub. Thus the development of the inner cone.


FRM

You missed the point.

The inner and outer cone are nothing more than a replica of axel hub and spinner/nut.
The cones clear the wheels splines by 2mm and don’t need relief. They protect the splines on placing the assembly on the balancer shaft.
When fastened, the inner and outer cones tapper is the only controlled surface that is in contact with the wheel hubs controlled surface.
The cones inner diameters are to be made identical to your preferred local phase balancers cones (ours are 40mm).

If phase balancing using cones on normal rims and their control surfaces are an acceptable method of balancing wheels then it is suitable for knock on rims using their control surfaces. Nothing has being reinvented.

As for the DIY assembly, the 16mm threaded bar does nothing more than keep the assembly together. The gravitational rotation of the wheel is insignificantly affected by the threaded bar and bushes compared to that of a neat fitting shaft.
The rolling resistance of the two 6004 bearings on the 16mm shaft with the seals removed and washed out with paraffin is far less than that of your DIY setup. 6004 bearings and threaded bar and bushes is a simple inexpensive setup.

Lastly, this is for those of us that do not have old parts at hand to modify and need a simple solution.

Richard.
RH Davidson

David - yes, "static" balancing usually works fine nowadays. Modern tires are so good, as a result of computer checks in production, that they are generally within reasonable limits, If the wheels are straight and not homemade out of old tractor parts, they are usually likewise. "Dynamic" balance is more of a problem as the assembly gets wider, but most "dynamic" problems are a result of idiot monkeys putting a half pound of weights all on one side of the rim to "balance" an uncentered wheel. Another error is that tires frequently do not seat squarely when first installed, even with clean rims and rubber lube; this results in spurious "out-of-balance" that gets "fixed" by weights, but changes as soon as the tires seat with a few miles driving. Careful examination of alignment marks moulded into the tire vis-a-vis the rim will reveal this before it is balanced incorrectly. It's common to have to re-balance after the first hundred miles if this is not attended to. It's common to find three weights on the same axis, one for "static", and two for "dynamic". Simply moving the one "static" from inside to outside or vv would eliminate the need for the two "dynamic" weights - the same tire error that requires the "static" weight causes the "dynamic" problem, but it is compounded by putting the "static" on the wrong side of the rim. If you are sure the "static" is OK, but you still have a shake in the steering, then moving any "static" weights to the opposite side (inner-outer) of the rim frequently fixes the problem.
Split your weights inside-outside (or near center for stick-on weights) to avoid introducing problems, especially if you need more than 1oz/30gm. More than that usually indicates a problem anyway. In the 60's it was not rare to need several ounces to balance "statically", and several more to get them "dynamically" correct, especially on US made tires (on car spin balancer). Now I rarely need over 1 oz, and on really good wheels with new rubber no weights is frequently the answer. One of my cars is running General Altimax HP on really nice Italian alloys at <.010" runout radial and lateral, with no weights, and is smooth as silk well into three figures. Another I just fitted with two new and two 30% worn winter tires on factory steel wheels, at least one with visible damage, and the worst one had 1 oz split half in & half outside - equally smooth. I cure a lot of customer complaints on Rostyles by simply removing all the weights (up to 8 oz!) the "computer balance professionals" had put on. I mark the weight locations, remove them, and try it - if need be I can put some or all of them back (never had to do that yet, though I've put some on in different positions).


Paul - I've done a lot that way, or on the rear of an FWD car, but the grease and seals make it insensitive, hence difficult, and modern preloaded bearings also screw you up. If a half oz weight put on at random doesn't clearly cause the wheel to rotate, then there's too much friction, 1/4oz is better. Careful work still gets better results than most paid for jobs I see, but then I only get the ones owners are complaining about!

Richard - Not trying to start a fight here, just attend to some errors. I get the point, but it seems you don't.
For any other than new unworn wheels, the tool as shown does not duplicate the hub in its location on the 30deg taper, UNTIL and UNLESS you provide the necessary relief as I describe in a) above. Read it again and go examine some used wheels - you will see that the taper surface wears leaving the ends of the wheel hub splines standing proud of the taper surface. That leads exactly to the situation of your comment to Paul, viz: "One with an angle less then 30deg that aligns on the crest of the splines and could peen them. It also appears to pick up miss-alignment from worn spines."

After that, if your intent is simply to make an adapter to suit a particular machine, and you attend reasonably to the fit to the main shaft, you are OK.
If you want to use it on another machine with a different shaft, or you want to use it with the "home" mandrel, then you need to avoid adding other errors.

If you think that locating the center axis on an undersized threaded rod with a bunch of random clearances is good enough, OK, but others might like to know this before subscribing to purchase of these as Paul has proposed. I just measured a piece of 5/8" (.625") threaded rod at .602" OD, to which you can add all the other clearances. I note that your threaded rod has now changed from 20mm to 16, and that additional factors of removing seals and washing bearings have appeared, and that the bearings are unchanged as 6004. My Federal Mogul/BCA book hasn't got a 6004, but if it is a standard metric ball bearing then --04 means it will be of 20mm bore. Most such are available without seals; shields might be better since they have no drag but do protect the bearing from dirt.

Lastly, if you do not have a dead hub then obviously you have to start from scratch. Some of us are pathologically attached to junk, so we have lots of such things!

BTW, is "phase balancer" a common term there, or elsewhere? Never heard it before.

FRM
FR Millmore

Hello RH DAvidson,

One friend a mine realized such a template hub for balancing machine. This hub had been intented to be left to a tyre seller, since then all people who want a serious wire wheel balance go to this tyre shop. This solution works finely.
Regards.
Guy RENOU

Attached is a revised drawing No 31/01/10 A, incorporating changes to remove any slack in the assembly that may occur as picked up and pointed out by FRM ¡V understood, and thank youƒº. The control surfaces have also being changed/reduced and will clear the splines and any outer ridge that may be created by the axel hub taper on the wheel hub inner taper. That is they will contact inside the area that the axel hub taper contacts.

On today¡¦s careful inspection of my cars wheel and axel hubs, on one set I found indentations on the axel hub taper caused by the wheel hub splines and a ridge running around the outside of wheel hub taper caused by the axel hub taper. The probable cause of vibration from a loose fitting wheel.

The second drawing No 31/01/10 B, is a revised simple DIY version that does away with the cone inserts. It is for use with a 20mm threaded rod (16mm as previously stated was my typing error ¡V sorry), 2 x 20 mm nuts similar to self cantering wheel nuts, 2 x 6004-ZZ bearings (ZZ indicates with 2 metal shields that clear the inner race, 6004-2RS indicate with 2 rubber seals that make contact with the inner race, 6004 is a plain) and a stand.

In my Mk1 version I used the standard wheel balancers cone on the inside and an adapter between the balancers cone and wheel on the outside. The outer cone to cone arrangement could not align easily. It made the wheel appear it had a wobble and was scrapped.

A phase balancer is an electrically operated machine used for aligning dynamic balance (causing wobble) with the static balance (causing eccentric movement) electronically. It is commonly called a wheel balancing machine or wheel balancer. Because most motorcycle wheels are narrow and the tyre shape is round, the dynamic forces are closer to the centre line of the tyre and are very small. Static balancing is acceptable for most motorcycle wheels.

If the printing in the images are too difficult to read, I will send you a clearer e-mail version.

Richard.


RH Davidson

Second drawing.

Richard.

RH Davidson

Richard, could you pleaseemail me the drawings-my eyes are getting old!!! Also a copy for Paul Hunt who has swanned off on vacation! Thanks Michael
Michael Beswick

Richard
Please could you send me the drawings for the cones to mgste1@yahoo.co.uk

Thank you Ste
Ste brown

Well I've now done the static balance rig using the motorbike kit and it works. I've been to France and back with very little shake. I still think I can get the bearings to run with less friction, but I'm within a few grammes.

Here's how it looks.

D Balkwill

Close up showing the shaft coming through a hole drilled in an onl wheel nut. The shaft has cones which I've glued inside an old hub with epoxy. Set up to run true with a DTI first. It runs on the ball races so there's not much friction, but I'm going to take the dust covers off to help a bit more.

David

D Balkwill

Hello David,

Really interesting device, you too may true wheel like a bike one with such bench. Interestingly efficient but not that expensive.
Guy RENOU

I've had a quote of £35 for the outer cone, plus £30 for the inner cone *which may be optional) based on Richard's revised drawings. Got a set on order which I'll try out.
Paul (too many Pauls own MGBs) Hunt

This thread was discussed between 05/01/2010 and 08/03/2010

MG MGB Technical index

This thread is from the archives. Join the live MG MGB Technical BBS now