KTM broke in half.

proC_class
Posts
19
Joined
4/20/2022
Location
Lehi, UT US
4/20/2022 5:39pm
Luxon MX wrote:
I'm glad the internet engineers have already found the problem and concluded that our product is junk. Can't wait for the internet lawyers to jump in...
I'm glad the internet engineers have already found the problem and concluded that our product is junk. Can't wait for the internet lawyers to jump in too!

I'm not at Atlanta, but from what I can tell at this point is that the pinch bolt at the stem failed, which caused the top clamp to fail, and then the bike to "break in half".

The KTM design uses the top triple clamp to clamp around the steering stem with a pinch bolt instead of the "standard" Japanese bike design where the top clamp is sandwiched between the adjuster nut and the lock nut. It's a pretty elegant design, but if the bolt fails, then the assembly becomes very weak and the clamp will fail. This is the same design that KTM/Husky/GasGas use on all of their stock clamps and factory clamp and multiple aftermarket companies use on their clamps for these bikes.

Here's the actual broken part from today:



You can see the broken bolt on the right, which allowed the clamp to break (on the left). Note the fresh break of the clamp and that there's no fretting or other evidence of a previous crack. That shows this happened all at once and the clamp itself wasn't the problem, it was the bolt. We use bolts that are stronger than the stock KTM bolts (random samples tested to failure for each batch we receive), so either the bolt was over-torqued to the point that it was on the edge of failure, or it came loose and that allowed things to give way.

This is the first failure of this kind for us, but it's not all that uncommon with this general design. Multiple other aftermarket clamps and stock KTM clamps have all failed in the same way. Not because the clamps are bad, but because the bolt failed; most likely because it was over torqued or came loose.

Regardless, we'll take a closer look at the clamps when we get them back to see if there's anything that I'm missing from the photos, but it seems pretty clear cut. If this were a design problem, we'd see this a whole lot more instead of this one incident. Freddie Noren has been on this same setup all year successfully and finished 11th in the 450 class today.

Here's a few examples of the same failure, stock and aftermarket, I'm sure there's plenty more I don't have photos of:








I’m going to invest in a set of your clamps. That was a reasonable explanation and made me think you aren’t hiding anything about your clamps. Showing the good and bad just makes me think you’re an honest company.
16
soggy
Posts
8477
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
UT US
4/20/2022 6:19pm
Motodave15 wrote:
Should I replace this, I was just looking at my bike and happened to see this and then this thread and now I’m like 99% sketched...
Should I replace this, I was just looking at my bike and happened to see this and then this thread and now I’m like 99% sketched out

Replace or non issue?? (I’m already leaning towards replace)
It’s dumbfounding you even had to ask.
1
1
Sandusky26
Posts
3385
Joined
7/28/2021
Location
Eastern, NC US
4/20/2022 6:21pm
Sounds like the clamps broke and that caused the crash, not the other way around. Wanted to let you hippies know.
1
14
4/21/2022 3:26am
Sandusky26 wrote:
Sounds like the clamps broke and that caused the crash, not the other way around. Wanted to let you hippies know.
So are you going to rename this thread "luxon clamps broke" or does your Suzuki pride interfere with that reality?
1
3

The Shop

Sandusky26
Posts
3385
Joined
7/28/2021
Location
Eastern, NC US
4/21/2022 4:11am
Sandusky26 wrote:
Sounds like the clamps broke and that caused the crash, not the other way around. Wanted to let you hippies know.
So are you going to rename this thread "luxon clamps broke" or does your Suzuki pride interfere with that reality?
8 pages of Young’s modulus and other bs, all I wanted to know is what happened to that KTM.
2
4
murph783
Posts
1355
Joined
3/2/2011
Location
CT US
4/21/2022 4:25am
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?)

Where do we land with lubricant on threads for torque spec? I know you recommend anti seize on Ti, but is that a dissimilar metals issue? I’m just looking at consistent specs. Conventional knowledge says put a little dab of grease on clean threads. But should I then compensate up or down on the torque spec? I only ask because I want to start playing with some chassis torque specs on my bike to see what it does with flex, so I want to make sure I’m accurate one way or the other.
sandman768
Posts
7936
Joined
3/21/2014
Location
Saratoga Springs, NY US
4/21/2022 5:16am
I have had 2 different Bolts on my KTM”s shear the heads off, discovered during normal routine check over, one bolt was this very bolt on the top clamp, the other was an upper subframe bolt. Both the heads of the bolts were just gone! The upper clamp bolt, I was able to get the remaining part of the bolt out pretty easy, leading me to believe the Bolt had become loose, the subframe bolt was on a new 450 with about 2-3 hrs on it, the remains of that bolt was much harder to extract… likely due to the loc tite used from the factory. Nothing like drilling on a brand new bike with a broken bolt! Thankfully all my old Suzuki restores prepared me well for drilling out frozen/ broken bolts. I think many of the KtM common bolts are a grade lower than what the Japanese use…
6
rbm33
Posts
429
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Duncan, OK US
Fantasy
4/21/2022 5:28am
murph783 wrote:
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?) Where do we land with lubricant...
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?)

Where do we land with lubricant on threads for torque spec? I know you recommend anti seize on Ti, but is that a dissimilar metals issue? I’m just looking at consistent specs. Conventional knowledge says put a little dab of grease on clean threads. But should I then compensate up or down on the torque spec? I only ask because I want to start playing with some chassis torque specs on my bike to see what it does with flex, so I want to make sure I’m accurate one way or the other.
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question.
did the factory torque spec call out a thread lubricant or loctite? if so they most likely factored the torque differences over using a dry bolt.
in most cases the factor is around 30% for lubricated bolts, meaning that it takes 30% less torque to achieve adequate amount of "tightness" due to less friction.
However this number can also vary based on the type of coating on a fastener, the 30% value is mostly based on a non coated bolt.
1
kb228
Posts
6154
Joined
1/31/2018
Location
Mansfield, OH US
4/21/2022 5:48am
forensic wrote:
how can you tell from the photo that the bolt failed and then the clamp, as opposed to the bolt and clamp failing in one overload...
how can you tell from the photo that the bolt failed and then the clamp, as opposed to the bolt and clamp failing in one overload event?
philG wrote:
the colour of the breaks. Just by looking at it you can see there are indications on the bolt and nothing on the clamp. If you...
the colour of the breaks.

Just by looking at it you can see there are indications on the bolt and nothing on the clamp.

If you sent that for analysis, the grain structure would show clearly.

When you get to stuff like this, at the top level, the drawing will even state if it can be made out of flat or round stock, and it will specify the grain direction too. That is on top of a detailed material spec, which the best manufacturers would test per batch, irrespective of what the certs tell them.

You would think thats the case but if its a small hardware manufacturer i doubt they do that. If you want that kind of documentation you would probably need to buy from holokrome
JM485
Posts
5785
Joined
10/1/2013
Location
Davis, CA US
4/21/2022 6:29am
murph783 wrote:
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?) Where do we land with lubricant...
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?)

Where do we land with lubricant on threads for torque spec? I know you recommend anti seize on Ti, but is that a dissimilar metals issue? I’m just looking at consistent specs. Conventional knowledge says put a little dab of grease on clean threads. But should I then compensate up or down on the torque spec? I only ask because I want to start playing with some chassis torque specs on my bike to see what it does with flex, so I want to make sure I’m accurate one way or the other.
rbm33 wrote:
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question. did the factory torque spec call...
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question.
did the factory torque spec call out a thread lubricant or loctite? if so they most likely factored the torque differences over using a dry bolt.
in most cases the factor is around 30% for lubricated bolts, meaning that it takes 30% less torque to achieve adequate amount of "tightness" due to less friction.
However this number can also vary based on the type of coating on a fastener, the 30% value is mostly based on a non coated bolt.
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex. A bolted joint should be rigid, and deviating from that can lead to accelerated fastener fatigue because the preload is reduced. I don’t know how this myth that reducing the torque on your engine hangers by 10% somehow reduces frame rigidity ever got started but it’s a terrible idea on a lot of levels, and isn’t going to produce the outcome that you’re looking for anyways.
7
Luxon MX
Posts
1372
Joined
11/6/2017
Location
San Diego, CA US
Fantasy
4/21/2022 7:57am
murph783 wrote:
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?) Where do we land with lubricant...
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?)

Where do we land with lubricant on threads for torque spec? I know you recommend anti seize on Ti, but is that a dissimilar metals issue? I’m just looking at consistent specs. Conventional knowledge says put a little dab of grease on clean threads. But should I then compensate up or down on the torque spec? I only ask because I want to start playing with some chassis torque specs on my bike to see what it does with flex, so I want to make sure I’m accurate one way or the other.
I have had a blog post 80% complete on this exact subject for months now, just been too busy to finish it! The responses from rbm33 and JM485 above are right on the money. I'll try to summarize some important points here without writing out my whole blog post in the process:

* Torque is irrelevant. What we actually care about is the bolt tension (clamping force). Unfortunately, it's not easy to measure that tension directly, so we use applied torque to make an educated guess at what that bolt tension is. Too little bolt tension and the bolt comes loose and the joint is no longer doing its job; things can come apart in a bad way. Too much bolt tension and the bolt is at a higher state of stress than it should be. If an external load comes around that's big enough, the bolt can fail making the assembly come apart in spectacular fashion (which is my best guess as to why we have this thread in the first place).

* That educated guess would be very accurate if it weren't due to friction and the unknowns that surround it. There are A LOT of factors at play when it comes to friction - bolt coatings, "nut" coatings (in the case of the clamps here, the threaded aluminum hole), lubrication applied, thread lockers, how many times the bolt has bee reused, etc.

* The vast majority of the torque you apply to a bolt is eaten up by overcoming friction rather than actually tensioning the bolt. It varies based on the conditions (lubricant, bolt size, etc.), but in the case of a steel bolt installed in aluminum triple clamps without lubricant (typical of a stock callout), only 6% of the input torque is actually tensioning the bolt. 40% of that input torque is used to overcome the friction at the threads and 54% is used to overcome the friction under the bolt head.

* The amount of friction present is directly related to the amount of tension in the bolt after torqueing it to a specific amount. Two bolted joints that are torqued to the same amount, but one dry and one with lubricant will have wildly different tensions.

* The only way to really know the difference in the torque-tension relationship between a dry bolt and the same bolt with a particular lubricant applied is to test it. In general rough numbers, though, it's a 30-40% difference in friction between the two.

* So, in the case above of two bolts torqued to the same amount, one dry and one lubricated, one of those bolts could have 40% more tension than the other. Depending on the external loading applied and the material of the bolt, that can easily mean the difference between having a great day at the track or bolt failure and a trip to the hospital!

* A correct bolted joint will not have any relative movement between parts of that assembly. So long as that is the case, changing the torque 5% or 10% (or whatever, really), will NOT change the overall stiffness of the assembly. Or in other words, there is no one in the world who can feel the difference after reducing the bolt tension of their engine mounts 5%. The difference just isn't there.
* Unless, of course, the torque is so low that the parts have relative movement between them. But that would be a very bad thing (and would also be considered a failure of the bolted joint).

Most all of our products use titanium bolts threaded into aluminum holes. We typically specify using anti seize for all of these bolts (because titanium in aluminum dry is a bad thing and it can seize up due to galling), both on the threads and under the bolt head. This creates a torque-tension relationship that's different than the typical steel bolt without any lubricant; and it's about 40% less torque to create the same bolt tension. Using anti-seize also creates a much more repeatable torque-tension relationship when reusing the bolt multiple times.

The downside of using anti-seize is that the torque spec is different from stock. It's easy to over-tension these bolts if you're doing it just by feel. The bolts are also more likely to come loose, since there's less friction to hold it in place.

In general, we believe the downsides of using anti-seize are outweighed by the upsides, and we try to mitigate the downsides by including the correct anti-seize with our products, including the correct instructions for installing the bolts with anti-seize with torque specs in our product instructions (with warnings that they must be followed), and engraving those torque specs on our parts directly. There are still mistakes made, despite that. And as we've seen, they can lead to some ugly situations.

So to answer your question more directly:

If you're using a torque wrench and will be checking torque often, use some grease on the bolt threads and under the bolt head. This will allow for much more consistent and repeatable torque-tension relationship. Reduce the applied torque from what is specified for a dry bolt by 30% to compensate for the lubricant. I would recommend using a paint marker to mark the bolts so you can quickly look at them to see if they're coming loose.

If you're more of a torque it and forget about it type, using a thread locker is a good idea (and the paint pen idea above is still good too). We recommend Loctite 243 (medium strength, primerless) for most bolts M6 and larger on the bike. If you apply a lot of Loctite (if it's oozing all over, on the threads and under the bolt head), reduce your torque by up to 20%. If only using a few drops (typically all that's necessary), then use the same torque as a dry bolt. For bolts that you really don't want coming loose (sprocket bolts, etc.), use Loctite 263 (high strength, primerless). Do not reduce your torque specs with 263, it doesn't have any significant lubricative properties.

Be careful reusing a bolt that has had Loctite applied earlier. The dry Loctite on the bolt and in the nut will add friction and throw off your torque-tension. You should thoroughly clean everything, then re-apply the Loctite, and torque appropriately.
23
FGR01
Posts
6006
Joined
10/1/2006
Location
AZ US
Fantasy
4/21/2022 7:59am
JM485 wrote:
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex...
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex. A bolted joint should be rigid, and deviating from that can lead to accelerated fastener fatigue because the preload is reduced. I don’t know how this myth that reducing the torque on your engine hangers by 10% somehow reduces frame rigidity ever got started but it’s a terrible idea on a lot of levels, and isn’t going to produce the outcome that you’re looking for anyways.
Bro, you just killed a lot of peoples dreams...... So, you're telling me that I can't tell the difference in handling between 1.0NM and 1.2NM torque on my shroud bolts? My data says easy .5sec/lap ! Woohoo

18
philG
Posts
10858
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
4/21/2022 10:41am
forensic wrote:
how can you tell from the photo that the bolt failed and then the clamp, as opposed to the bolt and clamp failing in one overload...
how can you tell from the photo that the bolt failed and then the clamp, as opposed to the bolt and clamp failing in one overload event?
philG wrote:
the colour of the breaks. Just by looking at it you can see there are indications on the bolt and nothing on the clamp. If you...
the colour of the breaks.

Just by looking at it you can see there are indications on the bolt and nothing on the clamp.

If you sent that for analysis, the grain structure would show clearly.

When you get to stuff like this, at the top level, the drawing will even state if it can be made out of flat or round stock, and it will specify the grain direction too. That is on top of a detailed material spec, which the best manufacturers would test per batch, irrespective of what the certs tell them.

kb228 wrote:
You would think thats the case but if its a small hardware manufacturer i doubt they do that. If you want that kind of documentation you...
You would think thats the case but if its a small hardware manufacturer i doubt they do that. If you want that kind of documentation you would probably need to buy from holokrome
But a small hardware manufacturer can buy the same bolt we buy..

The only difference is they will trust the certification, whereas we would have them lab tested because the budget is there to do it.



Pogipolini Ti bolts are off the shelf, its an expensive shelf, but you can get them .

I am notgoing to repeat what Luxon has said in a great post about bolt materials, and locking and lubricants.. He is selling stuff,and understands what matters.

I am constantly amazed by people who will spend $$$ on Cerakote and dont replace cheap OEM bolts .

We will leave the Hard Anodising discussion for another day..
1
Bruce372
Posts
6329
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
4/21/2022 12:45pm
One one thousand on the rattle gun is tight

Two one thousands is proper tight.

Works for very fastener!
3
murph783
Posts
1355
Joined
3/2/2011
Location
CT US
4/21/2022 4:50pm
murph783 wrote:
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?) Where do we land with lubricant...
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?)

Where do we land with lubricant on threads for torque spec? I know you recommend anti seize on Ti, but is that a dissimilar metals issue? I’m just looking at consistent specs. Conventional knowledge says put a little dab of grease on clean threads. But should I then compensate up or down on the torque spec? I only ask because I want to start playing with some chassis torque specs on my bike to see what it does with flex, so I want to make sure I’m accurate one way or the other.
Luxon MX wrote:
I have had a blog post 80% complete on this exact subject for months now, just been too busy to finish it! The responses from rbm33...
I have had a blog post 80% complete on this exact subject for months now, just been too busy to finish it! The responses from rbm33 and JM485 above are right on the money. I'll try to summarize some important points here without writing out my whole blog post in the process:

* Torque is irrelevant. What we actually care about is the bolt tension (clamping force). Unfortunately, it's not easy to measure that tension directly, so we use applied torque to make an educated guess at what that bolt tension is. Too little bolt tension and the bolt comes loose and the joint is no longer doing its job; things can come apart in a bad way. Too much bolt tension and the bolt is at a higher state of stress than it should be. If an external load comes around that's big enough, the bolt can fail making the assembly come apart in spectacular fashion (which is my best guess as to why we have this thread in the first place).

* That educated guess would be very accurate if it weren't due to friction and the unknowns that surround it. There are A LOT of factors at play when it comes to friction - bolt coatings, "nut" coatings (in the case of the clamps here, the threaded aluminum hole), lubrication applied, thread lockers, how many times the bolt has bee reused, etc.

* The vast majority of the torque you apply to a bolt is eaten up by overcoming friction rather than actually tensioning the bolt. It varies based on the conditions (lubricant, bolt size, etc.), but in the case of a steel bolt installed in aluminum triple clamps without lubricant (typical of a stock callout), only 6% of the input torque is actually tensioning the bolt. 40% of that input torque is used to overcome the friction at the threads and 54% is used to overcome the friction under the bolt head.

* The amount of friction present is directly related to the amount of tension in the bolt after torqueing it to a specific amount. Two bolted joints that are torqued to the same amount, but one dry and one with lubricant will have wildly different tensions.

* The only way to really know the difference in the torque-tension relationship between a dry bolt and the same bolt with a particular lubricant applied is to test it. In general rough numbers, though, it's a 30-40% difference in friction between the two.

* So, in the case above of two bolts torqued to the same amount, one dry and one lubricated, one of those bolts could have 40% more tension than the other. Depending on the external loading applied and the material of the bolt, that can easily mean the difference between having a great day at the track or bolt failure and a trip to the hospital!

* A correct bolted joint will not have any relative movement between parts of that assembly. So long as that is the case, changing the torque 5% or 10% (or whatever, really), will NOT change the overall stiffness of the assembly. Or in other words, there is no one in the world who can feel the difference after reducing the bolt tension of their engine mounts 5%. The difference just isn't there.
* Unless, of course, the torque is so low that the parts have relative movement between them. But that would be a very bad thing (and would also be considered a failure of the bolted joint).

Most all of our products use titanium bolts threaded into aluminum holes. We typically specify using anti seize for all of these bolts (because titanium in aluminum dry is a bad thing and it can seize up due to galling), both on the threads and under the bolt head. This creates a torque-tension relationship that's different than the typical steel bolt without any lubricant; and it's about 40% less torque to create the same bolt tension. Using anti-seize also creates a much more repeatable torque-tension relationship when reusing the bolt multiple times.

The downside of using anti-seize is that the torque spec is different from stock. It's easy to over-tension these bolts if you're doing it just by feel. The bolts are also more likely to come loose, since there's less friction to hold it in place.

In general, we believe the downsides of using anti-seize are outweighed by the upsides, and we try to mitigate the downsides by including the correct anti-seize with our products, including the correct instructions for installing the bolts with anti-seize with torque specs in our product instructions (with warnings that they must be followed), and engraving those torque specs on our parts directly. There are still mistakes made, despite that. And as we've seen, they can lead to some ugly situations.

So to answer your question more directly:

If you're using a torque wrench and will be checking torque often, use some grease on the bolt threads and under the bolt head. This will allow for much more consistent and repeatable torque-tension relationship. Reduce the applied torque from what is specified for a dry bolt by 30% to compensate for the lubricant. I would recommend using a paint marker to mark the bolts so you can quickly look at them to see if they're coming loose.

If you're more of a torque it and forget about it type, using a thread locker is a good idea (and the paint pen idea above is still good too). We recommend Loctite 243 (medium strength, primerless) for most bolts M6 and larger on the bike. If you apply a lot of Loctite (if it's oozing all over, on the threads and under the bolt head), reduce your torque by up to 20%. If only using a few drops (typically all that's necessary), then use the same torque as a dry bolt. For bolts that you really don't want coming loose (sprocket bolts, etc.), use Loctite 263 (high strength, primerless). Do not reduce your torque specs with 263, it doesn't have any significant lubricative properties.

Be careful reusing a bolt that has had Loctite applied earlier. The dry Loctite on the bolt and in the nut will add friction and throw off your torque-tension. You should thoroughly clean everything, then re-apply the Loctite, and torque appropriately.
Cannot thank you enough man! Love reading this kind of stuff. One of these days I’ll start buying up parts to try and repay some of the time you put in putting this knowledge (and great product) out!
5
1
4/21/2022 5:02pm
murph783 wrote:
Cannot thank you enough man! Love reading this kind of stuff. One of these days I’ll start buying up parts to try and repay some of...
Cannot thank you enough man! Love reading this kind of stuff. One of these days I’ll start buying up parts to try and repay some of the time you put in putting this knowledge (and great product) out!
…and it’s BILLY Tongue
4
Do_Work
Posts
92
Joined
3/24/2010
Location
US
4/22/2022 6:26am Edited Date/Time 4/22/2022 6:36am
Couple things.

The engine hanger opinions have merit, but missing the fact that when you only have one bolt it's tough to prevent rotation in the axis of the bolt. You could probably get similar results from adding lube under the bolt head and around the threaded hole as you can with reduced torque.

The clamp bolt in question here is not in a typical bolted joint configuration. The two faying surfaces never touch which makes the joint 100% dependent on the strength of the bolt. Ti bolts are cool but the strength and brittleness are inferior to a good 160ksi A286 bolt (grade 8 and up). Aluminum threads are a weak point but can be fixed with a stainless helicoil.

edit: another branch on a failure analysis fishbone would be raw billet quality. For example we frequently find vendors falsify their material certs. Also is it ultrasonic scanned for internal defects.
1
1
4/22/2022 6:32am
philG wrote:
the colour of the breaks. Just by looking at it you can see there are indications on the bolt and nothing on the clamp. If you...
the colour of the breaks.

Just by looking at it you can see there are indications on the bolt and nothing on the clamp.

If you sent that for analysis, the grain structure would show clearly.

When you get to stuff like this, at the top level, the drawing will even state if it can be made out of flat or round stock, and it will specify the grain direction too. That is on top of a detailed material spec, which the best manufacturers would test per batch, irrespective of what the certs tell them.

forensic wrote:
With all due respect, I believe you are speculating and giving vague technical-sounding statements. (unless you care to explain) I have worked with metallurgists on mechanical...
With all due respect, I believe you are speculating and giving vague technical-sounding statements. (unless you care to explain)
I have worked with metallurgists on mechanical failures like this and there is no way you can look at that photo and tell that the bolt was over-tightened. A little quick to throw the mechanic under the bus IMO. Unless there is a good reason to assume that... i.e., are those other similar failures also a result of over-tightening, or did the mechanic say he cranked on it? if so, then it is probably time to emphasize proper installation in the product literature!
philG wrote:
I never said it was over tightened, i said i thought it failed.first. . From what is visible , its a typical bolt failure, at the...
I never said it was over tightened, i said i thought it failed.first. .

From what is visible , its a typical bolt failure, at the end of the thread.. if it was loose or over tightened, or torqued correctly, it still broke.

I have seen more failures from bolts being too loose than tight, stuff that is too tight breaks pretty quickly, whereas stuff that backs off, does it over time and may have been fine for a while.



You can see on here where the grain structure shows the crack starting at the thread root at the bottom, spreading up, and then failing and moving to the top. The time frame for that may be very short once the initial cracking starts, but there is a timeline, whereas on the clamp picture, the break is clean ,and there is no obvious change of colour.





A good lab guy would tell you from looking at the grain structure.. i know the guys we used could do that . Loss of clamp load will always make stuff move till it breaks.


How many times have you seen a bolt snap, where the head came off and left the shank?

It doesnt , because the under head radius stops that happening.





That's a really nice example of beach marks and ratcheting. That's surely a fatigue failure. Its not the bolt in question though is it?

captmoto
Posts
5805
Joined
4/22/2009
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, CA US
4/22/2022 7:46am
philG wrote:
But a small hardware manufacturer can buy the same bolt we buy.. The only difference is they will trust the certification, whereas we would have them...
But a small hardware manufacturer can buy the same bolt we buy..

The only difference is they will trust the certification, whereas we would have them lab tested because the budget is there to do it.



Pogipolini Ti bolts are off the shelf, its an expensive shelf, but you can get them .

I am notgoing to repeat what Luxon has said in a great post about bolt materials, and locking and lubricants.. He is selling stuff,and understands what matters.

I am constantly amazed by people who will spend $$$ on Cerakote and dont replace cheap OEM bolts .

We will leave the Hard Anodising discussion for another day..
Powder coatingtuning tip. spoke nipples is my favorite
Madmax31
Posts
2133
Joined
1/7/2009
Location
Cincinnati, OH US
Fantasy
4/22/2022 7:52am
I guess I'm pretty stupid but not really understanding how a little 6 or 8mm bolt is really the issue. I'm not arguing I just don't understand.

You have 8 pinch bolts between upper and lower clamps. Why wouldn't the clamp bolts be enough to hold things together? The fork legs are typically a pretty snug fit in the clamps, then you add in the 8 pinch bolts and even if you left out the upper bolt I don't see why it would be a problem.

Again, me being stupid probably but I just can't wrap my head around this bolt being a big deal.
Luxon MX
Posts
1372
Joined
11/6/2017
Location
San Diego, CA US
Fantasy
4/22/2022 7:57am
Madmax31 wrote:
I guess I'm pretty stupid but not really understanding how a little 6 or 8mm bolt is really the issue. I'm not arguing I just don't...
I guess I'm pretty stupid but not really understanding how a little 6 or 8mm bolt is really the issue. I'm not arguing I just don't understand.

You have 8 pinch bolts between upper and lower clamps. Why wouldn't the clamp bolts be enough to hold things together? The fork legs are typically a pretty snug fit in the clamps, then you add in the 8 pinch bolts and even if you left out the upper bolt I don't see why it would be a problem.

Again, me being stupid probably but I just can't wrap my head around this bolt being a big deal.
The fork tube pinch bolts don't hold the fork to the frame, the steering stem does. If the one bolt fails, it makes the steering stem pinch portion of the upper triple clamp much weaker, so that fails. When that fails, the steering stem breaks off and the whole front end comes off (and the forks are still held by the pinch bolts to the clamps, but they're all separate from the frame at this point).
1
Brent
Posts
5798
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Party in Temecula, CA US
4/22/2022 8:47am
Madmax31 wrote:
I guess I'm pretty stupid but not really understanding how a little 6 or 8mm bolt is really the issue. I'm not arguing I just don't...
I guess I'm pretty stupid but not really understanding how a little 6 or 8mm bolt is really the issue. I'm not arguing I just don't understand.

You have 8 pinch bolts between upper and lower clamps. Why wouldn't the clamp bolts be enough to hold things together? The fork legs are typically a pretty snug fit in the clamps, then you add in the 8 pinch bolts and even if you left out the upper bolt I don't see why it would be a problem.

Again, me being stupid probably but I just can't wrap my head around this bolt being a big deal.
the same way that tiny clip holds your master link and chain together, despite extreme stress .

the same way that an o ring failure doomed the Challenger in 1986.

When one small part gives way, the rest of the house of cards falls soon after.
1
3
BobPA
Posts
8323
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
PA US
4/22/2022 9:15am
murph783 wrote:
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?) Where do we land with lubricant...
@ Luxon (I’m sorry, for the life of me I can’t remember your first name-Bryan? Brent? Something with a B?)

Where do we land with lubricant on threads for torque spec? I know you recommend anti seize on Ti, but is that a dissimilar metals issue? I’m just looking at consistent specs. Conventional knowledge says put a little dab of grease on clean threads. But should I then compensate up or down on the torque spec? I only ask because I want to start playing with some chassis torque specs on my bike to see what it does with flex, so I want to make sure I’m accurate one way or the other.
rbm33 wrote:
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question. did the factory torque spec call...
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question.
did the factory torque spec call out a thread lubricant or loctite? if so they most likely factored the torque differences over using a dry bolt.
in most cases the factor is around 30% for lubricated bolts, meaning that it takes 30% less torque to achieve adequate amount of "tightness" due to less friction.
However this number can also vary based on the type of coating on a fastener, the 30% value is mostly based on a non coated bolt.
JM485 wrote:
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex...
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex. A bolted joint should be rigid, and deviating from that can lead to accelerated fastener fatigue because the preload is reduced. I don’t know how this myth that reducing the torque on your engine hangers by 10% somehow reduces frame rigidity ever got started but it’s a terrible idea on a lot of levels, and isn’t going to produce the outcome that you’re looking for anyways.
I say this in every engine mount thread and get laughed at. Hopefully the "loc-tite and no torque" crowd reads this
4
Mr. Afterbar
Posts
2410
Joined
5/13/2019
Location
Green Bay, WI US
4/22/2022 9:31am
Sandusky26 wrote:
Sounds like the clamps broke and that caused the crash, not the other way around. Wanted to let you hippies know.
So are you going to rename this thread "luxon clamps broke" or does your Suzuki pride interfere with that reality?
Seems like your KTM pride gets in the way of your eveything. Finally a KTM is snapped in half that isn't directly KTM's fault and you just can't handle that people might think it's KTM's fault. I think we've all seen enough KTM's snapped in half at this point that we've decided already if we were going to roll the dice on that potentially being us with two pieces of a bike in a heap on the side of the track.
2
5
amilky912
Posts
19
Joined
3/2/2012
Location
Newport, NC US
4/22/2022 9:48am
rbm33 wrote:
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question. did the factory torque spec call...
Ill answer until Luxon can chime in with more detail but there are a lot of factors to that question.
did the factory torque spec call out a thread lubricant or loctite? if so they most likely factored the torque differences over using a dry bolt.
in most cases the factor is around 30% for lubricated bolts, meaning that it takes 30% less torque to achieve adequate amount of "tightness" due to less friction.
However this number can also vary based on the type of coating on a fastener, the 30% value is mostly based on a non coated bolt.
JM485 wrote:
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex...
This is all correct, but I would add that fastener torque is not what you should be using to try to achieve differences is frame flex. A bolted joint should be rigid, and deviating from that can lead to accelerated fastener fatigue because the preload is reduced. I don’t know how this myth that reducing the torque on your engine hangers by 10% somehow reduces frame rigidity ever got started but it’s a terrible idea on a lot of levels, and isn’t going to produce the outcome that you’re looking for anyways.
BobPA wrote:
I say this in every engine mount thread and get laughed at. Hopefully the "loc-tite and no torque" crowd reads this
Who would win in a fight a harbor freight torque wrench or loc tite no torque
5
BobPA
Posts
8323
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
PA US
4/22/2022 10:30am
amilky912 wrote:
Who would win in a fight a harbor freight torque wrench or loc tite no torque
That's tough, think I'd have my money on Harbor Freight though.
1
JK BRO
Posts
348
Joined
7/29/2021
Location
Oroville, CA US
Fantasy
4/22/2022 10:42am
Seems like your KTM pride gets in the way of your eveything. Finally a KTM is snapped in half that isn't directly KTM's fault and you...
Seems like your KTM pride gets in the way of your eveything. Finally a KTM is snapped in half that isn't directly KTM's fault and you just can't handle that people might think it's KTM's fault. I think we've all seen enough KTM's snapped in half at this point that we've decided already if we were going to roll the dice on that potentially being us with two pieces of a bike in a heap on the side of the track.
Half would imply two equal portions.

In this case majority of the bike was still in tact. Approx 1/4 of the bike was not in- tact.


Just sayin......
1
2
mx317
Posts
5291
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
TN US
4/22/2022 10:51am
Sandusky26 wrote:
Sounds like the clamps broke and that caused the crash, not the other way around. Wanted to let you hippies know.
So are you going to rename this thread "luxon clamps broke" or does your Suzuki pride interfere with that reality?
Seems like your KTM pride gets in the way of your eveything. Finally a KTM is snapped in half that isn't directly KTM's fault and you...
Seems like your KTM pride gets in the way of your eveything. Finally a KTM is snapped in half that isn't directly KTM's fault and you just can't handle that people might think it's KTM's fault. I think we've all seen enough KTM's snapped in half at this point that we've decided already if we were going to roll the dice on that potentially being us with two pieces of a bike in a heap on the side of the track.
I will say I haven’t seen any frames broken since they changed them in 2019. I saw first hand my friends bike break his 2017 frame at the neck.
1
mx317
Posts
5291
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
TN US
4/22/2022 11:10am
Here you go Sandusky a little old and new Suzuki carnage




1
amilky912
Posts
19
Joined
3/2/2012
Location
Newport, NC US
4/22/2022 1:45pm
mx317 wrote:
Here you go Sandusky a little old and new Suzuki carnage [img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2022/04/22/545375/s1200_C6810CE8_539B_47B4_B8C8_853FE1AB447E.jpg[/img] [img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2022/04/22/545376/s1200_4916C841_4F4D_4E4F_90AB_6EABDBE1C955.jpg[/img]
Here you go Sandusky a little old and new Suzuki carnage




Second picture is for sure due to improper torqued motor mounts, possibly put on with an air gun full blast and loc tite justin case. But other than that I think considering you had go back to 1969 for another example, the title of this thread stands.
1

Post a reply to: KTM broke in half.

The Latest