More on tools

[Tom Kunich]

I bough two sets of tools from OSH Hardware and one was inches and the other metric. I bought both because they had inch or metric Allan head tools In the process of working on my bike I discovered that the TORX tools which I assumed to be standardized are in fact different from inch sizes to metric. My 3T headset uses the INCH size Torx screw heads and none of the metric kit sized fit.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I bough two sets of tools from OSH Hardware and one was inches and the other metric. I bought both because they had inch or metric Allan head tools In the process of working on my bike I discovered that the TORX tools which I assumed to be standardized are in fact different from inch sizes to metric. My 3T headset uses the INCH size Torx screw heads and none of the metric kit sized fit.

There are no SAE or Metric specific Torx bits. Only Torx bits:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torx>
The same series of Torx drivers is used to drive
SAE, metric and other thread system fasteners,
reducing the number of bit sizes required.

There are also Torx Plus bits:
A Torx successor, Torx Plus, was introduced around
1990 when the original Torx patent was expiring.
The lobes are more square to allow for higher torque
and to minimize wear.

Difference between Torx bits and Star bits:
<https://carlawn.com/star-bits-vs-torx-bits/>

You really should do some Googlie searching before guessing. Maybe
ask the OSH salesman for help?

We don't know why we bother providing corrections to your postings.
You seem to enjoy playing the victim and posting erronious
"information". Maybe if we post similar garbage, you could spend your
afternoon fixing our mistakes?

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Tom Kunich]

After careful observation, although they say exactly the same thing on the outsides of the package there is one of the Torx bits that doesn't not match the box. Instead of a 30, 20, 15. It is a 30, 25, 15. So for one time in your life you can say that you were right before you die.

[sms]

On 4/9/2021 1:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I bough two sets of tools from OSH Hardware and one was inches and the other metric. I bought both because they had inch or metric Allan head tools In the process of working on my bike I discovered that the TORX tools which I assumed to be standardized are in fact different from inch sizes to metric. My 3T headset uses the INCH size Torx screw heads and none of the metric kit sized fit.
>
> There are no SAE or Metric specific Torx bits. Only Torx bits:

<snip>

Jeff, I was about to put up a craiglist ad for Inch-Sized Torx bits. You
just wrecked my sole chance of quick sale to the only possible customer
on the planet. Thanks a lot.

[Tom Kunich]

Tell you what Scharf - what if I come down there and shove your face in and then kick your skull in so that you can spend the rest of your life drooling in front of everyone like you do on the Internet?

[John B.]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

metric kit sized fit."??

Imagine that folks! Metric wrenches don't fit inch size fittings...
Tommy boy, you are positively amazing!
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:56:27 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich

<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, April 9, 2021 at 1:53:59 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
>> On 4/9/2021 1:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> > On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I bough two sets of tools from OSH Hardware and one was inches and the other metric. I bought both because they had inch or metric Allan head tools In the process of working on my bike I discovered that the TORX tools which I assumed to be standardized are in fact different from inch sizes to metric. My 3T headset uses the INCH size Torx screw heads and none of the metric kit sized fit.
>> >
>> > There are no SAE or Metric specific Torx bits. Only Torx bits:
>> <snip>
>>
>> Jeff, I was about to put up a craiglist ad for Inch-Sized Torx bits. You
>> just wrecked my sole chance of quick sale to the only possible customer
>> on the planet. Thanks a lot.
>Tell you what Scharf - what if I come down there and shove your face in and then kick your skull in so that you can spend the rest of your life drooling in front of everyone like you do on the Internet?

Oooooh Tommy, such a terrifying statement! I'm sure that SMS is just
huddling in terror.

Or more likely laughing his head off.

Question here. Do you ever reread your posts to see just how
ridiculous you are?

(ridiculous - inspiring scornful pity, incongruous;inviting ridicule)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Tom Kunich]

John, if you don't read English anymore why are you commenting?

By the way you ignorant fool. 3/32 is 4 mm, 13/64ths is 5 mm and 15/64ths is 6 mm - the most common metric sizes and which is in any complete English tool kit.

I suggest you grow a brain before you die. As unlikely as that sounds.

[John B.]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich

... except that 4mm is actually 5/32" or 0.1574... 3/32" is actually
2.5mm.

I didn't bother to check any more as we all know about your brain
damage and how you get so many things wrong.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Jeff Liebermann]

All those T-xx numbers are valid. I've bought assortments of Torx
driver bits in the past, where the vendor has a creative idea of which
bits to provide. The motivation is simple. If they leave out a
common Torx bit size, the customer will eventually return to the store
to buy the similar set that includes the missing bit. For example,
just about all the cast bits for Stihl chainsaws are T-27, which for a
time was not a common size:
<https://www.amazon.com/Stens-705-194-Power-Length-Replaces/dp/B01M09AD7H>

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>By the way you ignorant fool. 3/32 is 4 mm, 13/64ths is 5 mm and 15/64ths is 6 mm - the most common metric sizes and which is in any complete English tool kit.

Ummm... the thread size and driver size are very different. We were
discussing Torx drivers, which has nothing to do with the thread
diameter, Allen wrench driver size, or whatever you neglected to
specify with your unit conversions.

Also, the complete English tool kit for my former 1970 Land Rover IIa
required a few British Whitworth standard wrenches and sockets. The
Land Rover was mostly metric, but did include some SAE and Whitworth
hardware.

[sms]

On 4/9/2021 6:40 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:43:05 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> After careful observation, although they say exactly the same thing on
>> the outsides of the package there is one of the Torx bits that doesn't
>> not match the box. Instead of a 30, 20, 15. It is a 30, 25, 15. So for
>> one time in your life you can say that you were right before you die.
>
> All those T-xx numbers are valid. I've bought assortments of Torx
> driver bits in the past, where the vendor has a creative idea of which
> bits to provide. The motivation is simple. If they leave out a
> common Torx bit size, the customer will eventually return to the store
> to buy the similar set that includes the missing bit. For example,
> just about all the cast bits for Stihl chainsaws are T-27, which for a
> time was not a common size:
> <https://www.amazon.com/Stens-705-194-Power-Length-Replaces/dp/B01M09AD7H>

This set includes the 27 and the 25:
<https://www.harborfreight.com/professional-torx-bit-socket-set-12-pc-56366.html>

It's great that you can say you were right one time! We're still waiting
for Tom to be right one time!

[sms]

On 4/9/2021 6:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> By the way you ignorant fool. 3/32 is 4 mm, 13/64ths is 5 mm and 15/64ths is 6 mm - the most common metric sizes and which is in any complete English tool kit.
>
> Ummm... the thread size and driver size are very different. We were
> discussing Torx drivers, which has nothing to do with the thread
> diameter, Allen wrench driver size, or whatever you neglected to
> specify with your unit conversions.
>
> Also, the complete English tool kit for my former 1970 Land Rover IIa
> required a few British Whitworth standard wrenches and sockets. The
> Land Rover was mostly metric, but did include some SAE and Whitworth
> hardware.

That's odd that a 1970 Land Rover would still have Whitworth hardware
since it was effectively phased out in 1956. Must have been some
sub-systems that stayed the same for decades in order to still have
Whitworth stuff.

[AMuzi]

My 1965 MGB had a healthy mix and my friend's 1970 Rover
sedan did as well.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[John B.]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 19:15:21 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

But Tommy is always right!
(at least in his own fantasies)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 19:26:39 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

Not really odd. Land Rover bought bolt on gearboxes, front ends, rear
ends, transfer boxes, PTO gearboxes, etc from multiple vendors. They
used whatever the vendor provided. I was lucky that I only had to
deal with British Standard Whitworth (BSW). Earlier models also had a
mix of BSW, BSF, BSC, UNC, UNF, BA, etc. Later models were a mix of
UNF and metric. I don't recall which parts used BSW fasteners on my
Series IIa.
<http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/spanner%20size.htm>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Standard_Whitworth>
<https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.spanners.html>
<https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.threads.html>

[News 2021]

On Fri, 09 Apr 2021 19:26:39 -0700, sms scribed:

Err, I do not know where it was "phased out', but they are still commonly
selling Whitworth standard tools in this country.

[Frank Krygowski]

Regarding https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.threads.html
I've got a really handy chart hanging in my workshop. It covers threaded
fasteners in Metric, U.S. and British systems, sorted by diameter. To
identify a screw I measure the OD and scan down the chart, then read to
the right to find the possibilities, including thread pitches. It may be
the most frequently used chart in my work area.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

This was why a good auto repair tool box contained tools graduated in 64ths,

[Tom Kunich]

Perhaps you can remind me since I've forgotten, but isn't thread count counted in inches? i.e. A British BB thread is 24 threads per inch but so is an Italian BB. Thinking back the differences were in the threads with Italian threads being triangular and British flattened on the top.

[Lou Holtman]

Op zaterdag 10 april 2021 om 16:21:46 UTC+2 schreef Frank Krygowski:

Pfff.. really. I have no chart hanging in my 'Workshop', never needed one. Its M3, M4, M5, M6, M8, M10 or M12 and I can indentify them by just looking at them and then I also know what wrench, allen key or torx bit to use. It the very rare case I end up with other fasteners the part end up in the garbage bin.

Lou

[sms]

On 4/9/2021 6:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

<snip>

> Also, the complete English tool kit for my former 1970 Land Rover IIa
> required a few British Whitworth standard wrenches and sockets. The
> Land Rover was mostly metric, but did include some SAE and Whitworth
> hardware.

One of my friend's brother-in-law bought the first Range Rover imported
into the U.S. back in 1987. He was so proud of this. Eventually he began
sharing a map of all the places in the U.S. where he had to have the
Range Rover towed when it broke down.

[jbeattie]

That is certainly true of my bicycle "workshop." With bikes, your options are pretty limited in terms of fasteners, and many of the fasteners are part specific, so you just look at them and know what works with what -- and typically you order specific replacements and don't pick one out of a bolt drawer at home or at the hardware store. I do measure OD of plumbing parts and then check on line for pipe thread size. https://www.bestmaterials.com/PDF_Files/Pipe-sizes-threads.pdf

-- Jay Beattie.

[ritzann...@gmail.com]

Huh. I've watched a few National Geographic shows over the past half century and all of them showed Range Rovers and Land Cruisers driving around the Sahara or Burma. Vehicles that looked like they had been in service since Japan or England conquered and subjugated the land and people. I always thought of Range Rovers as being reliable. When you are driving across Africa with lions and elephants and water buffalo chasing you, reliability is kind of important.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 09:32:27 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

Chuckle. My former palatial office was conveniently located near a
freeway off ramp. Therefore, my office was regularly visited by
friends and customers (the difference is that the customers actually
pay me) for emergency automobile service, usually late at night, when
they knew I would still be working. The usual problems were flat
tires, cooling system problems, and blown fuses. One such visitor
arrived with a rather old Range Rover that I expressed an interest in
purchasing. It literally fell apart as it entered the parking lot.
There was hardware and fluids all over the road. It's common
knowledge that a British car that does NOT leak fluids has something
wrong with it, but this was ridiculous. I wasted two days patching
together the Range Rover so that it could be safely driven to a
mechanic. For obvious reasons, I elected not to buy it.

As for towing a Land Rover (not a Range Rover), I drove it about
150,000 miles and only needed to be towed once (when I drove it into a
ditch). What I found amazing was the number of parts that could fall
off the Land Rover, and it would continue to run. I was also not
thrilled with having to spend every Saturday under the car fixing
something.

It seems that early Land Rovers were built in layers. When a problem
was discovered, a suitable band-aid was contrived to hide the problem.
It was probably considered sacrilege to admit to a design problem,
much less to fix it. My favorite example was a metal "heat shield"
that was installed between the spark plugs and the firewall. Getting
access to the spark plugs was possible, but would have been much
easier if the heat shield was removed. So, I removed it. Nothing
happened until I reached about 45 mph, when the engine compartment
transformed itself into a rather loud giant whistle or flute.
Apparently, the "heat shield" was not a heat shield but rather a
method of detuning the acoustic resonance of the engine compartment.

Despite all the horror stories, I really miss my 1970 Land Rover
Series IIa. It turned driving and commuting into an adventure.
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/home/land_rover1.jpg>
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/home/index.html#land_rover3.jpg>
Sniff...

[sms]

On 4/10/2021 9:54 AM, jbeattie wrote:

<snip>

> That is certainly true of my bicycle "workshop." With bikes, your options are pretty limited in terms of fasteners, and many of the fasteners are part specific, so you just look at them and know what works with what -- and typically you order specific replacements and don't pick one out of a bolt drawer at home or at the hardware store. I do measure OD of plumbing parts and then check on line for pipe thread size. https://www.bestmaterials.com/PDF_Files/Pipe-sizes-threads.pdf

We have an awesome fastener store near me, Olander
<https://www.olander.com/>. Very old school, no online ordering. You
used to be able to just go to the sales desk and buy what you want but
they're closed for in-person sales due to Covid. So you have to submit a
quote online and someone calls you back with the pricing and then you
send them your credit card information and do a pick-up in the parking
lot. A few years ago they got tired of non-commercial customers ordering
extremely small quantities so they now have a $5 per line-item requirement.

I really like the M5 Cup Washer Head bolts for things like water bottle
cages and racks, even though they are not Allen head.

[sms]

The Range Rovers exported to the U.S. where MTVs, not SUVs. MTV=Mall
Terrain Vehicle.

[AMuzi]

Yes, historically Italy was an early mover to
industrialization, adopting metric diameters but with
British made lathes 55-degree Whitworth form (sinusoid; not
pointy) inch threads.

Metric threads are formally 'advancement', that is, how far
it moves per revolution. I have no idea why that makes any
more sense than measuring peak to peak which is the same number.

[AMuzi]

With 150,000 miles you likely knew this but for others,
here's a reminder to use the proper maintenance products:

https://www.orarc.org/?p=2348

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 14:46:52 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>With 150,000 miles you likely knew this but for others,
>here's a reminder to use the proper maintenance products:
>
>https://www.orarc.org/?p=2348

Also see:
<https://www.mez.co.uk/lucas.html>
<http://www3.telus.net/bc_triumph_registry/smoke.htm>

Chuckle. Very clever. However, Lucas Electric solved the problem for
me at about 100,000 miles by detonating the EOL (end of life) smoke
signal simultaneously in the generator, regulator, dashboard wiring,
about 6 fuses, some lamps, and my 144/440MHz radio. Basically, the
alternator output went from 12V nominal, to a much higher voltage.
Despite the extensive damage, I was able to add enough clip leads and
wires to drive the car home before the battery died. While waiting
for a wiring harness from Atlantic British, I decided that the Lucas
electrical hardware was hopeless. So, I dropped in a Motorola
alternator/regulator. After fixing my wiring errors, I was back on
the road in about 2 weeks (including shipping delays).

Unfortunately, I didn't have the time, money, or sense to also replace
the Lucas points, ignition coil, capacitor, RFI filters, etc with an
electronic ignition. Those failed just at about 140,000 miles in a
rather large puff of black rubbery smoke. I managed to push the car
out of the gas station before the attendant was about to spray my car
with whatever was in the ominous looking canister he was wielding. The
subsequent installation of the electronic ignition was a bit of a
kludge, but it worked well and never failed.

I also replaced the carburetor with a larger Rochester carb, asbestos
drum brakes with something less toxic, and rear seats with something
compatible with garbage hauling. The spare tire on the hood was
iconic but blocked my view. I moved the tire to the rear door.
However, these defficiencies could not be blamed on Lucas.

Replacing all the Lucas electrical parts in the vehicle would have
been uneconomical and time consuming. So, I continued to repair or
replace light switches, receptacles, rotten wiring, ignition switch,
etc until I blew the transmission and sold it as-is. I'm not sure of
the final mileage, but I think it around 200,000 miles. I never heard
from the buyer so I assume everything went well. Judging by our final
discussion, he probably parted it out.

[Frank Krygowski]

My guess is you would not be able to identify a 1/4-20 thread by looking
at it, or a 5/16-18 or 3/8-16 as I can. The point being, the U.S. is an
oddball holdout on the SI system. Not so much for bikes, but for other
things I work on I've got to deal with a mix of fastener systems. And
it's sometimes hard to predict what system (U.S. or SI) a particular
device uses.

Case in point: I worked for a year consulting at a tiny local holography
company. They had recently taken delivery of an innovative,
one-of-a-kind holograph duplicating machine. It was refusing to run
right, causing all sorts of headaches.

At one point, a couple small screws in that machine were cross threaded
by one of the company owners. He then complained the tapped holes must
be bad because his U.S. 10-32 screws just wouldn't quite go in. I told
him they were probably supposed to be metric 5mm x 0.8mm pitch. He
didn't believe me until I proved it by buying some 5 x 0.8 screws.

Those two sizes are (AFAIK) the only threads that coincidentally work in
both U.S. and SI systems - for a few threads, that is, until the errors
accumulate. It can be hard to tell them apart.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:01:30 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

Lucas was famous for poor electrics :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

U.S. thread pitch is specified in threads per inch, or "tpi." The most
common screw size here is 1/4-20, meaning 20 threads per inch.

SI pitch is measured directly in millimeters. So a 5mm x 0.8 has 0.8
millimeters between adjacent thread peaks.

I doubt that Italian threads or any other normal fastener threads are
pointed on top. It's difficult to manufacture threads that come to a
complete point, unless you're turning them on a lathe; they'd be easily
damaged if you did make them, and there's no need to do so. The tips of
the sharp threads would add negligible strength to the connection.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

:-)


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 10:21:41 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Regarding https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.threads.html
>I've got a really handy chart hanging in my workshop. It covers threaded
>fasteners in Metric, U.S. and British systems, sorted by diameter. To
>identify a screw I measure the OD and scan down the chart, then read to
>the right to find the possibilities, including thread pitches. It may be
>the most frequently used chart in my work area.

Opps. Wrong type of thread. I was thinking of sewing thread, which
has a more complexicated numbering system. Machine threads are easy
by comparison:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=sewing+thread+&tbm=isch>
<https://www.google.com/search?q=sewing+thread+chart&tbm=isch>
I wonder why they call both types of threads by the same name?

Note: Tom thinks I'm dead, so I can probably get away with some bad
humor and not worry about him looking for me.

[John B.]

I was in the trade so to speak for quite a few years and to the best
of my knowledge there are no common V male thread standards that do
not have a flat or rounded peak. I specified "male" as some taps do
have a sharp cutting edge.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I once had a guy come in the shop and wanted a "fat" thread bolt. That
threw me and I was about to tell him that we didn't have any "fat"
threaded bolts when he said, "You know, some bolts have fat threads
and some have skinny threads". Oh Yes :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[pH]

My Morris Minor has Whitworth for the front shock absorber mounts and also
for the engine mount to body mounting points. I replaced the latter with
normal English (SAE?) since it was easy to do so.

I tighten the shock mounts every so often and there is one special socket in
my kit modified to fit.

An 18mm socket fits my wheel lug nuts perfectly...don't know what 1958
Morris Minor lug nuts are supposed to be otherwise.

pH

[AMuzi]

Understated.

[AMuzi]

While you're right that standard commercial grade hardware
is about 75% engagement, teh Italian thread forms for
bicycles are Whitworth 55-degree with rounded tops.

https://www.ring-plug-thread-gages.com/images/Whitworth-Screw-Thread-Form.gif

Compare DIN metric:
https://www.ring-plug-thread-gages.com/PDChart/Metric-Fine-thread-data-1-28.html

[AMuzi]

On 4/10/2021 8:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 10:21:41 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Regarding https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.threads.html
>> I've got a really handy chart hanging in my workshop. It covers threaded
>> fasteners in Metric, U.S. and British systems, sorted by diameter. To
>> identify a screw I measure the OD and scan down the chart, then read to
>> the right to find the possibilities, including thread pitches. It may be
>> the most frequently used chart in my work area.
>
> Opps. Wrong type of thread. I was thinking of sewing thread, which
> has a more complexicated numbering system. Machine threads are easy
> by comparison:
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=sewing+thread+&tbm=isch>
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=sewing+thread+chart&tbm=isch>
> I wonder why they call both types of threads by the same name?
>
> Note: Tom thinks I'm dead, so I can probably get away with some bad
> humor and not worry about him looking for me.
>
>
>

> " I wonder why they call both types of threads by the same name?"

'twist'

https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=thread

[AMuzi]

It's a 3/8"WW wrench; "the wrench size to fit 3/8" WW
fastener heads"

[Frank Krygowski]

So as I said, not pointed at the top.

> Compare DIN metric:
> https://www.ring-plug-thread-gages.com/PDChart/Metric-Fine-thread-data-1-28.html

I wonder about the practicality of the detail differences in thread
forms. If diameter and pitch were compatible, would there be a problem
screwing a nut with Whitworth form onto a U.S. or SI bolt? (Looks like
3/8"-16 or 1"-8 would be good for a U.S. to Whitworth test.)

I'm sure some details of the thread form get swallowed by tolerances, so
to speak. SI threads don't actually have geometrically perfect corners
between the various straight lines. Tooling wear and other
practicalities prevent that.

I could dig into my copy of Machinery's Handbook, I suppose... but it
seems like a question where wondering is more appropriate than detailed
research.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

No, I don't think you're dead, but if you can't ride your bike hardly at all you're not going to last much longer.

[Tom Kunich]

All of the various sizes of heads and until metric tools came readily available is why you would always have everything in 64ths graduations. I think I still have a 4ths set of sockets. The problem was that the double hex sockets wear round very often and have to be replaced. Most of these tools are Snap-On but my tool box is leftover from 50 years ago so I expect wear.

[Tom Kunich]

There was a problem between the two systems. But it was sort of self resolving. You simply had to apply more torques to cut the tops off of the one to fit the flatter top of the other.

[AMuzi]

Right, somewhere below theory is practice, where we find
that Italian freewheels and British freewheels are generally
interchangeable in most applications:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/FWTHREAD.JPG

[Tom Kunich]

On Saturday, April 10, 2021 at 8:04:32 AM UTC-7, lou.h...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op zaterdag 10 april 2021 om 16:21:46 UTC+2 schreef Frank Krygowski:

> > On 4/9/2021 11:55 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > > On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 19:26:39 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>

> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 4/9/2021 6:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > >>> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > >>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> By the way you ignorant fool. 3/32 is 4 mm, 13/64ths is 5 mm and 15/64ths is 6 mm - the most common metric sizes and which is in any complete English tool kit.
> > >>>
> > >>> Ummm... the thread size and driver size are very different. We were
> > >>> discussing Torx drivers, which has nothing to do with the thread
> > >>> diameter, Allen wrench driver size, or whatever you neglected to
> > >>> specify with your unit conversions.
> > >>>
> > >>> Also, the complete English tool kit for my former 1970 Land Rover IIa
> > >>> required a few British Whitworth standard wrenches and sockets. The
> > >>> Land Rover was mostly metric, but did include some SAE and Whitworth
> > >>> hardware.
> > >
> > >> That's odd that a 1970 Land Rover would still have Whitworth hardware
> > >> since it was effectively phased out in 1956. Must have been some
> > >> sub-systems that stayed the same for decades in order to still have
> > >> Whitworth stuff.
> > >

> > > Not really odd. Land Rover bought bolt on gearboxes, front ends, rear
> > > ends, transfer boxes, PTO gearboxes, etc from multiple vendors. They
> > > used whatever the vendor provided. I was lucky that I only had to
> > > deal with British Standard Whitworth (BSW). Earlier models also had a
> > > mix of BSW, BSF, BSC, UNC, UNF, BA, etc. Later models were a mix of
> > > UNF and metric. I don't recall which parts used BSW fasteners on my
> > > Series IIa.
> > > <http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/spanner%20size.htm>
> > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Standard_Whitworth>
> > > <https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.spanners.html>
> > > <https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.threads.html>
> > >

> > Regarding https://www.lrfaq.org/Series/Other.threads.html
> > I've got a really handy chart hanging in my workshop. It covers threaded
> > fasteners in Metric, U.S. and British systems, sorted by diameter. To
> > identify a screw I measure the OD and scan down the chart, then read to
> > the right to find the possibilities, including thread pitches. It may be
> > the most frequently used chart in my work area.
> >

> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
> Pfff.. really. I have no chart hanging in my 'Workshop', never needed one. Its M3, M4, M5, M6, M8, M10 or M12 and I can indentify them by just looking at them and then I also know what wrench, allen key or torx bit to use. It the very rare case I end up with other fasteners the part end up in the garbage bin.

So can I. And I can recognize 3/8ths, 7/16's, 1/2", 9/16ths and 5/8ths on sight. I don't see that as a talent but as trial and error taken to an extreme.

[sms]

On 4/11/2021 10:11 AM, AMuzi wrote:

<snip>

> Right, somewhere below theory is practice, where we find that Italian
> freewheels and British freewheels are generally interchangeable in most
> applications:

A Sturmey-Archer 26 TPI, 13/32 nut can be used in place of an SRAM 26
TPI, 10.5mm nut. 13/32==10.32mm, close enough.

I found it amusing that the standard 1/8" phone plug/jack became 3.5mm
at some point. It was never really 1/8" anyway. You rarely see a 1/4"
phone plug jack referred to in mm.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 10:34:21 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

>I found it amusing that the standard 1/8" phone plug/jack became 3.5mm
>at some point. It was never really 1/8" anyway. You rarely see a 1/4"
>phone plug jack referred to in mm.

Search for 6.35 mm avionics plug and you'll find quite a few
references to both 1/4" and 6.35 mm.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=6.35+mm+avionics+plug>
However, it's true that it's not commonly labeled only in metric.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=6.35+mm+avionics+plug+-.25+-0.25+-1%2F4>

[Jeff Liebermann]

So, threading a needle means twisting the thread through the eye of
the needle? I can barely see the connection with "twist".

My guess(tm) is someone built a screw cutting lathe from a spinning
wheel in 1670 and called the process "threading" which morphed into
calling part of the result a "thread". It's possibly the same as
"bolt of fabric" morphed into the hardware "bolt" because they were
both made on similar rolling machines.

[AMuzi]

On 4/11/2021 1:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 09:03:27 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 4/10/2021 8:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> " I wonder why they call both types of threads by the same name?"
>
>> 'twist'
>> https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=thread
>
> So, threading a needle means twisting the thread through the eye of
> the needle? I can barely see the connection with "twist".
>
> My guess(tm) is someone built a screw cutting lathe from a spinning
> wheel in 1670 and called the process "threading" which morphed into
> calling part of the result a "thread". It's possibly the same as
> "bolt of fabric" morphed into the hardware "bolt" because they were
> both made on similar rolling machines.
>

The root for 'twist' which became 'thread' refers to
_making_ a thread. (applicable to both cotton and steel
threads !)

I assume the verb form is 'installing a thread' much as one
'oars' to shore etc.

IIRC 'bolt' starts with crossbow ammo, extends to other
cylindrical things later.

[Tom Kunich]

I think that "bolt" didn't come from a cross bow arrow but the locking piece you slid across a door to prohibit entry. From there you can see the obvious connection of stopping a door to stopping a metal rod to a nut and bolt.

[John B.]

rOn Sun, 11 Apr 2021 11:27:41 -0700, Jeff Liebermann

<je...@cruzio.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 09:03:27 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>>On 4/10/2021 8:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> " I wonder why they call both types of threads by the same name?"
>
>>'twist'
>>https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=thread
>
>So, threading a needle means twisting the thread through the eye of
>the needle? I can barely see the connection with "twist".
>
>My guess(tm) is someone built a screw cutting lathe from a spinning
>wheel in 1670 and called the process "threading" which morphed into
>calling part of the result a "thread". It's possibly the same as
>"bolt of fabric" morphed into the hardware "bolt" because they were
>both made on similar rolling machines.

Nope, the first use of the word "bolt" or at least the words that
evolved into the modern English "bolt" was for a short heavy arrow. A
"bolt" of canvas dates from the 1400's as does it's use referring to a
short rod as in a door bolt.

As an aside I doubt that a 1670's spinning wheel could be converted to
a thread cutting lathe as it would have been made of wood :-)

--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Tommy boy, you really should learn to keep your mouth shut when you
don't know what you are talking about.

As Andrew says "bolt" or at least the words that evolved into the
modern English word "bolt" originally meant a short heavy arrow.
"Old English bolt "short, stout arrow with a heavy head;" also
"crossbow for throwing bolts," from Proto-Germanic *bultas (source
also of Old Norse bolti, Danish bolt, Dutch bout, German Bolzen),
perhaps originally "arrow, missile," and from PIE *bheld- "to knock,
strike" (source also of Lithuanian beldžiu "I knock," baldas "pole for
strikin:
--
Cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

I happen to own a copy of 'Mechanics In 16th Century Italy'
so I know that carved wooden threads go back a very long
time (see Gutenberg's early-1400s press, for example).

and wine:
https://www.fastenerdata.co.uk/media/wysiwyg/history/wine_press_1.jpg

But all that gets far afield.

The root of 'thread' in the sense of 'twist' describes
making thread.

[News 2021]

On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 06:01:40 +0700, John B. scribed:

> As an aside I doubt that a 1670's spinning wheel could be converted to a
> thread cutting lathe as it would have been made of wood :-)

Only the cutting head needs needs to be able cut.
So how the rest of the machinery is not of initial concern.
Hint, flint headed arrows as the first example?.

[News 2021]

On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 10:16:01 -0700, Tom Kunich scribed:

> So can I. And I can recognize 3/8ths, 7/16's, 1/2", 9/16ths and 5/8ths
> on sight. I don't see that as a talent but as trial and error taken to
> an extreme.

Piffle, try giving dimensions to 1/1,000th of an inch.
Know some one who can eyeball that and his eyeball was backupfy
micrometer.

As to the sizes, bolt/nut sizes you list, those are just coarse common
sizes from the local,hardware shop.

[John B.]

I've never tried it but I would think that screwing a Whitworth bolt,
say 1/4" - 20 TPI, into a ISO nut would be possible although I wonder
about the strength.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Tom Kunich]

On Friday, April 9, 2021 at 1:28:46 PM UTC-7, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I bough two sets of tools from OSH Hardware and one was inches and the other metric. I bought both because they had inch or metric Allan head tools In the process of working on my bike I discovered that the TORX tools which I assumed to be standardized are in fact different from inch sizes to metric. My 3T headset uses the INCH size Torx screw heads and none of the metric kit sized fit.
> There are no SAE or Metric specific Torx bits. Only Torx bits:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torx>
> The same series of Torx drivers is used to drive
> SAE, metric and other thread system fasteners,
> reducing the number of bit sizes required.
>
> There are also Torx Plus bits:
> A Torx successor, Torx Plus, was introduced around
> 1990 when the original Torx patent was expiring.
> The lobes are more square to allow for higher torque
> and to minimize wear.
>
> Difference between Torx bits and Star bits:
> <https://carlawn.com/star-bits-vs-torx-bits/>
>
> You really should do some Googlie searching before guessing. Maybe
> ask the OSH salesman for help?
>
> We don't know why we bother providing corrections to your postings.
> You seem to enjoy playing the victim and posting erronious
> "information". Maybe if we post similar garbage, you could spend your
> afternoon fixing our mistakes?

This is also true but the problem is that they were experimentally used in places like the 10 speed Centaur lever bar ring tightener. The Torx end have to be shoved in via pulling the lever rubber cover back and then shoving the Torx in. This of course cut the rubber lever cover and eventually destroyed the cover. And they don't make replacement Centaur lever covers because they only allow you to go up one gear at a time rather than the Record 3 or 4. So replacement covers don't look right.

For awhile they were trying Torx on everything. They are nice in that they are very difficult to strip which makes home mechanics try harder and over torque everything. I have several sets of Torx drivers now so of course they are rapidly losing popularity. More than half of the tools in my bike tool box are of no use.

[AMuzi]

It's not 'only Centaur Ergo mounts'.
All Ergo mounts and all caliper mounts and it's because the
nuts are now aluminum, not steel.
Torx is a better design for the application.

[Tom Kunich]

It was only the Centaur 10 speed, I don't know about those years of other groups like Record and Chorus which were 11 speeds. But when Centaur converted to 11 speed, Campy went from the Torx 27 to the 5 (??) mm hex again because of the Torx problem of cutting the rubber covers.

[AMuzi]

I just peeked into a new set of Centaur 11 and of Chorus 12.
Yep, both aluminum Torx.

But hey it's just a sleeved allen nut. You can swap a
chromed steel allen one if you prefer those. This should not
be any big deal.

[Tom Kunich]

have two sets of new or new middle of last year Centaur and they have 5 mm (I think) hex and not Torx. As I said, while the Torx is superior connector into aluminum, it has the serious problem of cutting the rubber lever hoods. And I haven't figure out a way to prevent this without forcibly flexing the hood out of the way which is almost as bad on the hoods.

[AMuzi]

Take a peek at the nice pictures in your manual. Campagnolo
suggests you slip the tool straight in from the front, under
the rubber cover.

[TCL]

I found using a 6" torx bit made it relatively simple. Much easier than trying to use a torx screwdriver.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:34:31 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>This is also true but the problem is that they were experimentally used in places like the 10 speed Centaur lever bar ring tightener. The Torx end have to be shoved in via pulling the lever rubber cover back and then shoving the Torx in. This of course cut the rubber lever cover and eventually destroyed the cover. And they don't make replacement Centaur lever covers because they only allow you to go up one gear at a time rather than the Record 3 or 4. So replacement covers don't look right.

I'm not familiar with Campagnolo products. I found this page for what
might be a similar Ergo levers:
<https://www.bikeradar.com/advice/workshop/workshop-how-to-fit-campagnolo-ergo-levers/>
Notice 3 things:
1. They indicate that this is not easy.
2. Levers can use either 5mm Allen or T25 Torx.
3. They suggest and optional torque wrench.

>For awhile they were trying Torx on everything. They are nice in that they are very difficult to strip which makes home mechanics try harder and over torque everything. I have several sets of Torx drivers now so of course they are rapidly losing popularity.

I don't know anything about pulling the lever hood back, but it seems
possible. If you're having problems doing this without destroying the
cover, you might want to ask for help. From what I see in the
instructions, it seems easy enough. If you find yourself destroying
the cover, perhaps a lubricant might help. I have a similar problem
with electrical cable hoods or handlebar grips. I use soap wire pull
lube to lubricate the inside of the hood:
<https://www.homedepot.com/p/Klein-Tools-Premium-Synthetic-Clear-Lubricant-1-Quart-51028/100660159>
<https://www.kleintools.com/catalog/wire-and-cable-pulling-lubricant/premium-synthetic-clear-lubricant-1-quart-0>
Note that I have NOT tried this lubricant on Campagnola lever hoods.

If you find yourself stripping the threads on a matching aluminum part
when tightening a Torx screw, I suggest you purchase and use a torque
wrench. I use a torque wrench on most of the bolts found on emergency
generators, chain saws, small engines, and automobiles. Most
reputable vendors will supply bolt torque specifications with their
documentation.

I stupidly bought a 1/4" and 1/2" drive torque wrenches from Harbor
Freight. Pieces of junk. The 1/2" would not click when the set
torque is exceeded. Neither was even close to being calibrated and
the 1/4" torque wrench would not stay calibrated. Not recommended
unless you don't mind calibrating it every time you use it:
<https://www.harborfreight.com/hand-tools/sockets-ratchets/torque-wrenches/14-in-drive-click-type-torque-wrench-63881.html>
There are bicycle specific torque wrenches available:
<https://www.bikeradar.com/features/the-best-cycling-torque-wrenches/>
If you want to do it right, get a digital torque wrench:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+torque+wrench&tbm=isch>
This looks very tempting:
<https://www.amazon.com/Professional-Electronic-Wrenches-Repairing-Calibrated/dp/B08G4GBPG3/>

Note that the T25 Torx driver bit shown in the BikeRadar article is a
bit odd. It's a 1/4" drive for the torque wrench end, and has some
manner of replaceable Torx bit that I've never seen before. The idea
seems to be to use a narrow shaft to make it easier to fit under the
hood. A common 1/4" drive shaft extension will probably be to thick
on the socket end to fit under the hood. I use these Torx bits:
<https://www.ebay.com/itm/401654760787>
They work but seem to be made of mild steel. The shafts are easily
bent. At 3 inches, they are too short for your project, but longer
bits and shaft extensions are available. You might need a 1/4" drive
to hex drive adapter:
<https://www.ebay.com/itm/143047405863>

You seem concerned about the Torx bit "cutting" the rubber lever hood.
If that's happening, I suggest you either get a better Torx driver set
or file any sharp edges near the tip that might be responsible for the
damage. I looked at the T25 driver in six of my driver sets and
tools. Five of these were nicely deburred and quite dull. However,
one T-25 bit was crudely stamped and had would probably have done some
damage. Doing damage while extracting the bit is improbable because
there's nothing sharp in that direction.

>More than half of the tools in my bike tool box are of no use.

I have the same problem. I keep loaning my tools to friends,
customers and neighbors and then forget to record to whom I loaned the
tool(s).

[John B.]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 14:46:04 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

You can assume that all torque wrenches other then the ones that "bend
in the middle" need to be calibrated. I once worked in an Air Force
shop where one guy was the Base torque wrench calibrator and basically
every wrench that was tested required adjustment. And, of course the
"bend in the middle" wrenches are really only approximate (:-)

I might add that, at least in aircraft maintenance, having all bolts
holding something together tightened to the same tightness is usually
far more important then the exact torque value. What you are doing, in
most cases is actually stretching the bolt, or stud, to a
predetermined clamping force.

Another point is whether the bolt/nut should be dry or lubricated as
it makes a difference in the actual clamping pressure vis-a-vis the
turning force.

>Note that the T25 Torx driver bit shown in the BikeRadar article is a
>bit odd. It's a 1/4" drive for the torque wrench end, and has some
>manner of replaceable Torx bit that I've never seen before. The idea
>seems to be to use a narrow shaft to make it easier to fit under the
>hood. A common 1/4" drive shaft extension will probably be to thick
>on the socket end to fit under the hood. I use these Torx bits:
><https://www.ebay.com/itm/401654760787>
>They work but seem to be made of mild steel. The shafts are easily
>bent. At 3 inches, they are too short for your project, but longer
>bits and shaft extensions are available. You might need a 1/4" drive
>to hex drive adapter:
><https://www.ebay.com/itm/143047405863>
>
>You seem concerned about the Torx bit "cutting" the rubber lever hood.
>If that's happening, I suggest you either get a better Torx driver set
>or file any sharp edges near the tip that might be responsible for the
>damage. I looked at the T25 driver in six of my driver sets and
>tools. Five of these were nicely deburred and quite dull. However,
>one T-25 bit was crudely stamped and had would probably have done some
>damage. Doing damage while extracting the bit is improbable because
>there's nothing sharp in that direction.
>
>>More than half of the tools in my bike tool box are of no use.
>

Buy another tool box... they are cheap. I've got the bike box, the
car/truck box, the handyman - around the house - box and a whole
storage shelf full of tools that I hardly ever use. A tubing bending
took for 1/8th - 1/2" tubing... got one (:-) But of course, I
collected them over about a 50 year period (:-(

>I have the same problem. I keep loaning my tools to friends,
>customers and neighbors and then forget to record to whom I loaned the
>tool(s).
--

Cheers,

John B.

[Tom Kunich]

Please Andrew, I know very well how to use tools and have been doing so since the I was 5. It Campy intended a sharp object to be slid beneath a sensitive material don't you think that they could have made a deeper groove? I didn't cut ONE hood but five before I resorted to stretching the hoods out of the way.

[Tom Kunich]

> I found using a 6" torx bit made it relatively simple. Much easier than trying to use a torx screwdriver.

Perhaps you suggested this before because I bought a set and had no better luck than with the screwdriver. I am presently with three full sets of Torx and the only use I've found for them recently is the two new generation Campy 10 speed levers and a couple of stems I've bought that use the Torx on 4 mm face screws. While it is a good idea, my tool box is filled with tools for good ideas that never caught on.

[AMuzi]

I lift the hood with a screwdriver handle 3mm allen 100mm
long and slide the Torx driver under the rubber cover. We
find these nice SnapOn T-handle Torx very handy:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/er11b.jpg

(not a recommended use for that tool of course)

[Tom Kunich]

That is a very good suggestion and one that hadn't occurred to me. I'll use that method from now on.