NFRs2000NYC
Caught the Bug
Ok, figured I'd chime in....I changed out my bolts on my first rig (2012) to the shouldered bolts (didn't know better, was new to jeeping,) and could see right away that they fit the holes better. The stock bolts did have play in them (smaller than the hole) if you removed the nut, while the shouldered bolts have zero play. I also noticed that even without the nuts, the shouldered bolts kept the parts they held tight, while the stock bolts, if the nut is removed would just "let go" and freely come out.
Now, there are two things my inexperienced eyes can tell...
1) The stock bolts are technically the wrong size....bolts are 14mm and holes are 9/16s, I can see that clearly....don't really understand why chrysler would do that (same money I guess, probably use 14mm bolts in 100 other applications.
2) The part is being held solely by the torque generated from the nut to the bolt vs a 9/16ths bolt that fits snug and doesn't allow the part to move AT ALL even without the nut (the nut is there only to keep the bolt in.
Finally, I have helped a few local members install some things, and noticed that the stock bolts did indeed chew a little bit of the metal from the mount hole (threads were rasping at the mount).
It seems to me that
1) Those of you that have ran stock bolts without issues obviously maintain your bolt torques a lot more often than most (that never do) thus, you keep enough pressure not to let the OEM bolt move around.
2) It is my PERSONAL opinion that it would have been smarter for chrysler to use a smooth shouldered bolt, as I don't see a practical reason for using a fully threaded bolt in these applications.
Just my personal opinion on the matter, but I don't have the experience most of you do. I run shouldered bolts on my new rig (took them off my 2012 before I traded it in) and my mounting holes look perfect, and the nuts haven't backed off at all the last time I checked my torques.
It is a placebo? Maybe, but again, it seems to me that using a bolt that is the same size as the hole would yield a tighter fit. :thinking:
Just posting for the sake of discussion, not selling anything or telling anyone to do it, I run them because I already had them.
Now, there are two things my inexperienced eyes can tell...
1) The stock bolts are technically the wrong size....bolts are 14mm and holes are 9/16s, I can see that clearly....don't really understand why chrysler would do that (same money I guess, probably use 14mm bolts in 100 other applications.
2) The part is being held solely by the torque generated from the nut to the bolt vs a 9/16ths bolt that fits snug and doesn't allow the part to move AT ALL even without the nut (the nut is there only to keep the bolt in.
Finally, I have helped a few local members install some things, and noticed that the stock bolts did indeed chew a little bit of the metal from the mount hole (threads were rasping at the mount).
It seems to me that
1) Those of you that have ran stock bolts without issues obviously maintain your bolt torques a lot more often than most (that never do) thus, you keep enough pressure not to let the OEM bolt move around.
2) It is my PERSONAL opinion that it would have been smarter for chrysler to use a smooth shouldered bolt, as I don't see a practical reason for using a fully threaded bolt in these applications.
Just my personal opinion on the matter, but I don't have the experience most of you do. I run shouldered bolts on my new rig (took them off my 2012 before I traded it in) and my mounting holes look perfect, and the nuts haven't backed off at all the last time I checked my torques.
It is a placebo? Maybe, but again, it seems to me that using a bolt that is the same size as the hole would yield a tighter fit. :thinking:
Just posting for the sake of discussion, not selling anything or telling anyone to do it, I run them because I already had them.
Last edited: