Jump to content

GM Brake Caliper Bracket Bolts


Duelin

Recommended Posts

Posted

I just got done reading a technical article about GM Started in 2007 using TTY bolts to hold their caliper brackets on. And the article went on to say that if the bolts have to be removed during brake repair service that they had to be replaced. Does anyone know which units use these TTY bolts. How many of you replace the bolts. How many of you use a angle gauge to torque these bolts to the correct specs. when you do a brake job. Since I retired I don't have the access to the info that I did when I was working.

Posted

Sounds like something GM would do. Anything to make sure owners don't dare place a wrench anywhere on "their" vehicles ....

 

I haven't heard that personally, but that wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Posted

I have been trying to search the back of my mind. To see if I could remember doing a brake job that might have had the TTY bolts. I don't think so but I hope not.

Posted

I think that would be an excellent way for GM to get itself sued right out of business. Thousands of small shops and DIY'ers would re-use the bolts, with potentially catastrophic results - right on par with Toyota's sticky gas pedal.

Posted

Does not apply to trucks if I recall. Only thing they call for is threadlocker on the bracket to knuckle bolts. If its a 1/2 ton torque for the brakcet to knuckle bolts is 129ft-lbs. Caliper pin bolts 74 ft-lbs. TTY brake bolts seems to be a car thing...Cruze, Malibu, Sonic, etc. If it calls for new bolts do it though.

Posted

Maybe if MS3DALE has time he can pop in here and enlighten us as to what models might use the TTY bolts. I was wondering about the cross overs and the small cross overs.

Posted

From my own experience, mechanics tend to religiously follow torque specs (along with honouring the replacement of TTY fasteners) inside the engine/transmission, and the further away from that, the less they follow specs.

Torque to yield fasteners are really no different to any other fastener, with the exception that they take those fasteners to their maximum torque value.

 

First time I saw a TTY spec was when aluminum cylinder heads came out. Seemed to be common on engines with aluminum heads and cast iron blocks.

 

Would not surprise me to hear that manufacturers have gone to smaller dimensional fasteners to reduce weight, and by doing so, they had to find a dependable way to get the maximum "tightness" of these smaller fasteners, without them breaking.

 

There used to be a common saying regarding torque, tighten till it breaks, then back off quarter of a turn. TTY has already found that point of breakage, and tells you how to get to the quarter turn before it breaks.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,962
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    contrabombarde
    Newest Member
    contrabombarde
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 800 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • From where I'm sitting this sounds like a compatibility problem. I'm assuming the 2007 was a 900-series truck, and not an 800-series (they were sold side-by-side in dealerships that model year), since it starts and runs.   This is why I HATE post-2006 vehicles. Everything becomes a huge problem when you try to keep the thing running for longer than the manufacturer has designed it to.    I can't remember when Global-A architecture started - either '10 or '11. For your sake, you had better hope it's '11, or you're going to be spending some BIG money to correct this cluster-eff. That's something you need to find out before doing anything else. You may have several computers bricked ... but the fact that it runs tells me you MIGHT be ok here.     EDIT: Just did a quick refresher. You're screwed. This is Global-A. The 2 systems are NOT compatible in the slightest. Once you get the correct engine in there that IS compatible, you're going to need to see how many computers are locked. Absolute NIGHTMARE to straighten out, too. Your buddy might be better off cutting his losses and finding something else.   Welcome to post-2006 vehicle electronics. This is why I quit the industry, and drive nothing built after 1994. This stuff takes all the fun out of wrenching!  
    • Recently acquired new 2026 Silv. 1500 WT  - L3B + 4WD,  std cab + std bed, in (duh!) Sierra White. Upgrades: replaced 'steelies' w/  Vision "Flow" black alloys,  17x8.5"; HDX nerf bar w/steps (black powdercoat); Weatherguard large/deep alloy saddle toolbox; Michelin fitted bedmat (sale, perfect fit) Weathertech door sill guards TBD: rear wheebox liners 4x black fender arch trim - searching for best  (Putco: chrome only; not looking for flares either!) -Bill    
    • True, hard to say what differences there may or may not be between Chev and GM as well as a production year or mid year part change either.    I just found it odd that under the Sierra choice on the Autel that many of the last few years of production year did not include the choice of changing the tire pressure but if that is an Autel thing or a GM thing as to why the choices were not there. Knowing what tpms sensors are on the truck should give some guidance into which choices on the tool even make sense to try as I wouldn't give up just yet with the tool but I guess he will see what if anything he comes up with if he finds out a bit more info and tries a few more things on the Autel. 
    • I'm sure if you went to a junkyard where you go in and pull the part off the truck yourself, not a used part place where they do it for you, you can get that part on it's own.  Depending on if and what else you would be buying, and time of day, they might even just skip over adding it as a item to the bill.
    • No, we trade them like pokeman cards.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...