No
. The torque arm allowed enough fudge (fit on a quality piece should be tight and precise) that the axle was able to move when it shouldn't - again a common feature of these pot-metal cheapie arms. I had a fairly powerful motor on as I said. The dropouts spread (not a snap). The now-released axle spun. A spinning axle with that axle arm still attached pulled straight down on the blade arm and that whole arm shot straight down until the dropout arrested the hose clamp that was still intact. Exactly like in the picture I posted of the other guy's fork from today's latest catastrophe.
On an unrelated note: as the axle arm spun, it wrapped the motor cord that WAS running up the fork around the other side of the axle. Luckily it just released from the plug and no damage.
Look at the pic more closely. It may not be so obvious because I sized the pic so open it up in a new window. Look closely at the dropout's internal profile. The builder hasn't copped to it last I checked, but I think its pretty clear he filed the dropouts to match the axle profile and this guaranteed failure. As I said when I posted that picture, "there are other reasons this setup failed" but I posted the pic to display how the arms slip down when they are pulled upon.
Worth mentioning
@hulk is to be commended for taking the step of doing torque arms in the first place, and to ask whether he got it right. I'll say again this low torque motor can live with one of these torque arms put on properly on the non-drive side (assuming its fit to the axle is *snug* with zero play). I would only change the parts on the drive side, and that is assuming he can't get the one he has to work once the brakes get mounted, since it should go behind not forward of the fork blade. The alternate parts I mentioned will work around the brake calipers being there once installed.
