[The HACK]

The "87 ft-lbs" should be applied to the nut, not the stud for obvious reasons.

On a lug bolt, the thread engages the hub and the bolt itself is elastic, and the 87 ft-lbs provides clamping force to keep the wheel on the rotor hub surface because the bolt's elasticity. Most of that force is spread out onto the conical mating surface of the lug bolt and wheel.

On a stud conversion, there should only be enough force applied onto the studs into the hub to prevent it from backing out when the wheel is taken off. Hence typical stud conversion requires Loctite. None loctite applications should have the studs torqued to approximately 60 ft-lbs, or the force equivalent to a stud tightened to 20 ft-lbs plus loctite to prevent the stud from backing out when the lug nut is released.

The same "stretch" principle apply regarding studs, the material of the stud actually "stretches" to provide the clamping force, there's actually little torque load placed on the hub itself. It's the conical surfaces of the lug nuts and the wheel interface that bears the brunt of the 87 ft-lbs of torque. That is also why lug bots and studs should be replaced after X numbers of use, because the constant stretching and releasing will eventually fatigue the material. Typically I go with a fresh set of fasteners every 2 years on cars I track regularly, or every 5 years for cars I don't (basically every time the bearing is changed).

Personally, I'd prefer the "pressed on" type studs but I have no scientific evidence that it's better than the bolt-to-nut type conversion.