X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 22:25:46 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.67] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.5) with ESMTP id 1443452 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:53:40 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.67; envelope-from=leighton@teleport.com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=teleport.com; b=D3WH6QxUiHk216ljPJpo0CmLh+E5CcYp3ZN/qbGC5LBOy7ineXDiqkAOLl8y4ccv; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [4.242.171.200] (helo=user) by elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1GVUb9-0006jf-HT for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:53:20 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <000601c6e88d$ffbb8530$c8abf204@user> From: "Leighton" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mail list" Subject: Torque specs X-Original-Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 07:52:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01C6E853.3CDEECD0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-ELNK-Trace: ea0fe3d44b30ba0fc355332e9c4b49d598c48853aa0a5d89475fb94f79092692981f2553799d4966350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.242.171.200 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C6E853.3CDEECD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The recent discussions about proper torque on such things as engine = mount bolts reminds me that over the years I have heard from several = normally reliable sources that using a torque wrench on locking nuts = (either plastic or all metal) is not only a waste of time but possibly = even a bad idea. The logic is that because of the built in interference = of the nut either a lower than desired reading will be read or upon = approaching the desired torque the nut will "slip" and result in higher = than desired torque. It's been pointed out that truly torque-critical = items, like connecting rod bolts and case half connecting bolts never = use locking nuts. In other words, if the torque is really important = don't use lock nuts. I am curious what others on the list might have to = say about this. I am not an engineer, nor do I play one on TV, but I've = been using nuts and bolts since way back in the Erector Set days and = have absorbed "do" and "don't do" advice from people whose expertise I = respect, including the above observations on torquing fasteners. I = probably won't change what's worked well for me over the decades but = perhaps someone has some compelling argument to the contrary, or perhaps = confirm what I've heard. The floor is open. Leighton Mangels ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C6E853.3CDEECD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The recent discussions about proper torque on such = things as=20 engine mount bolts reminds me that over the years I have heard from = several=20 normally reliable sources that using a torque wrench on locking nuts = (either=20 plastic or all metal) is not only a waste of time but possibly even a = bad=20 idea.  The logic is that because of the built in interference of = the nut=20 either a lower than desired reading will be read or upon approaching the = desired=20 torque the nut will "slip" and result in higher than desired = torque.  It's=20 been pointed out that truly torque-critical items, like connecting rod = bolts and=20 case half connecting bolts never use locking nuts.  In other words, = if the=20 torque is really important don't use lock nuts.  I am curious what = others=20 on the list might have to say about this.  I am not an engineer, = nor do I=20 play one on TV, but I've been using nuts and bolts since way back in the = Erector=20 Set days and have absorbed "do" and "don't do" advice from people whose=20 expertise I respect, including the above observations on torquing=20 fasteners.  I probably won't change what's worked well for me over = the=20 decades but perhaps someone has some compelling argument to the = contrary, or=20 perhaps confirm what I've heard.  The floor is open.
 
Leighton Mangels
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C6E853.3CDEECD0--