Stupid question about torquing bolts...

[Eric VerValin]

when i see things that say (10-16) what do i use? anything in between ?
should i start with 10 and 'click it' a few times, then do 16?

I'm getting to the part where i tq my heads on, and I was wondering since its two stages, is it really like 4 ?

Once again.. I'm no mechanic.. just mechanically inclined.. sorry if this question makes you laugh.

 

[SASHO91]

when you have that- 10-16, thats just stating anything between those numbers, and also given the condition and part location are factors too, atleast in my book.
FWIW, I always tend to tq. things more so to the higher value but not that value.

As far as two step tq. procedures, its just that.... tq. to one value, then tq. to the other.
an example being the rod bearing cap bolts. i'll do one, then the other on the same tq value, then the same for the next tq. value.

 

[Eric VerValin]

yea thats pretty much what i was thinkin, just when i did my rod bearings the first time, I had 2 numbers, not 2 ranges.. So lets say for my aluminum heads, on the iron block, i'd be better to stay on the low end and if it is leaking or acting a little funny, I have a little 'room to work with' ?

 

[SASHO91]

i'd go with the higher value with the heads, as once they are tq'ed, i dont think you'll be able to re-tighten it after. I could be wrong though. But i do know that the head gaskets are going to get crushed to that smaller tq. value... so when you try to tq. it higher after they have been tq.'ed to the smaller value you may have some HG issues... but dont qoute me.

 

[egroce11]

As all are saying torque towards the higher number, and like on the heads when you have a two stage tightening sequence do all bolts to the first value and then go back and torque to the final number.

 

[Eric VerValin]

LoL.. why am I rebuilding this whole engine again.. Thanks for your honesty.. I wondered about the head gaskets and how they would crush when I first seen them. I'll have to search a little more maybe..

plus another thing I thought of is how well my little clicker is accurate. maybe thats why i should stay to the middle of those ranges?

 

[egroce11]

I'm old fashiond go to Sears and get an old fashioned wrench with the scale on it.

Ernie

 

[93rev2sev]

I second the scale...no clicking to rely on...just the amount a hunk of iron will bend given a certain force....which is very reliable as the physical properties of a hunk of iron wont change with use.

And no moving parts.

You can always use the old-school one to calibrate the new school one.

Anyone that reads this...if you have both kinds, have you tried to check them against each other?

 

[Eric VerValin]

I second the scale...no clicking to rely on...just the amount a hunk of iron will bend given a certain force....which is very reliable as the physical properties of a hunk of iron wont change with use.

And no moving parts.

You can always use the old-school one to calibrate the new school one.

Anyone that reads this...if you have both kinds, have you tried to check them against each other?

Well I am a commercial electrician by trade, and I usually torque the bolt by hand and feel depending on the size of it. Nothing I've installed that I know of has caught fire, exploded or anything as of yet that I know of. I do know when we use aluminum service wire, (about 1 1/2" diameter), we have to re check the 'system' within a month, due to heat cycles, and its always out of spec when we check it.

My friend's house has it too, but I begged him not to, and I get to go out there again this weekend to check it.. so he'll be resetting clocks all over again. But hey, he saved 200 bux on service wire..

Anyway my point is steel on aluminum is funny, and I dont know crap about this stuff, and glad you guys are here to help!! The word Craftsman always makes me *****, my woman hates the word Sears tho... For something like 30 dollar bolts, and 100 dollar gaskets, might as well get a good tq wrench. This one is from Harbor Freight, probally not good to use a $130 "Tester" :laugh_ti: