URGENT: another connecting rod bolt torque question

[jimtweet]

I’m getting few conflicting answers from few different reliable sources and trying to figure out which is correct

The motor is a 1980 911sc 3.0

1. Is a picture of the connecting rod bolts sent to me by pelican in their kit


2. Is a picture posted on pelican in a few other threads I’ve been reading


My question is, my bolts say 12.9 clearly but the bulletin does not pertain to my engine year.

Do I still follow the 10.5ft/lbs and then 2 90s?

[jimtweet]

What pelican shipped me

[chrisbalich]

The bulletin definitely shows different rod bolts than you have.
The 3.2L rod bolts (pn 964.103.176) may, or may not, match the rod bolts you received. (pn 914.103.171)

The real question is whether or not 3lb-ft of torque more will over-stress and damage the bolts that are already being tightened and then over-tightened to the point of plastic-deformation. (the plus 90* twice part)

[jimtweet]

[Walt Fricke]

The 3.2 (and later engines?) uses a smaller diameter rod bolt. This is because of the larger rod journal or longer stroke of the crank. Don't use the torque specs for the 3.2 bolt for your 3 liter motor's rods.

[Quicksilver]

^^ What he said.
The part number you listed is correct for the 3.0 liter.

The later, small diameter bolts are "stretch to torque" and should only be installed once.