Do I need an inch lb torque wrench?

[plymouthcolt]

This was a spur of the moment purchase from Sears.com on fathers day weekend and it was on sale for $131. http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00934186000P?keyword=00934186&sLevel=0

I've been debating on keeping or returning it, so other than valve covers, I see no other need for this wrench.

[York]

I purchased one 6 months ago, use it for spark plugs, valve covers and recently to re-torque the intake manifold on the 911. It is also handy for my other car, moto and bicycle. I think that you will find more uses for it if you keep it.

[rfn026]

I have one. I think I've used it twice in the last five years.

Richard

[cgarr]

The American way is to use it then return it!!

[Rodsrsr]

No

[Peter Zimmermann]

I use mine for...drum roll please...setting differential bearing pre-load. The 3/8" drive torque wrench does everything else - by the way, rocker (valve) cover nylok nuts torque to 18 lb/ft - perfect application for a good 3/8 wrench... So the answer is, as Rodsrsr stated - no.

[dshepp806]

Pete,

18 for the VC nylocks?

Doyle

[York]

I think that is 6 ft-lb (8 Nm) for the valve cover nuts.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by York

I think that is 6 ft-lb (8 Nm) for the valve cover nuts.

Yep...I use a Park bicycle torque wrench that's calibrated in inch/lbs for these (around $40).

[KTL]

I use mine all the time for M8 fasteners, since my "big torque wrench goes from 20-150 ft-lb and my old school beam wrench isn't always convenient to try and read the pointer whilst leaning on the wrench (and trying to lean on it properly). I say keep it if you're a torque spec. nut. If close enough is good enough, then take it back.

[rcwaldo]

These are great for brake caliper bleeder nipples.

[911pcars]

30-150 in lbs. = 2.5 - 12.5 ft lbs.

Extreme accuracy when tightening small fasteners.

"These are great for brake caliper bleeder nipples."

... and electrical ground screws.

No. For the few times you will actually need one, purchase a beam type in.lb. torque wrench. Much cheaper and more accurate over its lifetime. There's a better chance of damaging smallish threaded fasteners if this click-type loses its accuracy.

Sherwood

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

...For the few times you will actually need one, purchase a beam type in.lb. torque wrench. Much cheaper and more accurate over its lifetime....

That's what my Park is (beam type)...perfect for my limited applications...

[ChemMan]

I have used mine a couple of times over the past couple of years.

[Peter Zimmermann]

Originally Posted by dshepp806

Pete,

18 for the VC nylocks?

Doyle

Back in the day (let's call that the early '80s) I had already been a P-car repair shop owner for a number of years. My mechanics and I used to take a mid-morning coffee break, sit in a corner of the office and bat things around. 911 service and repair had become about 90% of our workload, and many items on those cars were tightened by feel due to sparse available torque info from the factory. We used rule of thumb guidelines that were, roughly; 8mm hardware = 18 lb/ft, 10mm hardware = 35 lb/ft, 12mm hardware = 65 lb/ft, and 6mm hardware was sensibly snug. Of course, special items like CV bolts, drain plugs, spark plugs, ball joints, etc. all had specs readily available. Porsche always wrote their manuals for technicians with some level of experience, and their "Spec" books were similar. Service instructions for many parts assumed that the mechanic already knew what the spec was and didn't feel a need to include it.

We made a collective decision, during a morning break, to try to assign a torque spec to virtually every fastener. At the time we had not torqued rocker (valve) covers; tight was tight and they involved two types of gaskets - cork and other. Cork gaskets required a very light hand, otherwise they would be squeezed out from between the cover and cam housing. The "other" gaskets ranged from paper products through to contemporary super gaskets. They were far more firm than earlier cork versions, therefore we knew they could handle more torque. As time passed we practiced, and we also used the '78-81 and '82/83 Spec books for reference. I quote from either, "All M8 bolts (meaning bolts, nuts, studs) on crankcase and camshaft housing - torque = 2.5 kpm (18 lb/ft)". Confusion entered the picture for the first time inside the early SC Spec book, where it also states, "Cover to camshaft housing - torque = .8 kpm (6 lb/ft)". We went hmmmm, and started torquing valve covers, because we wanted to learn if a typo existed along with a language glitch (those do exist in P-car manuals), perhaps meaning that the hardware was M6, not M8, and the cover was for the chain housing not the cam housing, or if Porsche was finally telling us what the rocker cover torque using cork gaskets really was. Well, we had already moved on to later gaskets, but tried the 6 lb/ft number on early cars that still had, mostly, warped magnesium covers that we used the cork version on. We discovered that the 6 lb/ft number was pretty good, perhaps a little light, but OK. We did a few cars with aluminum covers and next generation gaskets, tightened the nuts normally, by hand, and found that we had been tightening cover nuts to about 16-17 lb/ft after following up with a torque wrench. We did a few cars at 18 lb/ft, based on the rule of thumb, plus the fact that 8mm crankcase hardware was exactly the same as rocker cover hardware, and its torque spec was, you guessed it, 18 lb/ft. Not long after that we made another interesting discovery; there are two types of 8mm aluminum flat washers being sold out there. One has a somewhat shiny, silvery finish - they are junk and will crush into the stud threads at 18 lb/ft. The other 8mm washer has a dull gray finish, is available from the P-car dealer, and high-quality gasket kit makers such as Wrightwood Racing. Those washers do not crush, and can actually take more than 21-22 lb/ft of torque; and they are the exact washer that's used on crankcase halves on the lower end of engines.

In case that you think that I pulled the 18 lb/ft spec out of some dark place, I did not. The spec came from a well thought out, logical process - my shop, using 18 lb/ft, never had a stud or nut strip or leak, and this was on as many as ten 911s in a week, over a period of almost twenty years. I rest my case.

[jcsjcs]

Along these lines - what about the guidelines for the fan belt - my manual says 35 ft. lbs - yet I can seem to get that high using the Fan Belt Pulley Tool.

I know that the gap between the pulleys sets the tension on the belt - but am I weak or is 35 ft. lbs a tough objective? (Or do I have the ft. lbs wrong???)

[KTL]

Yes it's very easy to reach 30 lb-ft with the pulley spanner and 24mm socket wrench from the toolkit. If somebody wanted to muscle-up on tightening the fan nut, he could easily do so.

I think the spec book for my car says 40 Nm which equals ~31 lb-ft. So you are plenty tight with 35. Just be sure to recheck after installing a new belt. It's easy to install the pulley a little crooked. Once the belt and pulley "settle-in" with some running, you need to recheck the belt tension.

[jcunning]

I mostly use mine when rebuilding gokart or lawn mower engines.

However there have been a couple of occasions that I have used it on the Porsche engine and some M8 bolts.

Mine reads in inch/lbs and newton/meters so I can use the Bentley specs without having to convert from ft/lbs to inch/lbs.

[Komenda Fan]

Peter - it's great having you here!

[dshepp806]

Great read, Pete. Your case is "rested" (if need be). Hell, that's 10,400 Porsches! Who the frick would argue with that (not me),
........discuss,..yes.

I did note in my past readings that M8's were around 17 ft-lbs,..but read other stuff that mentioned VC nuts were not considered a "fastener" (neccessarily). I just keep reading ,..knowing that a holostic approach will do...(of course, listening to the P-wrenches).
Yes,.I've heard of these "other" washers;;;;;;too.

When I think of what could be the "variable" here ( for so many different ranges of VC torque , almost 3X the range) ,it has to be the covers, no? ((((understanding that the torque should be evenly applied across the V/cover.)))))) I guess , for the SAME gasket material, an evenly applied torque at the lower value would do as well as an evenly applied torque value (at the M8 fastener value) insofar as oil leaks........fine. Iwould imagine you'd see a LOT of different condition VCs on THAT many 911's.

As to VC trueness.......I guess one needs to be very careful when spreading the torque across the VC's, so as to NOT bend the VC's in spots..

Pete, did you guys check EVERY VC for trueness? Or only when the problem presented?
.....

Just trying to learn here,..and nothing better than getting the take on these things from someone FAR removed from the "shade of the tree"........ (pro).

Thanks!

My best,

Doyle