Torque...

Raven

Member
Put the cylinder head back on today and tightened it down according to specs. I used a dab of never sieze on each stud and I understand that this extra lubrication affects the torque value. According to Les Andrews handbook on page A-4 I'm supposed to reduce the torque values 45%...that is instead of 35,45,55 ftlbs I did 20,25,30 ftlbs. Any thoughts? I know that the compression ratio is low on these engines so is 30 ftlbs for a final torque okay?
 
Put the cylinder head back on today and tightened it down according to specs. I used a dab of never sieze on each stud and I understand that this extra lubrication affects the torque value. According to Les Andrews handbook on page A-4 I'm supposed to reduce the torque values 45%...that is instead of 35,45,55 ftlbs I did 20,25,30 ftlbs. Any thoughts? I know that the compression ratio is low on these engines so is 30 ftlbs for a final torque okay?

Hmmmmm....

I have never used "never sieze" and have always torqued to 55 ftlbs with no trouble.

If it were me, I do not think I would use the 20, 25, 30 values...you just might get some water leakage where you do not want it!

Just do it for the way Henry meant for it to be done...35...45...55!

Pluck
 
Raven, yes, 55 Ft Lbs,
Re-torque them at least 3 times, COLD, and don't break the torque when doing them. Why break an established "seal." Sometimes when folks loosen that nut on the long stud that holds the ignition cable clamp & leaves it loose overnight, they end up with an oil pan full of water!! For that reason, I NEVER use that damned cable clamp, EVER!
Bill W.
 
Put the cylinder head back on today and tightened it down according to specs. I used a dab of never sieze on each stud and I understand that this extra lubrication affects the torque value. According to Les Andrews handbook on page A-4 I'm supposed to reduce the torque values 45%...that is instead of 35,45,55 ftlbs I did 20,25,30 ftlbs. Any thoughts? I know that the compression ratio is low on these engines so is 30 ftlbs for a final torque okay?
There are several questionable things in that book
Bill W.
 
There are several questionable things in that book
Bill W.
Yes, probably more than several. However, I still find the book to be useful in far more things than not. And since no one else has undertaken the task of producing anything close to that, here we are!

One of the things I find frustrating is the order in which he walks you thru on a particular task. Right now I'm in the process of pulling the engine out of my PU. Things like: do this on the right side, then go over to the left side. Back and forth, back and forth. Each time raising the hood, closing, raising the other side, etc. etc. Then 2 hours later he says "now take the hood off."

Common sense goes a long way in being able to use the book. I think it says in there somewhere to torque the manifold nuts to 45 or 55 ft lbs. Just wonder how many manifolds that has busted!

Since Mr. Andrews hasn't seen fit to produce an errata sheet, has anyone else complied such a list? That would probably sell just as hot as the books do!

Sorry for the rant, didn't mean to hyjack the thread! But given that's the only book like it I have, I use it, but with some common sense mixed in.
 
Hmmmmm....

Just do it for the way Henry meant for it to be done...35...45...55!

Pluck

Interesting! Would that be Henry Smith circa 1960 or someone else I've never heard of that was still playing with Model A's after the invention of the torque wrench? Ford's ORIGINAL torque wrench for the cylinder head was included in the tool kit with every new car. There are at least three entries in the Service Bulletins describing how to use it properly.

I used a dab of never sieze on each stud and I understand that this extra lubrication affects the torque value. According to Les Andrews handbook on page A-4 I'm supposed to reduce the torque values 45%...that is instead of 35,45,55 ftlbs I did 20,25,30 ftlbs. Any thoughts? I know that the compression ratio is low on these engines so is 30 ftlbs for a final torque okay?

I'm afraid I've never used Never Seize in this case so I have no "feel" for it. However it may be worth explaining the reasoning here. First, torque values specified for Model A's today are simply arbitrary choices made by various folks in recent years based on charts with limited or no specific information on the specific application. We now throw in more variables or unknowns like decent or totally junk head studs, etc., which further throws any such numbers into question.

Finally, all "standard" torque specs unless otherwise noted are based on "clean, dry threads". The spec includes an allowance for friction between the parts as that friction is a significant part of the force the torque wrench picks up. Only the remaining portion applies to clamping pressure and stretch or stress on the stud (or bolt where applicable).

So with that said the the low numbers still scare me a bit but would hate to see you snap a junk stud of pull one from the block. I wouldn't advise going over 50 ft lb.
 
There are a number of reference guides, both for specific torque values and for general torquing procedures, some of which are (or were) available gratis. Two that I obtained in 1989 when I was a mechanical engineer for the Oceanic Division of Westinghouse Electric Corporation were free from an automotive parts store across the street from our offices. Both were from Fel-Pro Incorporated of Skokie IL; the first is “Fel-Pro 263-85 Gasket Installation Manual” and the second is “Fel-Pro 486-89 Complete Cylinder Head Torque Specifications” (including torque-to-yield information, not applicable, insofar as I know, to Model A’s). As pointed out in an earlier thread, some of this information is available on-line.

Here are some excerpts of industry-standard best practices applicable to torquing, retorquing and lubricating threads. While generally addressed from the standpoint of assembling heads and manifolds, some recommendations would be applicable to any bolted assembly:

“Wire brush the threads on all assembly bolts, check the bolt threads for damage and lightly lubricate the threads with engine oil before assembly. Dry…threads can decrease the bolt’s clamping force by as much as 50% [and] lead to false torque readings and possible gasket failure.”

“If the [assembly] has been resurfaced [or] if the threads run up to the surface, chamfer and retap the hole. The threads then will not be drawn above the [head or block] surface when the bolts are tightened [which] is enough to cause…failure.”

“Older [gasket] designs, such as the steel-faced sandwich and perforated core, require the cylinder head to be retorqued [since] these gaskets take a set after initial engine operation and relax to the point where retorquing is needed to restore the clamping force. Run the engine to a normal operating temperature (usually 5 to 10 minutes), shut off the engine and carefully retorque the cylinder head bolts for a second time while the engine is still hot if the engine is cast iron. If the head or block is aluminum, cool to room temperature. Follow the torque sequence to the specified amount in the torque tables. Retighten a third time after 300 to 500 miles.” Note that nothing was mentioned, either way, about breaking torque before retorquing.

“Some exhaust manifold gaskets have a perforated steel face on one side and a soft face on the other. The steel face is positioned toward the exhaust manifold…because the exhaust manifold expands when it is heated during operation [and] moves. Due to high heat conditions, it is important to retap and redie all threaded bolt holes, studs, and mounting bolts/nuts [to] ensure tight, balanced clamping forces on the gasket. Lubricate the thread with a good high temperature anti-seize lubricant [and] install the bolts/nuts finger tight [and] then tighten in three steps [to] ½, ¾ and full torque following the torque tables. Torquing…is begun in the center of the manifold, working outward.”

Just one take on the torquing/thread lubrication issue.
 
I use "Neverseize" on most threads, not for it's lubricating value, but it's weather resistance for rusting etc. I've never compensated torque values for it. Considering the tight fit that Fords have, I don't see it making any difference. When I worked on airplanes, we used neverseize on all threads including spark plugs. It's good stuff, especially on things that are left out in weather.
Terry
 
another piece of information requiring more information: "retap and redie all threaded bolt holes, studs, and mounting bolts"

Often fine...But do it on your 4025 and you will reduce threads to modern class 3 and have leaks. Then try it on a head stud hole...aaaaargh.

I think Ford's first torque spec published for service use may have been the pinion gear turning torque published in the Bulletins circa 1933 or so, when KRW released a little tool to measure that. The spec was given for the A-B rear as well as the later one in use.

On heads, if you want a number turn again to V8 books which eventually offered up a number*...Ford studs, threads, and nuts were the same except for length on everything except V8 60 up into 1948.

*It should be noted that Ford continued to supply a cylinder head nut wrench with each car. I think a torque wrench was an exotic toy even in garages up til the fifties and was not common amongst amateurs until at least early 1960's...
 
Last edited:
A side – and personal - note on torquing circa the Model A period. My Dad was a mechanic, starting as a P-38 mechanic for Lockheed Aircraft Corporation in Burbank CA before the war (that’s WWII for you younger types) and eventually becoming a tool and die maker for Lockheed Missiles & Space Company in – as I recall – Van Nuys CA (before they relocated to Sunnyvale CA). He claimed to have bought his first Model A when he was 15 or 16 (which would have been in 1936-7) and we once – after I became a mechanical engineer – got into a discussion of (basically) “How did you old guys do it in the ‘dark ages’ without torque wrenches?” whereupon he said that he could come to within 5 ft-lbs just by feel. Being a young (that’s a relative term) whipper snapper, I set up a fairly good sized double-nutted bolt in my vice and asked him to prove it (I had my trusty deflection-bar torque wrench at the ready to check his accuracy). As is usually the case in these instances, he was spot on each and every time, which brought new meaning to “Son, don’t mess with me” and provided some insight into why – back in the so-called “dark ages” – torque wrenches might not have been as prevalent as they are today.

By the way, I still have one of his Lockheed pay stubs from March 8, 1941 (before he was invited to spend time in New Guinea and Luzon with MacArthur’s army). He earned – for a 40 hour week - $20.40 and took home $18.90 (deductions were $0.20 unemployment insurance, $0.20 “Fed. O.A.B." – whatever that was, $0.58 for group insurance and $0.52 miscellaneous deductions). And – with those earnings – he was able to co-own a private plane (until December 7, 1941, when the government shut down the air space over Los Angeles) and live comfortably.
 
Along a similar line, I "Used to" Years ago, be able to pull 30# of torque with a 3/8 ratchet wrench. How do I know? I was working on airplanes W/O an A&P license. So I would "Rough" the work in and the guy with the A&P would follow me up. I used to put a lot of props on and they are 6 3/8 bolts that had to be torqued to 35 # and wired. I would draw them up, being careful not to over tighten them and the A&P guy would pull them down to 35# and wire them up. It saved the A&P's time that way. I would watch him and he never had to back off any bolts that I put in.
Terry



A side – and personal - note on torquing circa the Model A period. My Dad was a mechanic, starting as a P-38 mechanic for Lockheed Aircraft Corporation in Burbank CA before the war (that’s WWII for you younger types) and eventually becoming a tool and die maker for Lockheed Missiles & Space Company in – as I recall – Van Nuys CA (before they relocated to Sunnyvale CA). He claimed to have bought his first Model A when he was 15 or 16 (which would have been in 1936-7) and we once – after I became a mechanical engineer – got into a discussion of (basically) “How did you old guys do it in the ‘dark ages’ without torque wrenches?” whereupon he said that he could come to within 5 ft-lbs just by feel. Being a young (that’s a relative term) whipper snapper, I set up a fairly good sized double-nutted bolt in my vice and asked him to prove it (I had my trusty deflection-bar torque wrench at the ready to check his accuracy). As is usually the case in these instances, he was spot on each and every time, which brought new meaning to “Son, don’t mess with me” and provided some insight into why – back in the so-called “dark ages” – torque wrenches might not have been as prevalent as they are today.

By the way, I still have one of his Lockheed pay stubs from March 8, 1941 (before he was invited to spend time in New Guinea and Luzon with MacArthur’s army). He earned – for a 40 hour week - $20.40 and took home $18.90 (deductions were $0.20 unemployment insurance, $0.20 “Fed. O.A.B." – whatever that was, $0.58 for group insurance and $0.52 miscellaneous deductions). And – with those earnings – he was able to co-own a private plane (until December 7, 1941, when the government shut down the air space over Los Angeles) and live comfortably.
 
Back
Top