Flywheel housing torque

jeepguy1948

Well-known member
Is there a torque setting for the bolts that attach the flywheel housing to the engine block?
I can find some torque specs in Les Andrew’s red book (specification card) but it is not a complete listing as near as I can tell.
If someone could help me locate a complete listing of torque specs somewhere I would appreciate it.
Thanks
 
On page 1-147 para. 6 the text mentions 55 ft. lbs.

Andrews does this in several places describing assembly.
 
And it is not always correct... pan bolts come to mind.
Terry Burtz also recommends 55 ft-lb for the flywheel-block bolts in his Builders Guide. He also suggests use of Grade 8 fasteners with Locktite in lieu of the wired original bolts.

I put the pan on my new Burtz engine today - was quite surprised to see that Les Andrews recommends 20 ft-lb. I'm sure the bolts (5/16-18) can tolerate it, but that seems way too much to me for this application, especially with the cork gaskets I use. OTOH, you do need to have a certain amount of torque to be sure you compress the split lock washers. I chose 15 ft-lb, it seemed about right. The important thing with this, and any gasketed surface, is that the bolts are consistent.
 
Last edited:
oops i should have said this. make sure you use the gasket and make sure you check the runout. shim the housing.

i saw a video one time where a guy was shimming the housing and added a shim to the rt side by the cam journal. i would not recommend that because if that is done there is a possibility of cam journal leaking oil.
sooooo if you need to shim it there to tilt the housing a bit use more gaskets or thicker gaskets to make sure that journal is sealed. it is a hard oil leak to fix once the car is assembled.
 
Ford Motor Company wasn't always very specific in the early years. I tend to follow modern general torque specs that are listed by thread type and fastener diameter. The flywheel housing is a part of the engine, front suspension, and transmission mounting structure so it needs to be well aligned and secure. Torque charts are an engineering related subject and can generally be found on the internet. Have them in several aviation related texts that I reference from time to time. 55 ft/lbs is likely not far off but I still compare to the charts to be safer. When working with very old fastening systems, there could be fatigue or wear issues but I have always been amazed at the quality of the old Ford hardware and castings.
 
Last edited:
More importantly ! Wire wheel the bolt threads , chase the block bolt holes with a thread chaser ( not a thread cutter ) blow out the hole and spray with brake cleaner . Then tighten snugly and a hair more !
 
Just curious, is anyone going to discuss Flywheel Housing alignment? Just tightly bolting the Housing to the Block might create some issues if the Housing has not been restored.
 
Brent, The answer to your question is yes but I didn’t need to ask questions about that aspect. But since you asked what is the acceptable run out for the housing? I asked around our club and most guys don’t even check it. They’re either trusting the last guy or ignoring it or unaware of the need to do it. I got the dope from the 95 year old guru in our club. He told me .006 and loaned me the tool to measure it.
 
Brent, The answer to your question is yes but I didn’t need to ask questions about that aspect. But since you asked what is the acceptable run out for the housing? I asked around our club and most guys don’t even check it. They’re either trusting the last guy or ignoring it or unaware of the need to do it. I got the dope from the 95 year old guru in our club. He told me .006 and loaned me the tool to measure it.


Well my way is definitely not the only way, but on a new rebuild I strive for 0.002" or less of runout. The 0.006" is the maximum that Ford allowed however we must remember that the Crankshaft can affect this too. If the Crank has ever been ground without it being straightened first, the flange likely has runout. If the Crankshaft was straightened after grinding, there is also a possibility of runout at the flange. So, getting that established helps you know what comes next.

It has been my experience that most Flywheel Housings are warped. This is because cast iron is soft, and the entire fore/aft forces of the drivetrain are constantly being transferred into the Frame thru the Flywheel Housing. To correct a warped Housing, I modified a Flywheel Grinder machine to be able to fixture the Housing and true both surfaces (Block & Clutch Housing) where they are co-planer. Some may feel this really isn't a big deal whether this needs to be checked. Maybe they are right, but misalignment affects the Main (-Input) Shaft where it can cause bearing failure and harmonics that cause the Transmissions to jump out of gear.

Here is how we restore Flywheel Housings. Listen to the interrupted grinding which signifies just how warped this Housing was...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GDg5AT2TmI
 
I mentioned well aligned as a small part of my post #7. I would try to shim it as close to dead nuts as I could get. A person doesn't want a bind on the input shaft gear or bearings. A lot of transmission problems come from mis-alignment. Fords castings and machine work were pretty good/not perfect but 90+ years can warp things to some degree as well. Having the radius rod tie in there adds a lot of shock loads to that casting.
 
Like many topics with these old cars it seems overwhelming and impossible for your average owner. I would quite happily farm out a great deal of this work but there is nobody within 300 miles. Either I do it myself or it doesn’t get done. I imagine that Brent would true up a housing for me but shipping and the time delay would be a major problem.
 
There a couple of things to keep in mind when measuring flywheel housing runout with the housing mounted on the engine. The typical way is to mount your indicator (it might be a dial indicator, it might be a flywheel gauge like Snyders sells) is to mount the indicator base onto the back of the crankshaft, then rotate the crankshaft. You look for the difference between high and low, and that is the runout.

1. First and foremost, the crank has some degree of end play. It may be as little as say 0.001", or it may be 0.006" (especially on a rebuild without changing the thrust). As you use a wrench to rotate the crankshaft you are pushing against that end play and can move the crank back and forth in its bearings. Depending on where you are in the end play that will show up in your runout measurement. To try to minimize that effect I typically stand my engine vertical with the crank nut up, whack the nut a few times (gently) with a dead blow hammer to drive it backwards, and then rotate the crank a couple of times carefully to allow it to seat to its chosen position as far aft as it is comfortable. I then set up the dial indicator. It makes reading the dial indicator sort of awkward, but I think it gives as close to a true reading as feasible.

2. If you use a dial indicator, choose your end button on the indicator plunger carefully. You need a rounded end button, not a flat one. Dial indicators are not really intended to have a lateral force on them, and putting that lateral force while turning it can bend the indicator slightly in its mount, which will affect the reading. The shorter the distance from the flywheel housing to the mounting point of the indicator, the better.

3. I've found that you sometimes see a bit of jump across the opening that the starter motor goes through. I don't get too upset with that, the clutch housing will sneak those two into alignment when you mount it.

On another note, I've had flywheel housings decked like Brent describes. You need to be very careful when you are decking the surface that mounts to the block that you don't flex it during the decking process. The original housings are very weak around the lower two bolt holes, and too much pressure can crack them (as one machine shop did to one of mine). Ideally you would have the machine shop put a couple of jacks underneath the center section to remove flex when they surface that.

I just installed one of Terry Burtz's new flywheel housings on the engine I'm building. Boy, that is one beefy (and heavy!) son of a gun. Terry provides an O-ring as the camshaft seal, so I did not put a paper gasket in. Even with that O-ring on the passenger side of the engine, it did not exhibit any side-to-side runout. It still required a shim in each of the upper bolt holes (the ones that mount the mousetrap) to get good top-to-bottom runout. I think I finished out with around 0.003" total runout, and it was a bit high at the bottom where the weight of the transmission will tend to pull it down a bit.
 
Terry Burtz offers a newly designed and reinforced flywheel housing. This might be an option as well. I wonder if anyone has any experience using this new housing?
 
Terry Burtz offers a newly designed and reinforced flywheel housing. This might be an option as well. I wonder if anyone has any experience using this new housing?
Yes, I installed one earlier this week. From an installation standpoint the biggest difference is that the new housing provides an O-ring seal at the camshaft. So it's not necessary to use the usual thin paper gasket seal that the stock housing uses (I checked with Terry, he says it's optional but not recommended). I did not. If I had needed a bit of shimming I might have installed pieces of that gasket, but not the part that goes over the camshaft. I did not find the need to do that, the O-ring seemed to flatten out into its groove just fine. FWIW, I held the O-ring into its groove with grease and installed it with the flywheel horizontal up in the engine stand. I did still require one shim at each of the two upper ears to get the runout minimized.
 
Like many topics with these old cars it seems overwhelming and impossible for your average owner. I would quite happily farm out a great deal of this work but there is nobody within 300 miles. Either I do it myself or it doesn’t get done. I imagine that Brent would true up a housing for me but shipping and the time delay would be a major problem.

The difference that I see comparing today's Hobbyists vs. Hobbyists 50-60 years ago is the average Hobbyist's skillset. During the 70s, I would venture a guess that 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the Model-As in the clubs were actually restored by their owners, ...in their own garages -and largely with their own hands & tools. The hobby wasn't that costly back then because the Hobbyist used problem solving skills and determination to restore/repair/refurbish the worn or damaged component to a point that is was back within factory specifications.

From my perspective, the hobby has suffered because the typical Model-A owner chooses to replace with a reproduction part in lieu of repairing the original part. Over time, the Restorer has lost their problem solving skills and their craftsman skills simply because they have not used them on their car. I applaud you for choosing to do it yourself.

I would also think you are one that chooses to do the needed task rather than overlook it. The unfortunate thing is that it appears that you are in a very small minority these days. From my observations over the past decade or so, Hobbyists prefer to purchase a nice older restored Model-A and drive it without any significant maintenance or upkeep until it begins to have issues surfacing every time it is driven. At that time, because of their lack of skills, it is parked or sold at a discounted rate to another unknowing Hobbyist that tries to limp it along until they are overwhelmed with the repairs. Then it is sold again at a loss, and this continues where a Hobbyist ultimately buys it because it is cheap. Too many Model-As are owned today by people who honestly do not have adequate funds, nor the wherewithal to repair, maintain, or upkeep their vehicle. Never a popular topic, but it is reality. The other reality is that restoring a Model-A doesn't need to be expensive however 'one does need to be proficient at their skills and own the necessary tools to accomplish the restoration tasks, and show diligence.
 
If you google Standard Fastener Torque Values you will find numerous charts listing torque values for all fastener grades and sizes. As an example see this link.https://www.vancouverbolt.com/images/pdf/resources/Torque-Value-Chart.pdf
I suspect that is where the discrepancy in the oil pan bolts came from. Those are not so much torqued as snugged to just compress the gasket a little so it seals.
Terry's new housing has been designed to use an O ring to seal the cam area. It may have a little more tolerance to shimming on that side before you get a leak.
 
Like many topics with these old cars it seems overwhelming and impossible for your average owner. I would quite happily farm out a great deal of this work but there is nobody within 300 miles. Either I do it myself or it doesn’t get done. I imagine that Brent would true up a housing for me but shipping and the time delay would be a major problem.

Brent's jeremiad aside, I would recommend expanding your scope of repair places to general-purpose machine shops. There are no Model A specialist shops within 150 miles of me, but I've been able to find shops within 20 miles who were willing to deck heads, bore cylinders, do valve jobs, grind cranks, mount tires, reshape fenders, etc. I had a local machinist repair and true up two flywheel housings last year. A good machinist is a good machinist, 50 years ago or today, and they can do a lot of what you need.
 
Back
Top