Quote:
Originally Posted by 78F350
For the silicone bead, my manual shows the same path, but mirror image (opposite side).
For the rod bolts on a 2.5L, I expect that 90* is fine, but:
There is a table that shows all the engine bolt torques for the M96/20 2.5L, M96/21 3.2L, and M96/22 2.7L supplement 42 dated from 2000 says,
"Connecting rod screws with connecting-rod designation...7R
Initial tightening: 20 (15)
Final tightening: 1x90*
Connecting rod screws with connecting-rod designation...7R
Initial tightening: 20 (15)
Final tightening: 1x110*"
(yes, it says the same thing for both sections except for the final tightening. Is the 7R a typo in one of them?)
__________________________________
There is a table that shows all the engine bolt torques for the M96/23 2.7L and M96/24 3.2L supplement 64 dated from 2003 says, "Con-rod bolts (replace): initial tightening + final tightening || 20 (15) + 110* torque angle."
__________________________________
In the section that details the work, supplement 18 printed in 1998, it says:
(following initial tightening to 20 NM)
"2. Final tightening 1 x 90* turn"
|
Thanks. Yes, it`s the same confusion regarding "7R" that we tried to disentangle in a previous thread. Strange though, because I think the 2.5 and 2.7 rod bolts are the same (at least they are listed for all years), but the newer models` bolts need 110*. So they just increased the clamping force (from 90 to 110) in the newer models without changing the bolts?
Also, the 987 manual`s respective section says the bolts should be angle-tightened twice:
"First, screw in connecting rod bolts to the required torque and tighten to the specified torque angle. Then loosen the bolts again. The final tightening is performed again with an initial tightening per the torque and the concluding tightening is performed with the torque angle wrench. --> Initial tightening: 20 (15 ftlb.) Nm ; -->
Torque angle, final tightening: 110 ° "
What a mess.