You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: crank bolt tightening debate
| Michael Pardee | 06 Nov 2005 23:53 |
> ok, let's try this instead: > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/ I still dunno. I've seen galled steel flat washers and bolt heads various places before (but I don't recall where they have been), so I wouldn't have thought it was unusual. I would speculate that the torque we need to apply to break crank bolts loose isn't being directed to the threads but to the head, where the galled surfaces are responsible for the excessive break-loose torque. Pure speculation, though.
Usually crank bolts (Honda or otherwise) need to loosen a quarter turn or so before they come free, and then there is no evidence of the threads galling - leading me to the speculation of the galled head and washer surfaces being the key. That would also be consistent with the observation that the break-loose torque goes up over the years, if engine heat and/or vibration is important in the development of the galling.
I don't think we have enough to work with to come up with a definitive answer.
Mike
|
| jim beam | 06 Nov 2005 17:44 |
> lower res pics are here: > > http://www.snapfish.com/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=31395672/t_=36454773 ok, let's try this instead:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/
|
| jim beam | 05 Nov 2005 19:56 |
lower res pics are here:
http://www.snapfish.com/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=31395672/t_=36454773
|
| jim beam | 05 Nov 2005 01:07 |
this afternoon, i went to my favorite junkyard and bought two crank bolts. one from an 91 civic, one from a 92 civic. i'm going to post the pics later this evening, but the observations are these:
_91_ * eyeball=poppingly hard to shift - had to get a fulcrum and bounce full bodyweight at the end of a 18"x3/4" breaker bar. * no evidence of loctite. * clear fretting damage on the mating surface between the washer & the bolt head. * no evidence of corrosion. [i'm in california] * pulley wheel locked with single woodruff key.
_92_ * it was definitely snug, but i could remove with one hand. * bolt thread clearly loctited. * no evidence of fretting. * no evidence of corrosion. * pulley wheel splined /and/ woodruffed.
now, we all know what loctite does - it binds threads so they don't move. no movement means no possible further tightening. loctite also means a bolt is hard to remove compared to its fastening torque.
conclusions:
1. there is /definitely/ lash in the 91 pulley wheel - something that honda evidently felt needed to be addressed with the addition of a splined interface for the 92. [splines don't eliminate lash, but help mitigate it.] fretting [or lack thereof in the case of the 92] is as clear an evidence of lash as you can get.
2. loctite /prevents/ further tightening of the bolt! hence the 92 was much easier to remove, despite the loctite's binding function. the reduced lash would help in this regard also.
time to get out the camera...
|
Quick links: