Miatapower List Archive
HELP! Crank Pulley Torque???
Posted by mailbot
|
mailbot
Mail List Archive Bot
., Online, USA
|
Topic Creator (OP)
Apr 20, 2001 10:43 AM
Joined 15 years ago
227,243 Posts
|
This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: John Suchak Jr <(email redacted)>
OK, about to button up the crank pulley, finally got all the correct
bits... My manual is vague on which torque spec is appropriate for the
"intermediate" crank. (Small diameter like a 90, but longer.)
Is it the 80-87 pounds of the early one, because it uses the same
smaller diameter bolt, and that's what's really important, regardless of
the snout length?
OR
Is it the 116 to 122 pounds of the later spec, because it's engaging the
same number of threads on the crank as the later big diameter crank?
I have two knowledgeable Mazda guys at the local dealership embroiled in
controversy over this very subject, and my crank goes untorqued until
it's resolved, so I'm appealing to all you Einsteins out there for help.
Thanks in advance,
John
(Washed the empty engine compartment this morning... Once again I look
like a coal miner, but the car looks great. As an other lister said
this morning, if this runs as good as it looks... Woo Hoo.)
Mail From: John Suchak Jr <(email redacted)>
OK, about to button up the crank pulley, finally got all the correct
bits... My manual is vague on which torque spec is appropriate for the
"intermediate" crank. (Small diameter like a 90, but longer.)
Is it the 80-87 pounds of the early one, because it uses the same
smaller diameter bolt, and that's what's really important, regardless of
the snout length?
OR
Is it the 116 to 122 pounds of the later spec, because it's engaging the
same number of threads on the crank as the later big diameter crank?
I have two knowledgeable Mazda guys at the local dealership embroiled in
controversy over this very subject, and my crank goes untorqued until
it's resolved, so I'm appealing to all you Einsteins out there for help.
Thanks in advance,
John
(Washed the empty engine compartment this morning... Once again I look
like a coal miner, but the car looks great. As an other lister said
this morning, if this runs as good as it looks... Woo Hoo.)
|
mailbot
Mail List Archive Bot
., Online, USA
|
Topic Creator (OP)
Apr 20, 2001 11:03 PM
Joined 15 years ago
227,243 Posts
|
This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Lance Karl Schall" <(email redacted)>
80 to 87
----- Original Message -----
From: John Suchak Jr <(email redacted)>
To: Miata Power <(email redacted)>; SSCOR <(email redacted)>
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 9:43 AM
Subject: HELP! Crank Pulley Torque???
>
>
> OK, about to button up the crank pulley, finally got all the correct
> bits... My manual is vague on which torque spec is appropriate for the
> "intermediate" crank. (Small diameter like a 90, but longer.)
>
> Is it the 80-87 pounds of the early one, because it uses the same
> smaller diameter bolt, and that's what's really important, regardless of
> the snout length?
>
> OR
>
> Is it the 116 to 122 pounds of the later spec, because it's engaging the
> same number of threads on the crank as the later big diameter crank?
>
> I have two knowledgeable Mazda guys at the local dealership embroiled in
> controversy over this very subject, and my crank goes untorqued until
> it's resolved, so I'm appealing to all you Einsteins out there for help.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> John
>
> (Washed the empty engine compartment this morning... Once again I look
> like a coal miner, but the car looks great. As an other lister said
> this morning, if this runs as good as it looks... Woo Hoo.)
>
>
Mail From: "Lance Karl Schall" <(email redacted)>
80 to 87
----- Original Message -----
From: John Suchak Jr <(email redacted)>
To: Miata Power <(email redacted)>; SSCOR <(email redacted)>
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 9:43 AM
Subject: HELP! Crank Pulley Torque???
>
>
> OK, about to button up the crank pulley, finally got all the correct
> bits... My manual is vague on which torque spec is appropriate for the
> "intermediate" crank. (Small diameter like a 90, but longer.)
>
> Is it the 80-87 pounds of the early one, because it uses the same
> smaller diameter bolt, and that's what's really important, regardless of
> the snout length?
>
> OR
>
> Is it the 116 to 122 pounds of the later spec, because it's engaging the
> same number of threads on the crank as the later big diameter crank?
>
> I have two knowledgeable Mazda guys at the local dealership embroiled in
> controversy over this very subject, and my crank goes untorqued until
> it's resolved, so I'm appealing to all you Einsteins out there for help.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> John
>
> (Washed the empty engine compartment this morning... Once again I look
> like a coal miner, but the car looks great. As an other lister said
> this morning, if this runs as good as it looks... Woo Hoo.)
>
>
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.
Having trouble posting or changing forum settings?
Read the Forum Help (FAQ) or click Contact Support at the bottom of the page.







