RE: cylinder studs: torque or length?

["Minor, Bob" <Bminor@xxxxxxxx>]

Let's just put it this way Ben; four years a go I replaced my weeping
old-style head gaskets on my '96RS.  I followed the factory 90 + 90
method to the letter and 20,000 miles later there is no sign of a leak.
So there's empirical evidence for you, isn't that what psychologists
rely on to prove their point?


<<I promise to post nothing more on the subject after this... for a
while.

If you can't locate the wispy smeary indefinite location of that 
insubstantially light 15 ft-lb initial torque pressing down some 
slightly rubbery-at-first gasket stuff and 5 iffy joints in anything 
smaller than a 60 degree arc of uncertainty, it just doesn't matter how 
many times you stand on a chair and holler over and over again 
"stretch, properly derived from calculation stretch, final clamping 
force stretch... physics is smart...." - you just can't be torquing 
accurately. You can always make the nominal motions, but you can't be 
doing it accurately.

This calls for a little experiment although a bit subtle how to conduct 
it to compare the variability of a 15 ft-lb head torque setting as 
compared to a 35 ft-lb setting.

Ben
Toronto>>

------------------------------