CashDudeHomie

iTrader: (5)

Thank you for posting that correction. There are a lot of people out there who might have actually taken that wrong figure and used it. I googled for the U joint bolt torque and this was the first thread that came up.

TXsilverado

iTrader: (19)

and the crank bolt requires nut busting tight.

surely you would have known 59 ft lb seems a wee bit high just zip it in with an electric impact and stop after about 5 clicks. the only torque specs that i follow anymore are head bolts.

Dakota McCahon

To the *** hole who said 59 ft on torque spec **** you. Why would you put the wrong information like an *** hole. Doesn't matter if you thought you were being cute and silly **** you hard in the ***. Broken bolt later with an hour of getting it out again **** you gard mother ****** I will ******* knee you in the face so hard if I ever know who you are.

FFDP

iTrader: (2)

#1 reason I find more than one source for information or disregard torque specs all together and do the german spec.

I've probably put 90% of cars back together without torquing a dam thing LOL. Head bolts, rod caps, main caps, crank bolts and specific stuff gets the ole bendy treatment but everything else is a blap blap with an impact lol.

madmann26

iTrader: (7)

LOL. And to the person who thought 59ft-lb was realistic, you're an idiot.

RedXray

I actually broke the impact socket before I hit that torque spec.
I was lucky I didn't brake off the bolt too

firebladeJJ

iTrader: (1)

Some people will believe anything on the internet. Someone needs to put a sarcasm warning on that post.

MrHorsepowerLSx

iTrader: (13)