Quote from BlueFlame :

Yes you are using your hands. I was just being pedantic, I don't know, I can physically tighten any bolt, with anything :P untightening is a different story though but does that mean you need a specific type of torque wrench to tighten head bolts?

Um, no. Just a torque wrench. Probably a good place to start is to get a 15-85lbft one (sorry, I don't know what this is in Nm. I could normally work it out in my head, but I'm dog tired). I suspect you don't really understand what I'm on about.

Quote from BlueFlame :

I am assuming the head needs to be torqued as tight on each bolt of the cylinder head?

Eh? The head bolts ARE the torque. You don't torque a cylinder head as such, but the bolts. So no, the head bolts are not torqued the same as the head.

Quote from BlueFlame :

Well I didn't know this, to be honest, I didn't even think of power-assist or power steering, nor alternator, and would never of thought of the basically everything internal of the chassis, but most BHP/TORQUE numbers are based from at the flywheel as a general rule right?

Yes, as it's a consistent place to take the measurements from. Rolling roads (chassis dynos) tend to be a lot less accurate due to wheel slip, variable transmission losses etc.

Quote from BlueFlame :

Well, I thought the manufacters would bend the truth as much as possible. Afterall, it's not like anybody can find out for real before they buy the thing, once they have bought it the car company already have all their money.

But if the hundreds or thousands of people that DO test them (and yes, cars are tested through various means by lots of people) mention they are miles off I think they'd have a problem. Germany is particularly strict on power/torque/economy figures (if I recall correctly) via the TUV standards. I might be wrong on this - brain not working. Need bed.

Quote from Shotglass :

well i guess the usual wot runs under load on a dyno will show you quite quickly if youve undertorqued the head bolts at least if theyre only finger tight

Well, yes, that would show up!!! I don't use the term often, but LOL is appropriate here.

Quote from Shotglass :

anyway im getting the distinct impression that he hasnt got the first idea what torquing a bolt actually means

You think!?

Quote from Shotglass :

also im confused whether i should feel honoured or terrified that my oppinion posted on a rather insignificant web forum is apparently more believable and worthy of parroting than anything in a physics textbook

Quite. Especially as you and I, and anyone on this forum probably has no more (and quite probably less) understanding of any aspect of it than the people/person that wrote the text book...

Quote from hrtburnout :

Hey Blueflame. You said you knew something. Sadly, you were wrong. You could've done research before you made a statement, but you didn't. Even when others proved you wrong, you didn't believe them. And when you finally did confess you were wrong, you indirectly stated it wasn't your fault. You're one thick guy..



You should've been man enough to not make any mistakes. Also, when experts correct you, don't think they're wrong.

I'll leave the technical discussion to the experts, unless I can add something to the discussion. You should too.

You were too late to join the bandwagon mate, go grind your axe somewhere else.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Um, no. Just a torque wrench. Probably a good place to start is to get a 15-85lbft one (sorry, I don't know what this is in Nm. I could normally work it out in my head, but I'm dog tired). I suspect you don't really understand what I'm on about.

I understand what lbft and nm are if that's what you mean, but I don't understand how a torque wrench can be different to another, other than the handle size and ratchet design.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Eh? The head bolts ARE the torque. You don't torque a cylinder head as such, but the bolts. So no, the head bolts are not torqued the same as the head.

That's not what I am saying, I am saying does each cylinder head BOLT, need to be torqued equally?

Quote from BlueFlame :

That's not what I am saying, I am saying does each cylinder head BOLT, need to be torqued equally?

Not necessarily, the manufacturer will specify required bolt torque wrench values and tightening procedure (just as important). Sometimes the actual bolts need to be torqued differently, although normally most of the bolts do have the same specified torque more for simplicity and because the pattern tends to be symmetrical.

Quote from BlueFlame :

You were too late to join the bandwagon mate, go grind your axe somewhere else.

Because you cleverly changed subject.

Quote from BlueFlame :

I understand what lbft and nm are if that's what you mean, but I don't understand how a torque wrench can be different to another, other than the handle size and ratchet design.

I know I'm not the brightest tool in the box, but I'm completely lost. Does that mean you win? If so, congratulations. But I think it's more likely that you are so confused that you don't even know what you're trying to say, let alone what you are saying.

Quote from BlueFlame :

That's not what I am saying, I am saying does each cylinder head BOLT, need to be torqued equally?

Depends on the application, but most of the time yes.

Quote from hrtburnout :

Because you cleverly changed subject.

But you said I was stupid.

Quote from tristancliffe :

I know I'm not the brightest tool in the box, but I'm completely lost. Does that mean you win? If so, congratulations. But I think it's more likely that you are so confused that you don't even know what you're trying to say, let alone what you are saying.

I'm just saying there must be a design of torque wrench to use on cylinderhead bolts, right?

Erm, no, not really. 99% of the time you use a standard adjustable torque wrench. Some applications use a torque+angle setting, so you torque the bolt up, and then turn through some amount of degrees (perhaps 90°), and that usually requires a slightly different torque wrench; one that is okay to use beyond the set torque. Normal ones might not like being overstressed - though of course some are fine with it.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Erm, no, not really. 99% of the time you use a standard adjustable torque wrench. Some applications use a torque+angle setting, so you torque the bolt up, and then turn through some amount of degrees (perhaps 90°), and that usually requires a slightly different torque wrench; one that is okay to use beyond the set torque. Normal ones might not like being overstressed - though of course some are fine with it.

Ok, I understand it now. Oh btw, which manufacturer provides the best torque wrench and other tools? Snap-On of course have the best reputation for replacements/repairs but I'm wondering which tools are the most durable and or ergonomic.

Blimey - that's a question and a half!

Snap On is great, but I can't afford it. Teng Tools 'sponsored' us for a while, and gave us large discounts on tools, but they weren't all that good really. I've got a Kennedy (Cromwell) torque wrench downstairs, but it's not very nice to use... Draper is a bit cheap, but will probably never break (how accurate are they over their life though?). I've heard good things about Norbar, but know nothing about them...

How long is a piece of string!

I didn't realise Snap-On was so expensive, Draper I haven't heard much of, but as for budget tools go, I wouldn't recommend Clarke, well, infact I wouldn't recommend much from Machine Mart either, though Clarke are getting better, the ratchet ring spanners are quite weak (although most are) it's very rare that you find you need only a ratchet ring spanner to do a job though, because a ratchetwrench or regular spanner can normally do the job anyway.

Decided I could almost live with a focus (if it's meant to handle so well), drove 100 miles to find the perfect one which turned out to be a dog.

Now my mind has wandered onto a Saloon Mondeo?!

My god I change my mind almost daily...

Quote from Jakg :

Decided I could almost live with a focus (if it's meant to handle so well), drove 100 miles to find the perfect one which turned out to be a dog.

Now my mind has wandered onto a Saloon Mondeo?!

My god I change my mind almost daily...

You must be a chick, but naa, I have been thinking about Impreza for weeks and weeks, I know they are shit and not really sure what 'piston tap' is, it just sounds like an excuse for a badly timed flat 4... oh wait... it IS a badly timed flat4!!

If I were you I'd buy a Volvo 440. It's cheap, there's room for you and your mates, it isn't slow and it doesn't look old-fashioned either.

Quote from hrtburnout :

it isn't slow and it doesn't look old-fashioned either.

LOL

Quote from Jakg :

Decided I could almost live with a focus (if it's meant to handle so well), drove 100 miles to find the perfect one which turned out to be a dog.

100 miles to look at a Focus? There are stacks of them for sale so there is really no need to travel more than a few miles to look at one, don't get hung up on saving the last penny on an everyday common car like a Focus. If it is advertised for a reasonable amount, very well listed and the buyer isn't interested in getting rid of it as soon as possible to the first person who will take it. Then you will be much more likely to be buying a car off someone who isn't either selling it because they can't afford to keep it, in which case it is a fair assumption it hasn't been looked after or they are selling a dodgy motor.

Quote :

Now my mind has wandered onto a Saloon Mondeo?!

Watch what you're buying, very variable can either be a very well looked after car (much more likely in estates or higher spec cars) or they can be a classic example of a generally well built and reliable car that has been ruined by a total lack of maintenance. Parts are expensive on the mk 3 Mondeo and with the large wheel sizes that a lot of them have a set of tyres is not cheap, what a Mondeo is wearing will tell you a lot about the recent history of the car. To be honest I don't think a Mondeo ticks any of your, rather demmanding boxes.

Compared to a Focus it will never be as fun to drive, will cost you more to insure (quite a lot more actually), be slower and get worse fuel economy being bigger and heavier, generally they're not as well maintained as a Focus and the good ones will set you back more.

Quote from hrtburnout :

If I were you I'd buy a Volvo 440. It's cheap, there's room for you and your mates, it isn't slow and it doesn't look old-fashioned either.

Not a bad suggestion, I enjoyed my 440, not as well built as the 340 but still much better built than a lot of modern large hatchbacks. The later ones are sometimes very well equipped and though my 1.7 on carbs wasn't sluggish, the later fuel injected models would have much better fuel economy. I did an autosolo in it and found that at low speed it would reliably cock a wheelin the air just like the well setup FWD hot hatches, the only problem being it would be a front wheel in the air. Whilst it was completely useless on the autosolo and demonstrated collossal amounts of understeer it was actually quite nice to drive at speed and it actually quite neutral and fun to drive on old tyres and would happily get into a four wheel drift on roundabouts

Quote from ajp71 :

100 miles to look at a Focus? There are stacks of them for sale so there is really no need to travel more than a few miles to look at one

51k, FSH, very very very clean car. Or at least it was, from all the pictures on the outside. The interior definitely wasn't that of a 51k car, though and there was something very very dodgy about it...

Quote from BlueFlame :

LOL

Ofcourse when compared to cars with a similar price tag.

Quote from hrtburnout :

Ofcourse when compared to cars with a similar price tag.

It was just a funny thing to read.. :P

Quote from BlueFlame :

It was just a funny thing to read.. :P

Heh. I'm considering buying one when I sell my moped. Uni's my biggest expense atm, but when I've saved enough I might buy a 440

Well, I appear to of exchanged my brain for a cabbage and after the failure that was the Focus viewing, I went on the hunt for a local barge. Oddly I can get insured on a Rover 75 (no jokes from the back) for the same as my current car if I get the 1.8, and I have always had a soft spot for them...

So I went to look at one:



Very comfortable, relaxing to drive, a little faster (120 BHP gives it 0-60 in 11 seconds which is slow, but little better than I have now), same MPG and cheaper tax...

The suspension is set up for comfort rather than all out sportiness, but I think even so it should still be as good as my Wira (set up for cheapness, although I do like the direct handling...).

Found an example up the road with 63k on the clock, immaculate condition, FSH, even has climate control... (picture above) which has really grown on me. My Dad is getting the RAC to check it out tomorrow and i'm sorely tempted.

Downsides - beisdes the handling, it's a 1.8 K-Series so head gasket failure is a real concern...

K-series engines tend to fail on mid engined cars or those with custom cooling (e.g. kit cars). Due to airlocks and localised boiling. Most front engined production cars using the K-series don't suffer problems in that respect, and by now there are plenty of solutions with remote thermostats etc.

The biggest concern is... it's a Rover!

You're improving though. First a Proton, now a Rover, it will only take you a few more cars until you finally buy something halfway decent.

Quote from tristancliffe :

K-series engines tend to fail on mid engined cars or those with custom cooling (e.g. kit cars). Due to airlocks and localised boiling. Most front engined production cars using the K-series don't suffer problems in that respect, and by now there are plenty of solutions with remote thermostats etc.

From what i've read the issue seems to be a small coolant tank + a penchant for leaking, which means if you get a leak and dont notice your stuffed...

I'm amazed I haven't got more flack yet tho!