Sometimes it's just easier to ask the question than go searching for the answer. In the F workshop manual the English translation shows torque specs in Nm or Kg or something else, I'm not sure. For example I'm trying to determine the torque specs for the side covers of the gearbox. It appears to be 5.5 5.5 what? I don't know. Can someone translate?
the manual gives 4 different languages, you need to convert newton meter to foot pound--- 1 newton meter= 0.7376 foot pound. 5.5 newton meter = 4.0566 foot pound. hope this helps.
Yeah, that's what I thought too...but I find it hard to believe that the 8 bolts holding the differential side covers on are only torqued to 4 foot pounds. That doesn't sound right.
It's probably 5.5 daNm = 55 Nm = 40.6 ft-lb (but always match up the thread size too, if possible -- is the thread size in this particular case M10 x 1.25P?) Nm = Newton-meter (1 Nm = .738 ft-lb) daNm = deka Newton-meter (1 daNm = 7.38 ft-lb) Kgm = Kilogram-meter (1 Kgm = 7.233 ft-lb) Unfortunately, in section M of the TR WSM there is a misprint in the table heading -- where it says "Kpm", it should be "Kgm". Also, although not exactly right, they often assume 1 daNm = 1 Kgm (so they give the same numerical value for either unit). I find this a useful website for doing torque conversions: Online Conversion - Torque Conversion
That's good to know. However, it says daN m (kgm) so which is it? daN m or kgm? Gotta love these translated manuals. It's exactly like talking to an Italian guy who's English isn't very good. Anway, 30 or so foot pounds sounds a lot more reasonable than 4! Thanks as always Steve...
As I mentioned, they assume that 1 daNm = 1 Kgm, and, if you do an exact conversion to foot-pounds for both, the difference is small enough to not worry about it: 5.5 daNm = 55 Nm = 40.566 ft-lb 5.5 Kgm = 39.782 ft-lb In the early 1980s (when the TR was developed), the world was trying to go super strict metric (ISO) for all units -- so using Newton-meters (or multiples of Newton-meters) was the goal (and F was just trying to be a good citizen) -- it didn't really work out too well in the long run
Personally I hate when people write these foots and punds as cars them self are made in Metric system. Sure, if old Chevy/Crhysler/Ford needs "foot" to the end of braker bar to get wheels open, but those cars are made in non-metric system... The "metric mixup" was not cheap... Mars Climate Orbiter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
here is a link for a lot of conversions for torque: Einheiten Umrechnung Drehmoment in german but the table to put the numbers and the unit are in short cuts
my work shop manual suggest 53 for diff side cover torque. trust me its not da Mn i almost made a major mistake using that conversion. Its Nm, for some reason the torque chart says da Mn but when your read the actual procedure it says Nm, must be a mix up it the copy. when i converted 53 daNm to foot pound it came out to be @ 390 and i knew that was way to much that would pull the studs completely through the case so thats when i started my research and found out that Nm to Flb is correct. hope this helps Tommy
Where are you finding "53" as a torque for the side covers in the WSM? I don't see it in section "E" at all? The Section "M" torque table shows "Stud securing side covers" as "5,5" (or 5.5) daN m (Kpm). In Kpm or Kgm I get 39.7 ft-lbs or 477.3 in-lbs., and in daN m it is equivalent to 40.59 ft-lbs.
Thanks--they cleaned up a lot of Testarossa book errors on the 512TR WSM and SPC but it looks like they created a few more.
