Personally, I have no reason to doubt the workshop manual. Reuse bolts, always new nuts, and no need for thread locker. This is one place where I always use a torque wrench and clean dry threads and work up to full torque alternating between the nuts on a conrod.
What has heads coming off conrod bolts got to do with what I said, and whose conrod bolts were used? Were they properly torqued? Was loctite used with standard torque (over-torqued)? And so on.
https://www.totalbikebits.com/wassell/orderpoint/prod_info/CommandoBoltsTestCertificate.pdfThat thread once contained a link to a 3 way test comparison, which has since disappeared.
Any idea where I can find?
How much are you reducing the torque to compensate for the thread lube?I will still be using a little threadlocker on stock rod bolts and cranks.
Agreed, the factory would have measured the stretch to match the bolt makers specification and made a note of the torque required. So the torque is a derived figure and is affected by lubrication etc being different from the factory, the stretch figure give you the correct tension regardless of lube etc.Just my .02 cents,
Since the bolts can be easily measured with a micrometer, tighten them using the proper bolt stretch. Then they can be assembled wet, dry or anything in between.
Also green loctite will wick in after a bolt has been tighten. If need be, assemble the bolts dry with a torque wrench and then add some green loctite if so desired.
So, what stretch did the factory use?Agreed, the factory would have measured the stretch to match the bolt makers specification and made a note of the torque required. So the torque is a derived figure and is affected by lubrication etc being different from the factory, the stretch figure give you the correct tension regardless of lube etc.
Very nice in fact, it causes improvement and evolution and as Greg and some others have noticed we test regularly, some dangerous parts we find as well (two in the last 12 months) most of what we find is kept under wraps. Do not confuse being stronger as always being better, just because an item is stronger / tougher / harder does necessarily not make it fit for purpose. From through hardened gearbox pinions, gears in the timing cover that could destroy you and your bike ( I didn't see a recall from the vendor on this part either ) , fuel taps that continually pour fuel from the operating levers. We are currently looking at 3 items with quality issues, strangely not one of them is manufactured in the far east, try USA x 2 and the UK x 1, thankfully some on here know of these 3 products as well but say nothing saving the embarrassment of the manufacturers. The two items in the USA should be resolved as I am in touch with the manufacturers and the UK item is beyond help.i think Greg has hit the nail on the head the Wassell bolts were only tested to quash the fact AN were at the time slagging the so called pirate products NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE on their web site
wonder what humble pie tastes like ?
Norvil have also published a (beware of inferior parts) notice relating to 066486 big end boltshttps://www.totalbikebits.com/wassell/orderpoint/prod_info/CommandoBoltsTestCertificate.pdf
But as MadNorton pointed out - the wasted portion of the Wassel bolts is thicker so they are stronger, but that is not needed. In other words, the AN and Wassel bolts are both fit for purpose. The Norvil bolts are Wassel so there are really only two in the test although three are shown.
Norvil have also published a (beware of inferior parts) notice relating to 066486 big end bolts
066486 BIG END BOLTS
Fitting inferior big end bolts can lead to a devastating engine failure
How to identify the inferior big end bolt shown at the top
It is made to the original, unmodified, drawing without the extra support in the middle
It is made of different, weaker, material
The threads are rolled, not cut and are truncated and not fully formed
It has a tensile strength of only 68.5 tons ? the test certificate is available!!
How to identify our superior big end bolt shown at the bottom
It is made from the original, Genuine Norton forgings that we used to supply to other industry suppliers before one of them had their own, inferior, forgings made
The raised boss in the middle of the bolt has been lengthened to give more support to the connecting rod as it joins at this point.
The threads are fully formed and are sharp on top
The threads are cut, not rolled
How many fork who have a torque wrench have them calibrated every year... i doubt many and they have been in the tool chest for years & not wound backPersonally, I have no reason to doubt the workshop manual. Reuse bolts, always new nuts, and no need for thread locker. This is one place where I always use a torque wrench and clean dry threads and work up to full torque alternating between the nuts on a conrod.
Hardness is not a criterion for selecting suitable bolts and nuts. UTS is the only criterion.If reproduction nuts measure the same hardness and are locking the same as originals, I think it would be good to replace.
Would be good to see a hardness and breakaway torque comparison of both.
Makers of pre-chamber diesel engines used (and may still use) collar nuts. This is probably a consequence of the vibration level.Factory automaker con rod nuts and even most aftermarket replacements (ARP), don't have the lock. Nor do they use Loctite.
But they have a lot less vibration.
Don't know, but I have three (so I can always use middle of the range) 1/4 drive, 3/8 drive, and 1/2 drive. Always stored on the lowest setting per the manufacturer and always in their case and always in my climate-controlled shop. 1/4 checked against 3/8. 3/8 checked against 1/2. 1/2 checked against two old bar types.How many fork who have a torque wrench have them calibrated every year... i doubt many and they have been in the tool chest for years & not wound back