The Continental 180 to 220 inch lbs is correct. Agree with torque removing excess stretch on bolts, but does not apply on props. The Ercoupe Maintenance manual 125 -175 inch lbs is for wood prop on a 75 hp. No grunt factor on these like on the tapered shaft bolt.
Dan -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, March 22, 1999 4:35 PM Subject: Re: Torque Spec. >Darrell, > >I have attached the note I sent to Dan, hoping qualified A&E mechanics would >respond with something specific and definite. I must admit I am confused as to >the info, and think the numbers are too low --but I am probably wrong. > >Here is the e-mail I sent Dan : > >Subj: Torque Specifications >Date: 3/20/99 5:00:58 PM Eastern Standard Time >From: CALXA >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Dan, > >Hope I didn't offend you by my Caution posting, on the prop bolt specs. From >what I can see you are probably correct, but the torque seems too little to >me. > >The Ercoupe book gives torque of 125 to 175 inch pounds -and this must be for >a wooden prop. > >Ercoupe Service Memorandum #24 gives 125 - 150 inch pounds , with comments >that 150 is the maximum, except when necessary too obtain proper tracking, >with 175 is the absolute "should never be exceeded". This Memo suppsoedly >quotes from Sensenich Brothers Co. > >As you pointed out the Continental Manual gives 180 - 220 inch pounds. > >Neither specify Wood or Metal Props..... so that gives me concern. Maybe there >is no differences due to the metal bushings used in wood props. > >Somehow, neither seem high enough, in that to torque a bolt, one is supposed >to be taking all the stretch out of the bolt - so that it doesn't flex and >fail from fatigue. These bolts are pretty large, for such a small >torque...(3/8-24). > >I appreciate your comments and experiences shared with the list members. > >Harry > >Darrell, I hope some qualified A&E will respond with the definite information. >Sorry to have muddied the waters, but one doesn't want the prop flying off the >engine.....Better be safe than sorry ! > >Harry
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
