: Harmonic Balancer Torque



raymondk
06-15-14, 01:24 PM
93 Eldorado Touring Coupe N* I read many of the posts regarding the balancer replacement and was satisfied that the proper tightening proceedure was 37 FT-Lbs + 120 degrees. So I did that. Out of curiosity I looked in my FSM and it says 105 Ft-Lbs + 120 degrees. To get the 120 degrees took holding on with everything I had and pushing the wrench with my foot. Its all together now running over 50 miles. Do I need to go back and try for a few more degrees, loosen and retighten with the 105 FT-Lbs, or is it OK?

oldstuff
06-15-14, 01:35 PM
The whole reason for the procedure is to clamp the oil pump collar to the crankshaft so it can't slip and drop the oil pressure. Do you think any slippage could occur with the push you put on that wrench? That pump couldn't be pumping more than 60 lbs and the torque to do that is all you have to overcome.
I think you are OK as is.
Dave


93 Eldorado Touring Coupe N* I read many of the posts regarding the balancer replacement and was satisfied that the proper tightening proceedure was 37 FT-Lbs + 120 degrees. So I did that. Out of curiosity I looked in my FSM and it says 105 Ft-Lbs + 120 degrees. To get the 120 degrees took holding on with everything I had and pushing the wrench with my foot. Its all together now running over 50 miles. Do I need to go back and try for a few more degrees, loosen and retighten with the 105 FT-Lbs, or is it OK?

raymondk
06-15-14, 01:40 PM
I thought the same thing but I saw a couple of posts about them slipping and the expert posts were adamant about using the given proceedure. I'm not sure I could move it anyway.

oldstuff
06-15-14, 03:12 PM
I have a way of countering the "experts" with common sense.
Dave


I thought the same thing but I saw a couple of posts about them slipping and the expert posts were adamant about using the given proceedure. I'm not sure I could move it anyway.

Submariner409
06-15-14, 04:07 PM
I have a way of countering the "experts" with common sense.
Dave

As Stephen Foster once penned: "Beautiful Dreamer".

Is it somehow possible that differing year engines have differing torque + degree settings for the crank pulley (it's not really a harmonic balancer) bolt ?

I'd like to see the printed quote from the GM manual for a 1993 Northstar that said "105 lb/ft?" + degrees. Nobody's kidding anyone - 105 lb/ft is a LOT of initial torque - even for head bolts.

Curious that the OP did not look in his service manual FIRST .............................. FWIW, the 2000 and later FWD engine crank bolt spec is 37 lb/ft + 120 degrees.

raymondk
06-17-14, 02:18 PM
Here's the FSM proceedure in jpeg. Sorry bout the quality but I couldn't get it small enough.

Submariner409
06-17-14, 02:24 PM
Thanks for posting that there is a difference. It's good info...........

RippyPartsDept
06-17-14, 02:30 PM
that's TIGHT!

maeng9981
06-21-14, 07:28 AM
My goodness, 105 lb ft + 120 degrees would be like impossible to torque.

98eldo32v
08-24-14, 12:23 AM
Now, that's interesting?

Why the difference?

Submariner409
08-24-14, 11:26 AM
Either different crank pulley hubs, oil pump drive sleeves, crank snout machining, other mechanicals.

There were several different cranks made as the model years progressed - a 2000 crank won't even come close to working in a 1999, and other stuff happened in the 1995-1996 change.

For accurate work on ANY of these cars the Bible is the proper year GM service manual set - no one has enough experience with the entire FWD Northstar vehicle line to be able to cover all the ins and outs in these forums. Much "car advice" is pretty generic and straightforward - but as always, the real truth on specifications and special procedures is "in the book".

rodnok01
08-24-14, 11:41 AM
The harmonic balancer bolt size did change mid 90's also IIRC. In the sticky somewhere it mentions the change.