Date:         Tue, 19 Nov 96 11:46:02 -0800
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         vince_pappalardo@om.cv.hp.com
Subject:      Re: RE Bentley Thermostat housing torque values

TO: HANRAN.INC@internetmci.com

.......................................................................

Item Subject: RE Bentley Thermostat housing torque values


     Hi All,
     
       To convert from Nm (Newton-meter) to ft-lb (foot-pound) multiply the 
     Nm value by .738 to get the ft-lb value.  
     Nm x .738 = ft-lb
     
     For Example:  10 Nm x .738 = 7.38 ft-lb 
     
     Some other useful conversions are as follows:
     
     Nm x 8.851 = in-lb (inch-pound)
     in-lb x .083 = ft-lb
     ft-lb x 12 = in-lb
     in-lb x 16 = in-oz (inch-ounce)
     
       With the above conversions you can go between both large and small 
     values as well as SI (System International AKA metric) and English 
     units of measure for torque.
       Hope this helps.  Now--are there any typos of the SI units values in 
     the Bentley Book.  I just paid 85 bucks for the book--you would think 
     they would have corrected these errors by now.
     
     Regards,
     
     Vince (Mechanical Engineer)
     '85 VW GL Westy (Currently has a broken Alternator bracket--why did    
             they put this bracket up against the water pipes--aurghhhhhh!)
     '90 Mit. Eclipse GSX
     
     
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE Bentley Thermostat housing torque values
Author:  Non-HP-vanagon (vanagon@lenti.med.umn.edu) at HP-Corvallis,shargw1 
Date:    11/19/96 8:46 AM
     
     
-- [ From: Thomas D. Hanlon * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] --
     
Dave writes: 
I recently replaced the thermostat in my Vanagon (87 Waterboxer), the 
Bentley manual (Back cover under "Coolant system, section 19) says I should 
tighten the bolts on the housing to 61 pound/feet, is this correct?  It 
seems excessive when the housing is plastic, does anybody know if 61 
pound/feet is correct, or what it should be tightened to? 
     
     
Dave
     
Dave and Other Listees:
     
That 10 Nm value appears to be a typo or erroneous figure appearing more 
than once on that Quick Data back cover table.  Note the preceding and the 
following values in the column:  pump pulley 20= 15; thermo switches 30=22; 
and then compare the 10=61 value for the thermostat. Using a ratio and 
proportion approach,  it would appear that "about" half of 20nm  is 7 1/2 
pounds and "about" half of 30nm  is 11 pounds and "about" half of 10 nm is 
somewhere at 5 ( plus or minus)) pounds, in the range of 6.1 pounds which 
would apply if the decimal were missing.
     
Note that the same 10 nm = 61 pound feet" value appears at the "thermostat 
housing" "specification" under "Water-cooled Digijet and Digifant" further 
down the list. 
     
To my untrained and inexperienced eye, it would appear to be missing a 
decimal point. Maybe an engineer or a mathematician amongst us would 
analyze the figures.
     
Tom Hanlon
Austin, TX