UIM question - Page 2 - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


1992-1999 Series I L27 (1992-1994 SE,SLE, SSE) & Series II L36 (1995-1999 SE, SSE, SLE) and common problems for the Series I and II L67 (all supercharged models 92-99) Including Olds 88's, Olds LSS's and Buick Lesabres Please use General Chat for non-mechanical issues, and Performance and Brainstorming for improvements.

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-29-2006, 11:54 AM   #11
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS

Expert Gearhead
 
BillBoost37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Enfield, CT
Posts: 41,391
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Hmmm..who has a copy of the great FSM handly?

I removed the spec from techinfo for the time being as with my metal "upper" I have no issue going to 20. Again..that'* on a paper gasket, whereas the L36'* are a rubber gasket.
BillBoost37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 12:16 PM   #12
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

TB bolts for L27, L67, and L36 should all be 20 ft/lbs. Those large threaded inserts distribute the load.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 01:11 PM   #13
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,688
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
dillcc is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksmdigital
That'* what I thought.
Alldata had 10Nm/22 Ft-Lb.,I know that 10Nm=89 In-Lb.
Needless to say that I was a little confused
I just need to figure out why my engine is racing and the check engine light is on.
Did you clean your TB and remove the TPS sensor while doing so, and could you have put the TPS back on incorrectly? Maybe someone else can chime in on that.
dillcc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 01:14 PM   #14
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

That'* a good point, Dill. It'* possible to install the TPS so the tab isn't engaged by the throttle shaft flag pin.

You need to rotate the TPS as you insert it, then turn it slightly so it takes up tension as you line up the screw holes.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 01:29 PM   #15
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Posts: 5,656
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Archon is on a distinguished road
Default

All right then...I had better get back to the engines I did as all the specs I have for the L36 engines (no FSM) showed 89 inch pounds for the TB, and that'* what I used! No leaks....so far - but I'm not gonna take any chances!
Archon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 02:03 PM   #16
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Chilton'* #28200 page 3-53, under the intake manifold section, it only lists one value for TB bolts at 20 ft/lbs, or 27 nm.

L27 (Vin L) are listed in the 95 FSM as 88 in/lbs for the plastic intake, not 89 like the VinK, but that'* no difference.

In the 95 FSM, I can't find specs for torquing the TB for the Vin L, Vin 1, or Vin K. All it says is to install and tighten.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 02:35 PM   #17
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Posts: 5,656
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Archon is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm getting my information from the same place that he got his conflicting info. Alldatadiy for a '98, '99 and 2000. They all show the 89 inch pounds (no conflicting information for those years). I have a FSM for my 2000 but unfortunately, I don't have it with me right now.
Archon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 08:53 PM   #18
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 94
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Arbelac is on a distinguished road
Default

FSM for my 96 says 11 ft/lbs = 89 in-lbs.

That'* what the APN spec sheet said as well.
Arbelac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2006, 11:15 PM   #19
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ames, Iowa
Posts: 3,066
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
bill buttermore is on a distinguished road
Default

Well, 20 ft-lbs on a 6mm bolt into plastic is just asking for trouble. I cannot believe that is the correct torque spec. It would not be the first time that torque specs have been widely published and have been wrong. Same thing happens with the flywheel bolts on the '95. If you torque those little 8mm bolts to the specified torque, they simply break. 7.5 ft-lbs is all I have ever used with those little TB nuts and bolts on a plastic upper, and I have never had a leak yet.

[edit: here are some general torque specifications from the Engineer'* Handbook online for metric fasteners:
http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/torque1.htm

for cap screws:
http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/torque2.htm

for steel bolts:
http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/torque.htm

All these give torque specs for DRY bolts. The same bolt tension or clamping force (which is really what we are trying to normalize when we torque fasteners) is achieved with less torque if the bolt is lubricated. According to this source, http://www.raskcycle.com/techtip/webdoc14.html oiling the bolt reduces the torque requirement by up to 25%. With a dry lubricant, the torque requirement drops by half! When you analyze these and other similar data from a variety of sources, the conclusion is that 89 in-lb will provide all the clamping force these bolts were designed to provide.

willwren is correct to say that those bolts have a wide distributing nut set in the plastic that speads the clamping force widely around the base of the bolt. The problem is not that the bolts pull out, it is that the plastic can crack and distort when too much force is applied. This sealing surface is an area that is prone to distortion by warping anyway, and anything we can do to minimize warpage and distortion is a good idea.

I believe this is simply a case where some printed specifications are wrong. It is not common, but it does happen.]
bill buttermore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2006, 12:06 AM   #20
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Posts: 5,656
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Archon is on a distinguished road
Default

Thanks, Bill. I think that I'll leave things as they are, then.
Archon is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Damn UIM, where do i go from here? *ONE NEW QUESTION* alec_b Oldsmobile 49 06-04-2009 10:04 AM
UIM and LIM replaced now leaking coolant out of UIM gasket Paul1981 2000-2005 10 12-21-2007 11:05 PM
Quick UIM Question! NCCamper 1992-1999 12 03-08-2006 03:47 PM
UIM ID and Thermostat question. radchad3 1992-1999 3 12-30-2005 07:19 PM
UIM Removal with pics and a question or two nick s 1992-1999 21 11-06-2005 10:55 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:37 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.