Is this right torque seuence?

I do not think it makes a lot of difference. The idea is to start kind of in the middle on one side, and work evenly toward the outside. As opposed to starting at the ends and working toward the middle. Makes even less difference if you torqued all the bolts to about 2/3 's of the final torque first and then to the final torque.

Dan

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Dan

I torques to 30 foot pounds, then 50, then 105. (Book only said to do

A three cylinder engine? Not that common.

But what *I* would do is torque in the following sequence (starting from your image)

But pretty much any pattern starting in the center and working out symmetrically should do.

Enjoy, DoN.

I torques to 30 foot pounds, then 50, then 105. (Book only said to do

Retorque them in a few weeks after a number of heat cycles.

Try six :-)

Mark Rand RTFM

Reminds me of a high school friend visiting my shop many years ago. He took one look at an inline 6 cylinder head in the trash can and exclaimed "Wow, you rebuilt a V-12!!!" We went pretty hard on him for quite some time after, teasing him about the V-12 in my street car. This was about 1970.

What everybody else said. Start near the middle and torque toward the ends. In this way, you "iron out" the mating surfaces.

It never hurts to bring up the torque in small increments rather than large steps.

You wont go wrong on this.

What does the real factory service manual say?

Opps! Of course a V-6 would have it. I tend to think of 6 cylinder ones as the old inline ones. :-)

Enjoy, DoN.

I was taught to start near the middle and work outwards in a circle. Stepped torquing is a good thing too. With the head specs in "modern" engines that give a torque spec plus 90 degrees retorquing isn't an option.

chris

I was taught to start near the middle and work outwards in a circle. Stepped torquing is a good thing too. With the head specs in "modern" engines that give a torque spec plus 90 degrees retorquing isn't an option.

chris

The torque-to-yield tightening system provides both a more accurate clamping pressure and a reserve tension that will maintain the pressure without retensioning.

Don Young

I learned the hard way that there is only one source of information on how to work on your vehicle: the FSM. Haynes and Chiltons are much cheaper, for a very good reason. Working from anything other than a FSM is a really false economy (yes, I do in fact have the FSM for every vehicle I have ever owned, from the 1966 Dodge Charger to the 2007 Dodge Dakota, including the dear departed 1975 Toyota Corolla and others).

I don't know enough to agree or disagree with that, but it certainly makes retorquing impossible.

That will be fine. Stepping the torque up to spec is a good thing. So you start it yet?

Want a V-12? I've got a nice Jag 6.0 HE out of an XJ12 sitting on the shop floor. Looks great, other than the 3 holes out through the bottom!!!

Owner cried when I told him what the replacement was going to cost. He told me his kid was out showing off and decided to play street racer... Kid would be laying under the grass if he was mine.

He may get lucky though. I am sending to a local jag guru to see if the block can be salvaged by TIG welding it back together. I don't even want to try that one. Already found a crank and rod/piston/sleeve set.

I am VERY VERY glad this thing isn't mine, I can buy a complete car for the price of the parts he needs!

Only if the manufacturer's manual says so.

So, I was interested in the torque-to-yield system, and I sumbled across this pretty interesting web site:

Yes, that's a terrific site -- I hadn't seen it before, thanks for the link.