Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>> you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>> a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>> the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>> undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>> why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>
> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
> friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
> screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
> left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
> equivalent force on the crank bolt.

ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
"precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
to make the distinction as follows:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
precession that's meant here.

As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
thread, which it is on the left pedal).

I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
plenty do.)

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>> you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>> a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>> the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>> undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>> why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>
> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
> friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
> screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
> left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
> equivalent force on the crank bolt.

ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
"precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
to make the distinction as follows:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
precession that's meant here.

As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
thread, which it is on the left pedal).

I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
plenty do.)

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>> you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>> a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>> the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>> undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>> why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>
> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
> friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
> screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
> left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
> equivalent force on the crank bolt.

ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
"precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
to make the distinction as follows:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
precession that's meant here.

As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
thread, which it is on the left pedal).

I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
plenty do.)

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>> you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>> a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>> the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>> undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>> why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>
> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
> friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
> screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
> left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
> equivalent force on the crank bolt.

ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
"precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
to make the distinction as follows:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
precession that's meant here.

As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
thread, which it is on the left pedal).

I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
plenty do.)

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:y82dneXHT8wZzy_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> news:f-adnZ-O0NVJKSzZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on a bike so
>>>they're only finger tight. now, pedal around the block. you'll find you
>>>need a wrench to get them undone again. that's precession that tightens.
>>>and it's why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>
>> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The friction of the
>> bearings, small as it may be, works to screw the pedals in
>
> yes and no. yes, it's a different physical arrangement, but it's not the
> bearing friction that works the thread in [a remarkably wide
> misunderstanding!] - the rotation direction is incorrect. check it out
> yourself.

Well, I'll be! You're right!

Mike

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:y82dneXHT8wZzy_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> news:f-adnZ-O0NVJKSzZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on a bike so
>>>they're only finger tight. now, pedal around the block. you'll find you
>>>need a wrench to get them undone again. that's precession that tightens.
>>>and it's why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>
>> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The friction of the
>> bearings, small as it may be, works to screw the pedals in
>
> yes and no. yes, it's a different physical arrangement, but it's not the
> bearing friction that works the thread in [a remarkably wide
> misunderstanding!] - the rotation direction is incorrect. check it out
> yourself.

Well, I'll be! You're right!

Mike

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:y82dneXHT8wZzy_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> news:f-adnZ-O0NVJKSzZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on a bike so
>>>they're only finger tight. now, pedal around the block. you'll find you
>>>need a wrench to get them undone again. that's precession that tightens.
>>>and it's why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>
>> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The friction of the
>> bearings, small as it may be, works to screw the pedals in
>
> yes and no. yes, it's a different physical arrangement, but it's not the
> bearing friction that works the thread in [a remarkably wide
> misunderstanding!] - the rotation direction is incorrect. check it out
> yourself.

Well, I'll be! You're right!

Mike

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:y82dneXHT8wZzy_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> news:f-adnZ-O0NVJKSzZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on a bike so
>>>they're only finger tight. now, pedal around the block. you'll find you
>>>need a wrench to get them undone again. that's precession that tightens.
>>>and it's why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>
>> That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The friction of the
>> bearings, small as it may be, works to screw the pedals in
>
> yes and no. yes, it's a different physical arrangement, but it's not the
> bearing friction that works the thread in [a remarkably wide
> misunderstanding!] - the rotation direction is incorrect. check it out
> yourself.

Well, I'll be! You're right!

Mike

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

Elle wrote:
> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
>
>>"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>>>a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>>>the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>>>undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>>>why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
>>friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
>>screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
>>left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
>>equivalent force on the crank bolt.
>
>
> ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
> "precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
> explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
> male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
> it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
> more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
> tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
> notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
> to make the distinction as follows:
> http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
> I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
> either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
> precession that's meant here.
>
> As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
> so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
> between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
> applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
> a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
> thread, which it is on the left pedal).
>
> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
> web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
> would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
> dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes either, but i am
however trained to observe carefully, and from that the following facts
emerge:

1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's hard evidence
of some rotation.
2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the bolt would
tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120 ft.lbs to
~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.

i also know from other research that bolts can tighten. now, the dots
on this may not all be joined, but an outline appears to be there.

>
> Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
> I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
> socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
> the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
> plenty do.)
>
>

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

Elle wrote:
> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
>
>>"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>>>a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>>>the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>>>undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>>>why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
>>friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
>>screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
>>left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
>>equivalent force on the crank bolt.
>
>
> ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
> "precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
> explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
> male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
> it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
> more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
> tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
> notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
> to make the distinction as follows:
> http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
> I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
> either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
> precession that's meant here.
>
> As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
> so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
> between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
> applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
> a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
> thread, which it is on the left pedal).
>
> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
> web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
> would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
> dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes either, but i am
however trained to observe carefully, and from that the following facts
emerge:

1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's hard evidence
of some rotation.
2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the bolt would
tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120 ft.lbs to
~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.

i also know from other research that bolts can tighten. now, the dots
on this may not all be joined, but an outline appears to be there.

>
> Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
> I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
> socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
> the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
> plenty do.)
>
>

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

Elle wrote:
> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
>
>>"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>>>a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>>>the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>>>undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>>>why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
>>friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
>>screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
>>left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
>>equivalent force on the crank bolt.
>
>
> ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
> "precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
> explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
> male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
> it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
> more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
> tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
> notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
> to make the distinction as follows:
> http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
> I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
> either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
> precession that's meant here.
>
> As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
> so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
> between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
> applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
> a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
> thread, which it is on the left pedal).
>
> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
> web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
> would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
> dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes either, but i am
however trained to observe carefully, and from that the following facts
emerge:

1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's hard evidence
of some rotation.
2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the bolt would
tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120 ft.lbs to
~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.

i also know from other research that bolts can tighten. now, the dots
on this may not all be joined, but an outline appears to be there.

>
> Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
> I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
> socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
> the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
> plenty do.)
>
>

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

Elle wrote:
> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote
>
>>"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
>>
>>>you can do this experiment at home: loosen the pedals on
>>>a bike so they're only finger tight. now, pedal around
>>>the block. you'll find you need a wrench to get them
>>>undone again. that's precession that tightens. and it's
>>>why left hand pedals have a left hand thread.
>>
>>That's a very different physical arrangement, though. The
>>friction of the bearings, small as it may be, works to
>>screw the pedals in - as you point out, that's why the
>>left hand thread on left side pedals. There is no
>>equivalent force on the crank bolt.
>
>
> ISTM a number of bicycling enthusiasts throw the term
> "precession" around (IMO, so loosely as to be reckless) to
> explain the ordinary, expected motion between female and
> male (bolt, stud, nut etc.) threads against each other when
> it comes to bike pedal rotation. It seems that some of the
> more sophisticated ones point out that it is not the
> tap-on-a-gyroscopic-and-watch-it-spin-around-now-a-second-axis
> notion of precession meant here. Some guy named Andy tries
> to make the distinction as follows:
> http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...0aeb3b876c7ffa .
> I am not sure he's being entirely accurate with his wording,
> either, but at least he recognizes it's not gyroscopic
> precession that's meant here.
>
> As one pedals to move a bike forward, the left pedal rotates
> so as to loosen a right-hand thread (put bearings in
> between, if anyone wants). It's still simply torque being
> applied directly to the pedal stud so as to loosen (if it's
> a right hand thread) and tighten (if it's a left-hand
> thread, which it is on the left pedal).
>
> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at my
> web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so tight. I
> would bet money that the very fine thread and heat and high
> dynamic load cycling does have something to do with it.

good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes either, but i am
however trained to observe carefully, and from that the following facts
emerge:

1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's hard evidence
of some rotation.
2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the bolt would
tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120 ft.lbs to
~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.

i also know from other research that bolts can tighten. now, the dots
on this may not all be joined, but an outline appears to be there.

>
> Getting material specifications would help, but using Google
> I can't even nail down exactly what steel is used in Snap-On
> socket extensions, never mind the "special bolt" used for
> the crankshaft pulley. (Any fool can guess of course, and
> plenty do.)
>
>

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
E wrote
>> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at
>> my web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so
>> tight. I would bet money that the very fine thread and
>> heat and high dynamic load cycling does have something to
>> do with it.
>
> good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes
> either, but i am however trained to observe carefully, and
> from that the following facts emerge:
>
> 1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's
> hard evidence of some rotation.
> 2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the
> bolt would tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
> 3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120
> ft.lbs to ~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.
>
> i also know from other research that bolts can tighten.
> now, the dots on this may not all be joined, but an
> outline appears to be there.

That's properly qualified and so reasonable, AFAIC. It's an
outline, but nothing certain as yet.

I am interested in point 3 above. I remember your mentioning
some months ago that you had generally evaluated the
tightness after torquing to spec and then driving briefly.
Did you redo this experiment a few times, estimating as best
you could the torque necessary to free the bolt each time?

I am still not willing to remove my Civic's pulley bolt more
than is necessary--too lazy and I don't like putting wear
and tear on such an expensive bolt with super fine threads,
and so more susceptible to stripping in my estimation, at
that. Admittedly that might be overworry on my part.

I will say that in 2004 when I first got some experience
with my 91 Civic's pulley bolt that the first time I broke
it free (some three years after it was last removed)
demanded, from memory, notably more force than the next few
times I freed it. (I spent a few weeks researching and
preparing to replace the front crankshaft seal blah blah,
and so ended up freeing the bolt I think maybe four times
algother during this period.) I did not try to estimate the
torque to free it after the first removal, since I was kinda
hurried.

Why is it again that you feel the abrasion beneath the bolt
head could not occur while torquing the bolt to spec with
the pulley fixed?

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
E wrote
>> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at
>> my web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so
>> tight. I would bet money that the very fine thread and
>> heat and high dynamic load cycling does have something to
>> do with it.
>
> good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes
> either, but i am however trained to observe carefully, and
> from that the following facts emerge:
>
> 1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's
> hard evidence of some rotation.
> 2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the
> bolt would tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
> 3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120
> ft.lbs to ~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.
>
> i also know from other research that bolts can tighten.
> now, the dots on this may not all be joined, but an
> outline appears to be there.

That's properly qualified and so reasonable, AFAIC. It's an
outline, but nothing certain as yet.

I am interested in point 3 above. I remember your mentioning
some months ago that you had generally evaluated the
tightness after torquing to spec and then driving briefly.
Did you redo this experiment a few times, estimating as best
you could the torque necessary to free the bolt each time?

I am still not willing to remove my Civic's pulley bolt more
than is necessary--too lazy and I don't like putting wear
and tear on such an expensive bolt with super fine threads,
and so more susceptible to stripping in my estimation, at
that. Admittedly that might be overworry on my part.

I will say that in 2004 when I first got some experience
with my 91 Civic's pulley bolt that the first time I broke
it free (some three years after it was last removed)
demanded, from memory, notably more force than the next few
times I freed it. (I spent a few weeks researching and
preparing to replace the front crankshaft seal blah blah,
and so ended up freeing the bolt I think maybe four times
algother during this period.) I did not try to estimate the
torque to free it after the first removal, since I was kinda
hurried.

Why is it again that you feel the abrasion beneath the bolt
head could not occur while torquing the bolt to spec with
the pulley fixed?

Re: crank bolt right or left hand thread?
 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
E wrote
>> I still wouldn't bet money on all the causes I propose at
>> my web site being behind the pulley bolt becoming so
>> tight. I would bet money that the very fine thread and
>> heat and high dynamic load cycling does have something to
>> do with it.
>
> good point about "all causes". i don't know all causes
> either, but i am however trained to observe carefully, and
> from that the following facts emerge:
>
> 1. there is angular galling under the bolt head. that's
> hard evidence of some rotation.
> 2. the rotation direction on the crank is such that the
> bolt would tighten against a "stationary" pulley wheel.
> 3. the apparent pulley bolt torque increases from ~120
> ft.lbs to ~300ft.lbs in ~30 miles.
>
> i also know from other research that bolts can tighten.
> now, the dots on this may not all be joined, but an
> outline appears to be there.

That's properly qualified and so reasonable, AFAIC. It's an
outline, but nothing certain as yet.

I am interested in point 3 above. I remember your mentioning
some months ago that you had generally evaluated the
tightness after torquing to spec and then driving briefly.
Did you redo this experiment a few times, estimating as best
you could the torque necessary to free the bolt each time?

I am still not willing to remove my Civic's pulley bolt more
than is necessary--too lazy and I don't like putting wear
and tear on such an expensive bolt with super fine threads,
and so more susceptible to stripping in my estimation, at
that. Admittedly that might be overworry on my part.

I will say that in 2004 when I first got some experience
with my 91 Civic's pulley bolt that the first time I broke
it free (some three years after it was last removed)
demanded, from memory, notably more force than the next few
times I freed it. (I spent a few weeks researching and
preparing to replace the front crankshaft seal blah blah,
and so ended up freeing the bolt I think maybe four times
algother during this period.) I did not try to estimate the
torque to free it after the first removal, since I was kinda
hurried.

Why is it again that you feel the abrasion beneath the bolt
head could not occur while torquing the bolt to spec with
the pulley fixed?