torque specs

[GT@50]

The Ford book is crazy
I've found 98 ft lbs for lug nuts in one spot and 111 ft lbs in two other spots.
Sounds like 100 ft lbs is the general consensus on this site.
For chin splitter, side rockers, front engine pan and rear engine pan(diffuser) I've found 9 in lbs, 62 in lbs, 9 ft lbs, 10 ft lbs and 20 ft lbs.
I'm guessing 62 in lbs will feel good but I'll start with my internal clicker style torque wrench, tighten til stripped and back off a quarter turn.
Not real concerning items for me but I wonder about other critical specs in the book.
Trans oil fill, drain and filter 20 ft lbs
Engine oil drains and filter lid 18 ft lbs
I didn't find any discrepancies with these.
Any other mistakes to be aware of?
Rob

 

[Specracer]

I use 90 for lug nuts, Everything else, I make tight, with out being over tight. I have stripped nothing, and still have every single fastener under the car (nothing has fallen out). When Installing, I start every screw by hand, then run in with a drill, with a clutch set very low, then go back and tighten by hand using a stubby ratchet (less leverage).

 

[PeteK]

I went with 100 on the lugs. Anything That’s part of the engine or trans, I follow torque specs, but other miscellaneous bolts and screws I do by feel, but I’ve been wrenching for over 50 years, so I have a pretty repeatable and conservative feel.

One area of caution: drain plugs should not be torqued more than spec. I’ve seen multiple cases of the aluminum casing getting cracked at the threads by over tightening (thankfully not on GTs but other vehicles, especially motorcycles). If you have a plug that is pipe thread, this is a real danger, because pipe thread is tapered and wedges into the hole as you tighten it. I’ve become conservative on drain plugs and don’t even tighten them to full torque. I haven’t had one fall out yet! (Fingers crossed).

 

[fjpikul]

Which year book do you have? The 2006 book has corrected specs.

 

[2112]

So, at 111, am I causing a problem?
.

 

[GT@50]

I've been rebuilding transmissions for 30+ years so none of this is a problem for me. Just found it interesting/funny.
I have the 05 book and an 05 GT.
Page
204-01-1 states 98 ft lbs
204-04-1 111 ft lbs
204-04-6 111 ft lbs
I'd imagine a lot of wheels have been torqued to 111 ft lbs. If there was a problem because of it you would have heard.

 

[PeteK]

So, at 111, am I causing a problem?
.

On a 2005-06 with aluminum wheels, don’t sweat it, especially with the forged wheels that can take a considerable amount of yield and deformation. If that was a NGT with carbon wheels I’d be a little more concerned.

 

[Specracer]

There are metal bosses in the CF wheel that the studs go through. The spec is actually 150 lbft (which I ignore and use 90).

If that was a NGT with carbon wheels I’d be a little more concerned.

 

[mmlcobra]

90 on the wheels has worked for years!
Mark