First my question, on a '75 2.0: I was reinstalling the impellar housing/impellar today, and my Haynes manual is telling me that certain bolts should be torqued to 6.0 kg/fm (43.4 lb/ft). Those bolts being the 3 small ones that mount the small pulley arms to the impellar housing (see pic). Now maybe I read the wrong part in the book, but I don't see anything else that accurately describes these bolts. So can anyone confirm this for me? Because 6.0 kg/fm is A LOT of torque, and it seems to me that the only thing this would accomplish is stripping them.

And now the story of the 1.5 hour fight that got me to this point. It's a good one, and comical I think-

It's been a while since I've done any engine work. Beyond reassembling the crankshaft, installing the cam, reassembling the case, pistons, cylinders, heads, and reinstalling the dizzy, I haven't done anything for at least 2 months as I've been focusing on body work. But with my shoulder down and out the body work has been on hyiatus, so today I figured what the hell, I'd continue reassembly.

So I gathered the parts for the impellar, housing, etc. I look at the front end of the engine and think "Okay, if I remember right, the hub bolt also goes through the impellar." So I go about the hassle of using a screwdriver on the 3 impellar bolts to hold the crankshaft while I break loose the hub bolt. Then I remove the shim washer, thinking it goes on the outside of the impellar as well. I get the impellar tapped into place, and for some reason decide that I should install the 3 bolts first, so I do, and get them torqued down only to find that, gee whiz, the hub bolt is too short to fit through the impellar after all! "Dammit, I knew that, too!" So I go through the hassle of breaking them loose again, removing the impellar, reinstalling the hub bolt and torqing it down.

And as you can imagine, I go through the motions of reinstalling the impellar and torqing the 3 bolts down, only to look to my work bench and see the shim washer lying there! Uuugghhh! So at this point I'm laughing myself stupid as I'm once again removing the 3 bolts and impellar, then put in the washer and reinstall everything. And then, guess what? Yes, I can hear you say it- "what?" I forgot to install the damn small pulley!!! Yes, the one in the pic. So once again I remove the 3 bolts, laughing even harder this time, install the small pulley and torque down the bolts again. But I still... I say again, STILL didn't get it right. This time I left off the timing marks! And for the life of me, as hard as I tried, as many different ways I attempted to slip those timing marks in behind the arms of the small pulley without removing it, it just wasn't happening.

At this point I have to just stop and take a break to get the giggles out of my system, because they were literally stopping me from being able to do the work. About 2 minutes later I'm calmed down, so again I remove the impellar bolts, install the timing marks, make a double and triple check to make sure that this time I have everything right, and then I go ahead and torque them down. I was about to torque the bolts on the arms of the small pulley when I thought the torque setting wasn't right, so I leave them alone for the time being and set about installing the half of the u-clamp that mounts the oil cooler. That, contrary to the above, went smooth and fine the first time around.

So, I just had to share that story- I got quite a kick out of it. And it's the perfect example of "Even tho I think I'll remember how it goes back together, I really won't." I'm sure most of you have had similar experiences.

Anyway, thanks in advance for the advice.

The first mistake is buying the Haynes manual.
The second is using it!

Seriously, that misprint and many others have cause big issues for people... Haynes won't listen and change the way it all reads, so the best we can do is preach to use things like my videos and the net to avoid these issues.

I totally agree with you there. And I know it sounds like just a bad excuse, but it wasn't myself that bought it. When I first bought the car and began tearing it down, my wife-to-be ordered it behind my back and "surprised" me with it. And instead of telling her I'd sooner tear it up and use it for asswipe than read it, I just grinned and accepted it so as not to hurt her feelings. It's not her fault- she doesn't know what a good manual is.

And it's partially my fault too, I haven't actually purchased a good book on it either. I suppose I should, especially now with starting to put things back together.

But you know I'd of thought it would at least be good for torque settings, which is the main reason I kept it. I guess they truly are worthless. Even their f**king diagrams suck. Not specifically the 914 book, but when I first began restoring cars I used Haynes for other models; and on more than one occasion I'd be looking at a diagram, see a numbered part, look to the key to find out what it is and, gee whiz, they didn't f**king label it! "Let's see, part #16 is... well how the f**k is a guy to know what #16 is if you don't label it!"

And yet, somehow, to this very day, they're still selling manuals. F**king incredible, isn't it?

I mis-placed my Haynes manual about six months ago, and I haven't missed it one bit. If I ever find it, I'll try like hell to lose it again...

there's also a mistake on the idle adjustment screw, it directs you to some "Figure: " that doesn't exist

spent awhile looking for the right picture

43 ft-lb sounds like the torque for the 3 fan to hub (on crankshaft end) bolts as in cooling fan not EGR pulley

[edit]Whoops, I guess not...

There is no reference to those bolts in the Haynes manual, and I doubt that a torque spec is even necessary for them. If it makes you feel better use 16ft-lbs.
I think the torque spec you referenced is for the nut that holds the pulley on the alternator (small v-belt pulley).

Haynes specs those at 14.5 ft-lbs, and the center bolt at 23 ft-lbs.

They also have a mistake on the rear venting clearance.

But I'm not tossing the baby out with the bath water. Lots of good info in that manual. The idea of trusting information from the Internet doesn't sound more reliable to me.

Makes me really appreciate a place like this however... If wrong answers get posted here, at least there are enough experts hanging out to set the record straight.

Too bad we can't send the Cap'n over to the Haynes office and let him get Krusty with their editors! Maybe we would get an accurate revised edition.

Might be nice to compile all of the Haynes mistakes into one place so a correction addendum was available.

What's really fun is that most of those mistakes, the way the torque specs are segregated out from the rest of the chapter, the pictures, the wording, pretty much everything: Taken straight from the factory manual.

Sadly, there isn't a "good repair manual" for our car--at least, not of the caliber of a modern workshop manual...

--DD

Uhhhhh, this is the Internet...

I'm pretty sure Al Gore invented 914World too...

Yeh, and because of all the servers running to support 914s, we have created a heat load that contributes to Global Warming ... Gore and Quayle in '08 .... that's the dream ticket.

Alworld.

Yeah, this site is ON the internet, but I think you know what I meant. The ratio of bad info to good on the internet overall is much higher than the Haynes manual. But here on this site we have a high concentration of 914 gurus who aren't afraid to pipe up and call out the bad info when they see it.

Yeah, I know what you meant. I was just funnin ya.

You're right... One of the really positive functions of this forum is the critical review of posts and the submission of alternative ideas. A response by any single person should be suspect, regardless of whom posted. And since many of the members of this forum are not shy in expressing their opinions, a really good mix of responses is presented.

I was going to add a really funny example of this, but I'm getting of my own response, so I'll leave it at this.

The Brits I used to work with always refered to it as the "Haynes Book of Lies"

It is an English publication too IIRC.



I am refering it being originally published in England not written in English. You know you were going to say something.

Yes, the "small v-belt pulley" is the spec I was talking about, but that's not a very descriptive spec. "Small v-belt pulley" could have been the one that I snapped the shot of too. And I agree that a torque spec for these is probably not necessary, but it never hurts to be on the safe side.

Anyway thanks for the tip.