Factory spec for the headbolts is 58ft lbs with motor oil. http://www.cygnusx1.net/Supra/Librar...ion=EM&Page=55

I SAID they reissued a new torque value and what I meant by "like the TSRM says" is to use motor oil.

I own the TSRM thank you very much. I'm talking about advanced mechanical dynamics here, obviously far beyond your scope of stock head bolt torque. The fact is that 72ft/lbs with motor oil would equal less with ARP moly lube. Thats what I was trying to tell you and I get, "the factory torque spec is 58ft/lbs". We all know that the factory 58ft/lbs is wrong, we don't need a link to the TSRM. I have connections with Toyota dealerships, I get 20% off anything I want along with factory trained technicians to tell me things any other mechanic wouldn't know about, like the reissued torque value.

I think its funny how all these people (sorry supramacist) with non turbo motors are replacing head gaskets with ARP hardware. Those cars should be in the scrapyard. The cost of repairing a head gasket on a non turbo supra far exceeds the value of the vehicle. Shit, even on a turbo motor you are closing in on the vehicles value. Besides, I don't know what you are trying to prove, a stock turbo supra is at best sub par so a non turbo supra is a joke. What a waste of time and money.....

EDIT: Cleaned up and removed most of the negative commentary. My apologies for lashing out.


Yep, full of all kinds of useful info. My car's market value has absolutely nothing to do with it's worth to ME.

EDIT2: I should rephrase this. The Toyota Service Tech's that I know couldn't find any update concerning the torque spec of the head bolts. This isn't just one dealership either, there are three where I've inquired about this. The only reason I give a rat's ass about this is because people taking their car to a Toyota service center for a headgasket may just assume this known issue is being taken into account, when it may very well not be.

Further more, the 7M block has plenty of potential. The only reason half of those that I've seen would classify as "junk" is because people keep cheeping out on them. I don't own a MKIII because I expect it to be fast or cheap. I own this car because I like it. If I want to "dump" a ton of cash into my car I will.

Advice is just like old cars, they are only worth what *you* get out of them.

If you're just getting defensive because I posted a TSRM link well I'm sorry, it wasn't just posted for your benefit.

well heres the thing.. if you mean me saying they can be torced to 100 you would be wrong for doubting me. i do have alot to learn but this is a Quote from the ARP Staff member that wrote me back when i asked if you could torc them to 100ft pounds


HELLO,

THE RECOMMENDED TORQUE IS 75 FT LBS WITH ARP MOLY LUBE, OR 115 W/ 30 WT
OIL. IF THIS TORQUE IS EXCEDED IT COULD DAMAGE THE STUD AND WILL VOID
ANY WARRENTY WITH THE STUD.

PAUL S.

-----Original Message-----
From: Erica Martinez
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 11:08 AM
To: pauls@arpfasteners.com
Subject: FW: Website Submitted Question from nick seery


but the edit button is my friend b/c i can't spell so im always changing stuff lol. i wasnt trying to be mean just saying it could be done. the only way i knew this was my buddy works on DSM's and said thats what he does... but you never know we could be wrong... wouldnt be the first time or the last time.

Sorry i didn't read you post in time IHATEHACKS.. you just said that.. but at least that also proves my point that it can be done.. but after reading all of this stuff 80-85ft pound will be just fine for me.

What happened? We all had a bad day yesterday? I cleaned it up a little.

its all good... well this topics dead , i would like some help if you want to comment on my new topic Nos and HeadWork.