Which type of torque wrench do you prefer and why?
Micrometer Click Type -vs- Dial Type
- Thread starter Merkava_4
- Start date
- Status
Title is wrong.
Click all the way. I can use dial, but it is difficult some times to get yourself in a position to actually be able to read it.
Click all the way. I can use dial, but it is difficult some times to get yourself in a position to actually be able to read it.
Originally Posted By: Colt45ws
Title is wrong.
Yeah, micrometer =/= torque wrench.
As for torque wrenches, I agree that click-type is more practical.
Title is wrong.
Yeah, micrometer =/= torque wrench.
As for torque wrenches, I agree that click-type is more practical.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Yeah, micrometer =/= torque wrench.
Well... CDI is calling them "Micrometer" torque wrenches:
Yeah, micrometer =/= torque wrench.
Well... CDI is calling them "Micrometer" torque wrenches:
A clicker type is more accurate and causes less errors. I find this type is the best for the more precisions parts like engine spark plugs, valve cover/cam cover gaskets etc. However: for the less precision torquing, like wheel lugs, a beam type is just fine. My clicker is a SNAP-ON and my beam type is a Craftsman. Ed
Last edited:
I had a Snap-On dial type for years and loved it but as engine compartments got more crowded there were less places you could use it and still see it.
The clicker style is great as you don't need to see it just feel or hear it.
The clicker style is great as you don't need to see it just feel or hear it.
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Torqueing fasteners- click type.
Measuring bearing preloads-dial type, not beam, but dial.
Measuring bearing preloads-dial type, not beam, but dial.
Originally Posted By: cchase
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Depends on the manufacturer. PI dials are spec'ed at 2% accuracy vs. 3% for their micrometer types, whereas CDI's are spec'ed at 4% same as their micrometer types.
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Depends on the manufacturer. PI dials are spec'ed at 2% accuracy vs. 3% for their micrometer types, whereas CDI's are spec'ed at 4% same as their micrometer types.
Originally Posted By: SIXSPEED
Originally Posted By: cchase
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Depends on the manufacturer. PI dials are spec'ed at 2% accuracy vs. 3% for their micrometer types, whereas CDI's are spec'ed at 4% same as their micrometer types.
Is that % of full scale?
Originally Posted By: cchase
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Depends on the manufacturer. PI dials are spec'ed at 2% accuracy vs. 3% for their micrometer types, whereas CDI's are spec'ed at 4% same as their micrometer types.
Is that % of full scale?
Originally Posted By: cchase
Is that % of full scale?
I believe the major manufacturers say their wrenches fall within accuracy specs at 20%-100% of full scale.
Is that % of full scale?
I believe the major manufacturers say their wrenches fall within accuracy specs at 20%-100% of full scale.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: cchase
Originally Posted By: SIXSPEED
Originally Posted By: cchase
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Depends on the manufacturer. PI dials are spec'ed at 2% accuracy vs. 3% for their micrometer types, whereas CDI's are spec'ed at 4% same as their micrometer types.
Is that % of full scale?
Accuracy is percentage of set torque or indicated torque (dial).
Originally Posted By: SIXSPEED
Originally Posted By: cchase
I prefer the click type for convenience but I can't help but think they are less accurate, or easier to use less accurately anyway, than a good dial wrench.
Depends on the manufacturer. PI dials are spec'ed at 2% accuracy vs. 3% for their micrometer types, whereas CDI's are spec'ed at 4% same as their micrometer types.
Is that % of full scale?
Accuracy is percentage of set torque or indicated torque (dial).
I was talking to an experienced engine builder/machinist and he told me a story about using a clicker to torque down connecting rod caps. He said he put an engine together for a customer and within 500 miles, the customer was experiencing a rod knock. After pulling the engine back out of the vehicle and investigating the source of the rod knock, it was determined that the rod cap was not torqued down tight enough.
Upon further investigation, it was determined that there was a burr on the threaded stud going into the connecting rod and that the nut hit that burr at the very same instant that the torque wrench clicked. He said he then grabbed his beam type torque wrench and brought it up to the final torque spec and the nut stopped at the burr for a few seconds but eventually gave way to the tension the torque wrench was placing on it.
Luckily there was no damage done to the rod journal on the crankshaft because the customer shut the engine down right away. The machinist reassembled the engine with a new rod bearing and torqued the rod caps down with a beam type torque wrench. He told me that since that incident, he has not and never will use a clicker for the final torque when assembling an engine ever again.
Upon further investigation, it was determined that there was a burr on the threaded stud going into the connecting rod and that the nut hit that burr at the very same instant that the torque wrench clicked. He said he then grabbed his beam type torque wrench and brought it up to the final torque spec and the nut stopped at the burr for a few seconds but eventually gave way to the tension the torque wrench was placing on it.
Luckily there was no damage done to the rod journal on the crankshaft because the customer shut the engine down right away. The machinist reassembled the engine with a new rod bearing and torqued the rod caps down with a beam type torque wrench. He told me that since that incident, he has not and never will use a clicker for the final torque when assembling an engine ever again.
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I was talking to an experienced engine builder/machinist and he told me a story about using a clicker to torque down connecting rod caps. He said he put an engine together for a customer and within 500 miles, the customer was experiencing a rod knock. After pulling the engine back out of the vehicle and investigating the source of the rod knock, it was determined that the rod cap was not torqued down tight enough.
Upon further investigation, it was determined that there was a burr on the threaded stud going into the connecting rod and that the nut hit that burr at the very same instant that the torque wrench clicked. He said he then grabbed his beam type torque wrench and brought it up to the final torque spec and the nut stopped at the burr for a few seconds but eventually gave way to the tension the torque wrench was placing on it.
Luckily there was no damage done to the rod journal on the crankshaft because the customer shut the engine down right away. The machinist reassembled the engine with a new rod bearing on torqued the rod caps down with a beam type torque wrench. He told me that since that incident, he has not and never will use a clicker for the final torque when assembling an engine ever again.
Something to keep in mind. This isn't a matter of 'clicker vs. beam', this is a problem with using friction torque to calculate bolt tension. This likely would have happened regardless of which type of wrench he was using. All a friction torque wrench does is estimate how tight the joint is based on tension, it's not a direct measurement. Hitting a bur created excess friction, and overestimates bolt tension. The type of friction-based wrench really isn't going to make much of a difference either way.
Friction torque is imprecise, and for something like a rod bolt it's probably not best to rely on it. That's why manufacturers give specifications for bolt stretch, and why they make bolt stretch gauges.
I was talking to an experienced engine builder/machinist and he told me a story about using a clicker to torque down connecting rod caps. He said he put an engine together for a customer and within 500 miles, the customer was experiencing a rod knock. After pulling the engine back out of the vehicle and investigating the source of the rod knock, it was determined that the rod cap was not torqued down tight enough.
Upon further investigation, it was determined that there was a burr on the threaded stud going into the connecting rod and that the nut hit that burr at the very same instant that the torque wrench clicked. He said he then grabbed his beam type torque wrench and brought it up to the final torque spec and the nut stopped at the burr for a few seconds but eventually gave way to the tension the torque wrench was placing on it.
Luckily there was no damage done to the rod journal on the crankshaft because the customer shut the engine down right away. The machinist reassembled the engine with a new rod bearing on torqued the rod caps down with a beam type torque wrench. He told me that since that incident, he has not and never will use a clicker for the final torque when assembling an engine ever again.
Something to keep in mind. This isn't a matter of 'clicker vs. beam', this is a problem with using friction torque to calculate bolt tension. This likely would have happened regardless of which type of wrench he was using. All a friction torque wrench does is estimate how tight the joint is based on tension, it's not a direct measurement. Hitting a bur created excess friction, and overestimates bolt tension. The type of friction-based wrench really isn't going to make much of a difference either way.
Friction torque is imprecise, and for something like a rod bolt it's probably not best to rely on it. That's why manufacturers give specifications for bolt stretch, and why they make bolt stretch gauges.
No offense to this builder but the errors in this case were not the fault of the tool but the operator.
Its normal procedure to to put short lengths of tubing on rod studs before installing to avoid contact with the crank.
When doing rods checking the threads and running the nut down by hand before placing them in the engine is mandatory, if any roughness is felt running a die over them is a must.
Clean threads with no burs or nicks are an absolute must to obtain proper reading regardless of tool type.
In this case blaming the tool instead of saying "boy did i F up" is easier in saving face IMHO.
The Mercedes Diesel line used clicker types made by Stahlwille to assemble diesel engines (including the bottom end) at the factory when i was there visiting in 85.
Its normal procedure to to put short lengths of tubing on rod studs before installing to avoid contact with the crank.
When doing rods checking the threads and running the nut down by hand before placing them in the engine is mandatory, if any roughness is felt running a die over them is a must.
Clean threads with no burs or nicks are an absolute must to obtain proper reading regardless of tool type.
In this case blaming the tool instead of saying "boy did i F up" is easier in saving face IMHO.
The Mercedes Diesel line used clicker types made by Stahlwille to assemble diesel engines (including the bottom end) at the factory when i was there visiting in 85.
Quote:
Friction torque is imprecise, and for something like a rod bolt it's probably not best to rely on it. That's why manufacturers give specifications for bolt stretch, and why they make bolt stretch gauges.
Okay but here is the part the book is leaving out.
Most of the time when angle is specified they require the fastener to be set to an initial torque spec using a regular click, beam or dial type wrench before turning the fastener X degrees.
Not all bolts are torque to yield bolts. High grade bolts don't do well with these methods as the metal the threads are in is usually much softer than the bolt.
Most of the fasteners found in the bottom end of an engine are hardened to resist stretching, nothing other method than a regular torque wrench should be used unless otherwise specified.
Friction torque is imprecise, and for something like a rod bolt it's probably not best to rely on it. That's why manufacturers give specifications for bolt stretch, and why they make bolt stretch gauges.
Okay but here is the part the book is leaving out.
Most of the time when angle is specified they require the fastener to be set to an initial torque spec using a regular click, beam or dial type wrench before turning the fastener X degrees.
Not all bolts are torque to yield bolts. High grade bolts don't do well with these methods as the metal the threads are in is usually much softer than the bolt.
Most of the fasteners found in the bottom end of an engine are hardened to resist stretching, nothing other method than a regular torque wrench should be used unless otherwise specified.
Jod and Trav, your arguments about torque wrenches have been educational.
JOD, I agree with your basic principles, but then you imply that torque wrenches are nearly useless.
When I was researching which torque wrenches to buy a few years ago, I actually struck up a conversation with a person in charge of tools at a Lockhead airplane plant. He described to me which ones they used.
If a torque wrench can be used to assemble jet airplanes......?
JOD, I agree with your basic principles, but then you imply that torque wrenches are nearly useless.
When I was researching which torque wrenches to buy a few years ago, I actually struck up a conversation with a person in charge of tools at a Lockhead airplane plant. He described to me which ones they used.
If a torque wrench can be used to assemble jet airplanes......?
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
When I was researching which torque wrenches to buy a few years ago, I actually struck up a conversation with a person in charge of tools at a Lockhead airplane plant. He described to me which ones they used.
If a torque wrench can be used to assemble jet airplanes......?
Which kind does Lockheed use; clicker or dial?
When I was researching which torque wrenches to buy a few years ago, I actually struck up a conversation with a person in charge of tools at a Lockhead airplane plant. He described to me which ones they used.
If a torque wrench can be used to assemble jet airplanes......?
Which kind does Lockheed use; clicker or dial?
No idea about lockheed but electronic units are common in these industries today.
High end units are able to perform normal and angle measurements but are very expensive.
http://tools-from-germany.com/index.php?page=product&info=3183
High end units are able to perform normal and angle measurements but are very expensive.
http://tools-from-germany.com/index.php?page=product&info=3183
- Status
