Rear driveshaft bolt torque again

[AnthonyExplorer92]

Hello All

I see that rear driveshaft bolt torque settings have been discussed here and elsewhere before, and I've seen different answers, which seem to be the result of conflicting information between the 1992 Explorer Haynes manual and the Ford service manual (and possible inconsistencies within the service manual itself). So I just thought I'd double check to see if folks have resolved this definitively. (I just regreased the driveshaft slip joke for my 120,000 mile check on my manual tranny 1992 XLT 4x4, and I checked the U-joints, which are just fine. I got everything back in but want to be sure before I torque the bolts. I've done this in the past, but forgot what I did. I was confused then too!)

Here what I have for the rear shaft:

Rear shaft to transfer case connection:
The Haynes manual and service manual agree on 12 to 16 ft-lbs. But as others have said, that seems ridiculously low. Have folks used that and survived :O) ? I keep imagining the shaft falling out while I'm driving. In the past, I think I cranked them up higher, but I don't remember. (Many years ago I exceeded the recommendations for the front shaft bolts - which also seemed too low - and snapped off the head on one of them. So I'm reluctant to exceed what Ford says).

Rear shaft to rear differential:
This is where I get different numbers for what I think is a single cardan U-joint.

Haynes (see uploaded files "Haynes") says 8-15 ft-lbs (70-95 ft-lbs for the double cardan U-joint, which I don't have on the rear shaft).

The 1992 service manual seems to have two different numbers:

On page 05-01-7 (see uploaded file ServiceManual1), it shows, for the Explorer specifically, an exact drawing of what I have, and it says very clearly 70-95 ft-lbs. It says the same thing in the text that follows, under "installation."​

​

But on page 05-1-15 (see uploaded file ServiceManual2), the section that shows how to rebuild the U-joints for all three covered vehicles - Explorer, Ranger and Aerostar - it has a "Specifications" chart split into two sections.​

The first section is labeled "labeled "TORQUE LIMITS, DRIVESHAFT WITH SINGLE U-JOINT." Then it shows "Driveshaft to Rear Axle Companion Flange U-Bolt and Nut" I don't know what a U-bolt is, but it says 8-15 Lb-Ft. Maybe that is not shaft bolts themselves? Maybe this means a driveshaft with a U-joint on just one end (which is not my truck?) Perhaps this is where Haynes got that 8-15 range?​

​

The second section of the chart is "TORQUE LIMITS, DRIVEHSAFT WITH SINBLE CARDON U-JOINT". I'm not sure how that differs from the first one. Anyway, it has "Circular flange bolts 70-95 Lb-ft." There are different numbers for supercabs, clearly not for the Explorer).​

So....

Is the front okay at 12-16 ft-lbs without my wife and I prepaying for a funeral :O)?

Is the rear 8-15 ft-lbs or 70-to 95 ft-lbs (I'm thinking 70 to 95? and assuming the Haynes manual is wrong on the shaft-to-differential torque?

Thank you everyone for any help!

By the way, my 92 is still beautiful (I keep the bottom painted). The uploaded file Explorer92 shows it some years back, but it still looks just like this. I factory ordered it the way I wanted it: a rare cabernet (non-metallic) red, mocha interior, manual transmission, limited slip and the high-end sound system with subwoofer. And I actually can see out of the thing without needing radar, like many of today's vehicles, and the hatch window actually opens, so all my stuff doesn't fall out.

Happy motoring.

Anthony Giorgianni

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Hello All

I see that rear driveshaft bolt torque settings have been discussed here and elsewhere before, and I've seen different answers, which seem to be the result of conflicting information between the 1992 Explorer Haynes manual and the Ford service manual (and possible inconsistencies within the service manual itself). So I just thought I'd double check to see if folks have resolved this definitively. (I just regreased the driveshaft slip joke for my 120,000 mile check on my manual tranny 1992 XLT 4x4, and I checked the U-joints, which are just fine. I got everything back in but want to be sure before I torque the bolts. I've done this in the past, but forgot what I did. I was confused then too!)

Here what I have for the rear shaft:

Rear shaft to transfer case connection:
The Haynes manual and service manual agree on 12 to 16 ft-lbs. But as others have said, that seems ridiculously low. Have folks used that and survived :O) ? I keep imagining the shaft falling out while I'm driving. In the past, I think I cranked them up higher, but I don't remember. (Many years ago I exceeded the recommendations for the front shaft bolts - which also seemed too low - and snapped off the head on one of them. So I'm reluctant to exceed what Ford says).

Rear shaft to rear differential:
This is where I get different numbers for what I think is a single cardan U-joint.

Haynes (see uploaded files "Haynes") says 8-15 ft-lbs (70-95 ft-lbs for the double cardan U-joint, which I don't have on the rear shaft).

The 1992 service manual seems to have two different numbers:

On page 05-01-7 (see uploaded file ServiceManual1), it shows, for the Explorer specifically, an exact drawing of what I have, and it says very clearly 70-95 ft-lbs. It says the same thing in the text that follows, under "installation."​

​

But on page 05-1-15 (see uploaded file ServiceManual2), the section that shows how to rebuild the U-joints for all three covered vehicles - Explorer, Ranger and Aerostar - it has a "Specifications" chart split into two sections.​

The first section is labeled "labeled "TORQUE LIMITS, DRIVESHAFT WITH SINGLE U-JOINT." Then it shows "Driveshaft to Rear Axle Companion Flange U-Bolt and Nut" I don't know what a U-bolt is, but it says 8-15 Lb-Ft. Maybe that is not shaft bolts themselves? Maybe this means a driveshaft with a U-joint on just one end (which is not my truck?) Perhaps this is where Haynes got that 8-15 range?​

​

The second section of the chart is "TORQUE LIMITS, DRIVEHSAFT WITH SINBLE CARDON U-JOINT". I'm not sure how that differs from the first one. Anyway, it has "Circular flange bolts 70-95 Lb-ft." There are different numbers for supercabs, clearly not for the Explorer).​

So....

Is the front okay at 12-16 ft-lbs without my wife and I prepaying for a funeral :O)?

Is the rear 8-15 ft-lbs or 70-to 95 ft-lbs (I'm thinking 70 to 95? and assuming the Haynes manual is wrong on the shaft-to-differential torque?

Thank you everyone for any help!

By the way, my 92 is still beautiful (I keep the bottom painted). The uploaded file Explorer92 shows it some years back, but it still looks just like this. I factory ordered it the way I wanted it: a rare cabernet (non-metallic) red, mocha interior, manual transmission, limited slip and the high-end sound system with subwoofer. And I actually can see out of the thing without needing radar, like many of today's vehicles, and the hatch window actually opens, so all my stuff doesn't fall out.

Happy motoring.

Anthony Giorgianni

View attachment 429579 View attachment 429580 View attachment 429581 View attachment 429582

not a 1st genner but a 2nd genner, and my d/s definitely wasnt 8-15 ftlbs!!! ill be honest in sayign i didnt torque it down to a specific spec, just by feel to about where it was before w/ blue threadlock iirc (or did i use red? too logn to remember, brain is fried )

 

[AnthonyExplorer92]

not a 1st genner but a 2nd genner, and my d/s definitely wasnt 8-15 ftlbs!!! ill be honest in sayign i didnt torque it down to a specific spec, just by feel to about where it was before w/ blue threadlock iirc (or did i use red? too logn to remember, brain is fried )

Thanks Fix4Dirt.

I saw one conversation about the 97 Explorer, saying 75-90 all the way around on the rear axle and 11-15 on the front shaft to the front axle yoke. Not sure if that's accurate either.

I've seen this concern come up for other vehicles, too. For one Chevy model - I think a car - someone questioned low torque settings on the rear driveshaft. Someone else responded, saying the reason is to avoid warping the flange. Not being an automotive engineer, I just don't know. But there must be some reason. On the other hand, why would that be a concern for the rear connection?

There's also a debate about whether to use threadlock. As with grease and anti-seize compound, I think threadlock can change the friction coefficient, making the torque reading inaccurate - not a concern for you if you're not using a torque wrench (I try to follow Ford recommended torque settings as much as possible on my 92, especially of course on the lug nuts and spark plugs). Another concern is that threadlock may make removing these bolts even harder than it already can be. Nothing about using threadlock in either the Haynes or Ford manuals.

I think I'll just tighten the rear ones to 70 and the front one to lower setting and then head over to the local Ford dealer on Monday for advise. (The head of the repair shop there is always helpful and knows his stuff, even on the older Fords)

This is much more difficult than it should be

Thanks again!

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Thanks Fix4Dirt.

I saw one conversation about the 97 Explorer, saying 75-90 all the way around on the rear axle and 11-15 on the front shaft to the front axle yoke. Not sure if that's accurate either.

I've seen this concern come up for other vehicles, too. For one Chevy model - I think a car - someone questioned low torque settings on the rear driveshaft. Someone else responded, saying the reason is to avoid warping the flange. Not being an automotive engineer, I just don't know. But there must be some reason. On the other hand, why would that be a concern for the rear connection?

There's also a debate about whether to use threadlock. As with grease and anti-seize compound, I think threadlock can change the friction coefficient, making the torque reading inaccurate - not a concern for you if you're not using a torque wrench (I try to follow Ford recommended torque settings as much as possible on my 92, especially of course on the lug nuts and spark plugs). Another concern is that threadlock may make removing these bolts even harder than it already can be. Nothing about using threadlock in either the Haynes or Ford manuals.

I think I'll just tighten the rear ones to 70 and the front one to lower setting and then head over to the local Ford dealer on Monday for advise. (The head of the repair shop there is always helpful and knows his stuff, even on the older Fords)

This is much more difficult than it should be

Thanks again!

yeah, i follow spec when it comes to engine stuff, but with the D/S every once in a while i end up having to remove it, so i gave up on spec for it havent done too much with it the past few years, so ds hasnt come out recently. for lugs and easy stuff, i do follow spec, but with the d/s igave up

 

[AnthonyExplorer92]

yeah, i follow spec when it comes to engine stuff, but with the D/S every once in a while i end up having to remove it, so i gave up on spec for it havent done too much with it the past few years, so ds hasnt come out recently. for lugs and easy stuff, i do follow spec, but with the d/s igave up

Thanks Fix4Dirt

FYI, I spoke to the dealership shop manager. He confirmed 70-95 for the rear shaft-to-differential. He's says that's where the big force is. He says 11-16 is fine for the rear shaft-to-transfer case, though he advised using 20 ft lb. He did recommend using threadlocker on them, noting that if you buy those bolts new, they automatically come with threadlocker (I verified that, and he's right). I'm using orange threadlocker (red calls for heating the bolts to 500 degrees to remove them). Orange says it has the strength of red but it removable with a tool. I guess that will work.

Thanks again!

 

[Fix4Dirt]

forgot about orange loctite!!! good reminder to get more blue... and stock up on orange... still got some red thats interesting though, i couldve sworn it was more than 20 ft lb... good thing to know next time... eheheh.... how exciting, messed up big time on torquing that down....

 

[BKennedy]

It's too hard to get a torque wrench on those bolts. I've always just done them good-n-tight. I use the orange thread locker too. Seems to work very well.

 

[Gadget X]

As many times as I have removed mine, I have never used any threadlocker on them..... Just used the "good-n-tight" method. Never had one come loose, either!

 

[allmyEXes]

Flange type, real tight. I didn't use a torque wrench but I did use a 1/2" breaker bar and standing under the truck with the parking brake on and got them as tight as my 190 pound a** could get them, 2 grunts (75 to 90). You wont break them trying.
U-bolt 15-20ish.

 

[AnthonyExplorer92]

forgot about orange loctite!!! good reminder to get more blue... and stock up on orange... still got some red thats interesting though, i couldve sworn it was more than 20 ft lb... good thing to know next time... eheheh.... how exciting, messed up big time on torquing that down....

Just keep in mind that mine is a first gen. I'm not sure if your 2nd gen is the same. You might to double check if you ever work on it again. And I got orange Permatex brand. Don't know if Loctite has that. I saw some more online discussions about threadlocker on driveshafts. Seems optional. Ford definitely has used red though. Very interesting: Which threadlocker for driveshaft bolts?

Best of luck