• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Torque the top head bolts more than the bottom?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zero Signal
  • Start date Start date Jan 8, 2006

Zero Signal

Active Member
Feb 24, 2003
2,633
2
46
Tucson, AZ
Jan 8, 2006
#1
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #1
Most places say torque the heads 70 ft-lbs or so, but I got an AERA technical bulletin about how ford now torques the top bolt about 5 ft-lbs more than the bottom due to our intake manifold mounting style. It mentions that since our manifold bolts straight down, it has a tendency to wedge the heads outward near the top. It mentions that AERA members were reporting lots of blown head gaskets on the top side of the head. So their recommended torque is more like 70 on the bottom and 75 on the top. Has anyone heard of this?

On another note, does anyone know if it's safe to re-torque ARP head bolts? I know their torque value is for 75% yield, so it seems they should still be far enough into their elastic zone to be torque multiple times. I heard they say you can do it 3 times. Is that true? Obviously I would need to replace the head gaskets if I remove the heads, but I hate to buy all new bolts again.
 

CManT1914

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
3,172
2
0
Killeen, Texas
Jan 8, 2006
#2
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #2
I seem to remember hearing that. IIRC, I torqued my lowers to 75, and my uppers to 80.
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jan 8, 2006
#3
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #3
CManT1914 said:
I seem to remember hearing that. IIRC, I torqued my lowers to 75, and my uppers to 80.
Click to expand...

John

I called ARP and told them I was using their bolts on AFR heads and these were the specs the tech gave me

Using ARP sealant Lower 65 Upper 70

Using Locktite teflon sealant Lower 70 Upper 75

He then told me to use use sealant on all bolts for consistent results and be sure to lube the head/washer junction to prevent galling.

Grady
 

CManT1914

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
3,172
2
0
Killeen, Texas
Jan 8, 2006
#4
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #4
Grady, nice job quoting the wrong person!

Was it 70 lower 75 upper? Maybe that's what I torqued them to. Dang I hate having a bad memory.
 

Zero Signal

Active Member
Feb 24, 2003
2,633
2
46
Tucson, AZ
Jan 8, 2006
#5
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #5
Well the ARP specs are assuming you use a sealant for the bottom and something else for the top, since they say to use sealant for the wet holes and something else for the 'blind' holes. I'm pretty sure those values are due to the variance in friction between compounds. So something that lubes really well will required less torque to achieve the same tension on the bolt.
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Jan 8, 2006
#6
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #6
I have always heard to use the higher trq. setting method with non-trq. to yld. bolts.
 
B

blk9450

Founding Member
Jan 31, 2002
1,507
0
0
your moms bed
Jan 8, 2006
#7
  • Jan 8, 2006
  • #7
i torqued my arp studs 100 on top 90 on bottom. i dont want any blown gaskets
 

Zero Signal

Active Member
Feb 24, 2003
2,633
2
46
Tucson, AZ
Jan 9, 2006
#8
  • Jan 9, 2006
  • #8
Well it makes sense that it would all be the same with torque to yield bolts. Steel has this property where once it yields and you keep straining it, it doesn't actually pull more net tension (called plastic state). So the bolt will torque more and more untill it yields, then you might find that you hit a flatline where it doesn't seem to get tighter, but it will eventually strain-harden before it snaps. In theory you could actually re-use those bolts, but the problem is you have no idea how far they were strained in the first place so you don't know what stress-strain state the bolt is in the second time around. If its already nearing strain hardening, you can get your torque value initially, but get them really hot and the bolts will lose there tension and fail.
 

Grn92LX

Fidanza Man!
Founding Member
Jan 14, 2001
6,819
64
129
New York
Jan 9, 2006
#9
  • Jan 9, 2006
  • #9
Follow the arp instructions. They call for 60 ft/lbs for aluminum heads on ALL bolts using their lubrication.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
699
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
797
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
T
Turning over fresh 347 stroker torque question
  • TexxDex
  • Apr 1, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 1, 2024
Bullitt347
S
Requesting Guidance for 306 motor swap - Fuel? - SD? MAF?
  • So_Flo
  • Jul 26, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 4, 2026
Mcmahst
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?