Volvo steering torq setting

Snug. Not tight.

The 94 960 is listed, for the stabilizer bar, link-bushing-nut; as 1 N.m.

Foot lbs. are not listed.

Here's the link:

http://caunter.ca/volvo960/bm14842.pdf

Hope this helps, the model you asked for is not listed in the PDF fish, from what I can find; but then I don't have access to the European site.

Vorsicht! That's not my reading of the table in the link: The (1) appears to refer to a note at the bottom , not a torque of 1Nm. Such a figure would be in the realms of 'finger tight'-ness.

I wouldn't use more than 5 lbs., to be honest.

It's one of those voids in engineering where the lock-nut does more damage to the threads and the tensile strength, if it's over-tightened and if it's loose, it allows the system to re-adjust.

I recently had a torsion discussion with the largest industrial rigging manufacturer, who forge turn-buckles and rigging for major US industrial lifting, at an engineering standards course. This company authorizes the course for proper use and loading of the braided slings and wire rope systems they manufacture and it will be required to use anything they sell, very soon, as per ASME and ESTA.

We routinely employ turn-buckles for the safety-wire-rope-systems, around buildings as fall protection. We are instructed to use 1/2 wire and securing the cables to concrete embeds or drilled lag bolts, in order to secure them properly to columns and shear walls.

The entertainment industry, use them in ceilings of hotels, theaters and stadiums for major productions, wherever wire ropes need to be tightened; (unless we have cable strain devices available, which work much better).

Naturally, the twist in the wire causes torsion, which tries to unwind the turn buckles.

The more you tighten the more torsion you place upon the system and it tries to unwind and thereby unscrew the TB.

I asked the design engineers teaching the course; "why don't you put lock nuts on the turn buckles"; and my answer from the engineers was out of a legal manual:

"We do not recommend they, (the turn buckles), be used for anything over 5 feet of cable, and only for minor adjustment of lifting legs, as the torsion will un-wind the turn buckle."

"If a lock was employed, the nut will cause the threads to be sheared, should the tension between the lock-nut, exceed the rating for a single directional torque, under shock-loading or dynamic stress."

"We do not allow lock-nuts, or stop-nuts to be used, whatsoever, where torsion may be a factor or when it may degrade the thread contact area required to sustain full load of ALL the threads, in one direction; the direction of the load."

He went on to say, the threads are cut so they appose force, yet can be screwed into the material, without binding, and as such; by placing a lock nut in the apposing direction, the threads are reduced to less then 10% of effective loading, as the nut pulls the tension of the steel against the load, but in the wrong direction.

(At this point every single construction engineer and superintendent at the meeting is starting to look squeamish, as they all have major high-rises with this exact system, used incorrectly, as fall-prevention systems, in the buildings and various projects they are developing).

According to this team; when the lock nut takes the entire load, for the .05 of shift, under strain, the lock nut strips and the assembly is shock-loaded and strips, possibly causing critical failure or adjustment which ruins the threads and voids the mnfgr's liability of use of the product. This torsion anomaly occurs even with fine threads are used to control twist.

According to this team, the use of a lock-nut, is forbidden, or you, the installer; take full liability for the use of the turn buckle, when accompanied with any form of lock-nut, or back-up nut, to stop counter rotation of the device.

Of course, the import companies are more than happy to use lock and stop-nuts, course threads and sub-standard materials; so there's a real gap in common usage or best practices, around this "problem".

I realize this doesn't exactly answer your question, yet from what I have been taught recently, the use of such a stop-lock system, is no longer approved, unless the engineering of the steel rod, is over designed to exceed any possibility of the torque-nut, from splitting the threads, under load.

It sounds like the liability, is one left for the installer, (as usual).

You're in murky water on this one, I'm afraid.

Time to get out of the front end business.

Finger tight might work, because the road ash will probably fill in the threads behind the nut, over time and keep it in place. LOL

Try 5 lbs. and see if that will hold it during a road-race. If not then you have a great case of industrial negligence against Volvo, as the stated amount of torque from the manufacturer's site incorrectly instructs you, to under-tighten the system; 'so as to be ineffective at either safely retaining the safe use of the device, or increasing likelihood of catastrophic failure".

Now you see what liability is really about. If you can pass the buck onto the installer and blame him for mis-use or improperly over-tightening, then the engineer is off-the-hook, in case of death, but only if there is a published regulation.

You might have found a nice hole in the Volvo engineering program here.

I wonder if any standard tie-rod-end, is covered by the manufacturer, under these circumstances, or is the mechanic who installed it ultimately at fault; just like the safety rope installer, on every high-rise in the world using turn-buckles with lock-nuts?

Found this link too:

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:uCJM1STUrYoJ:www.volvoclub.org.uk/tech/service/850/AxleShafts-Front.pdf+volvo+steering+ball+joint+torqu+spec&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firefox-a

It states: 120 degrees past ?

Unless you are talking about Torq Hoist industrial lifting... and your Volvo is suspended from the roof by this system...

http://www.torqhoist.com/product_list.php?FormName=cat_list&CatID=55&ProductID=