View Full Version : Could they have it wrong for 1964


rodneybe
05-14-2003, 08:03 PM
Researching torque specs for 1964 300V8 proves an interesting task in Australia.

The 64 Buick shop manual lists conrods at 60-75 but in the text says torque them 40-45. For mains it lists 50-55 and 65-70 for rear. This is for a cast iron block and aluminium heads. hmm

The 63 Buick shop manual lists the same specs as above yet this is for the 215 V8 that had the ALLOY BLOCK!!! Specs listed for the cast iron block V6 are much higher.hmmm hmmm

The 65 Buick shop manual lists 95 - 120 for mains and 30-40 for rod bolts for the 300 V8. This was a cast iron block with cast iron heads.

Could they have got it wrong? Did they carry over 63 specs to 64 by mistake? Did they finally get it right then in 65?.

Most of the aftermarket publications such as Motors manuals or Chiltons would copy the genuine manual listings.

Have Buick previously released a Service advice bulletin on this back in 1964? Has someone come across this problem before?

I know that we are upside down in Australia but any help with this one would be great as I am rebuilding a 300 now.

TODD
05-19-2003, 08:22 PM
Rodney, it looks like the proofreaders at Buick were on holiday for a few years in the early 60's. The values for these 3 torques vary some even within the same manual as you have found. There were no variations in the parts lists that would explain some of the wild values.

The 64 intermediate-size manual has the most mistakes. The 64 full-size manual (has the 300 aluminum head LeSabre V8) looks to be correct. It gives 40-45 for the connecting rods, 100-110 for the main bearings, and 65-75 for the head. These figures fit in with other aluminum head and iron block engines in the 61 to 66 manuals.

There was one service bulletin put out Dec. 5, '62 introducing pre-waxed head bolts with separate washers for the 215 V8. The bulletin says to continue torqueing the heads to 60-70 ft-lb as used with the standard washer-head bolts and special lube. I don't have the bulletins for the other years in question.

rodneybe
05-19-2003, 09:06 PM
thanks so much for your reply. It seems your research and results makes real sense now. I'm am so relieved over this one. So now off to the machine shop and let them know!

( graemlins/wavey.gif you know, there were times when I thought it would just sit gathering cobwebs and slowly rust away at the shop)

cheers graemlins/banana.gif