waveslayer
Well-Known Member
Amazon
Scope Mounting
- Thread starter Allen Kitts
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
dfanonymous
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,477
That's what most charts are based off….
Any real charts require the actual lubricant in question, the actual fastener size, with that lubricant, the reduction of the dry torque spec. It's expressed as a percentage reduction. Picture for example.
Now the that being common knowledge, I'm not aware of any charts with blue locktite for a 6x40 or whatever size fastener that warns uses.
And if you ask loctite, they say on page 3 here that no adjustment is required…which is inaccurate. https://www.ellsworth.com/globalass...mIBYUfcCpoonK2qBwyCUeIphhe9x-lYI-AhV_WF1YDW3Z
The dry spec is set in this case by the scope manufacturer.
And there's no charts for a tiny little screw
Attachments
Last edited:
ntsqd
Well-Known Member
No charts? Clearly your google-fu is lacking. All of this took me about 10 minutes.
None other than Borden Rilfes, note that a specific lock-tite is called out.
The extra and extra-extra fine pitches of gun screws are the problem, not their size. A generic torque table:
Note the 8-32's in the upper-right corner. If you don't know what the k valve for your choice of thread-locker is, assume the worst, use the k=0.15 column as that will be the safest. Now you have a torque value for an 8-32 as a guide. If you really want an exact value you're going to need to use an online calculator or do the math.
If you want to dive deeper and find informed and educated people doing real world work and analysis on this topic, it is out there and it is NOT on Utoob.
From: https://www.practicalmachinist.com/forum/threads/torque-specs-and-locktite.204146/post-1352911 May 12, 2010:
He IS using a much bigger bolt, so his results may or may not directly translate. It's work, but not too hard to recreate the experiment using the size of fastener this thread is concerned with. I'd suggest that if you can measure any bolt stretch on this size that the install torque is too high.
I think that the real purpose of a torque value for screws of this size is two-fold.
1) It attempts to replace the "gudentite" (one grunt or six?) method so that the installer isn't failing the screws with too much torque.
2) the goal is a uniform clamping, no one screw is doing most/all of the work. Experience has shown me, in everything - not just firearms - that uniform clamping, even when well below the maximum possible, does a better job of securing the part than does wildly random screw tension.
None other than Borden Rilfes, note that a specific lock-tite is called out.
The extra and extra-extra fine pitches of gun screws are the problem, not their size. A generic torque table:
Note the 8-32's in the upper-right corner. If you don't know what the k valve for your choice of thread-locker is, assume the worst, use the k=0.15 column as that will be the safest. Now you have a torque value for an 8-32 as a guide. If you really want an exact value you're going to need to use an online calculator or do the math.
If you want to dive deeper and find informed and educated people doing real world work and analysis on this topic, it is out there and it is NOT on Utoob.
From: https://www.practicalmachinist.com/forum/threads/torque-specs-and-locktite.204146/post-1352911 May 12, 2010:
He IS using a much bigger bolt, so his results may or may not directly translate. It's work, but not too hard to recreate the experiment using the size of fastener this thread is concerned with. I'd suggest that if you can measure any bolt stretch on this size that the install torque is too high.
I think that the real purpose of a torque value for screws of this size is two-fold.
1) It attempts to replace the "gudentite" (one grunt or six?) method so that the installer isn't failing the screws with too much torque.
2) the goal is a uniform clamping, no one screw is doing most/all of the work. Experience has shown me, in everything - not just firearms - that uniform clamping, even when well below the maximum possible, does a better job of securing the part than does wildly random screw tension.
Last edited:
Check for loose brake or suppressor
dfanonymous
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,477
None of that mentioned torque charts…it's just says what I'm saying. Did you even read what you linked? Litterally post 24 of the forum you linked…
The chart again, doesn't specify the size of screw with the specific lubricant used…those are just random fastener with their yeild values. My google fu is lacking?
ntsqd
Well-Known Member
I've read everything that I've posted, and everything that you've posted. Reading comprehension does seem to be a problem, but it's not here.
We'll have to agree to disagree and move on.
We'll have to agree to disagree and move on.
dfanonymous
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,477
Not after you say some nonsense like that.
You're free to point to any iota of evidence that supports your argument. It's not my job to argue against myself. I presented specifics with a very specific argument.
You've have a general yield chart, a forum saying the same thing I am, and again, real charts are engineering specs of the specific fastener, with the specific lube in question.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have the specific torque values that are recommend by the ring manufacturer for the scope base and the clamp screws, than a generic chart? The chart called for 38 in lbs on a number 8 screw, but that's all you can get from that "generic" chart.
