Guys,
I have a 97 Camry 4 cyl.

I replaced the valve cover gasket-pretty easy stuff right?

The Haynes manual says the recommended torque on the spark plug nuts(which is what holds the cover on) is 33 ft lbs.
I went through & tightened each one a little at a time to be even....right about the time I got to 25 ft lbs on each nut, I heard a "pop"-thought it was the RTV making noise at first, but just for the heck of it , I looked & the back of the valve cover has a 6" long crack!

Anybody heard of this happening before? Was this thing just bad, is the manual wrong, or did I just screw up something else?

I'd like to know before I shell out for a new valve cover & crack it too...

thanks

-mike

I know on the 94 it's 27 foot lbs per the Toyota technical service manual. I did mine a few years ago to that spec to stop a minor leak in to the spark plug well and it took that torque just fine. It hasn't leaked since.

I would try a recycling yard for a replacement cam cover. It would be a lot cheaper than the dealer.

Mike

Torque is 17 ft-lbs

WHAT??

17 ft lbs??!!??

That might explain the cracked cover....wonder where the hell Haynes came up with 33???

Brian, if you don't mind me asking, where did you get that info?
Not that I doubt ya (cause it certainly make sense), but maybe I need to look elsewhere besides Haynes.


I found a used valve cover for $86.00; supposedly less than 50k miles & it has a 60 day warranty. I don't know what the dealer would charge but I'm sure I'd get screwed.

thanks guys,
-Mike

It's the torque from the factory repair manual for a '96 5S-FE. Sorry, I should have given you the reference in the previous post. I am pretty sure that particular torque value didn't change between '96 and '97.

uh-oh...I'm back to square one...


I e-mailed Haynes to get their two-cents worth.

They emailed me back a scan of a page from a Toyota tech manual, that shows the torque value is indeed 33 Ft lbs.

Leads me back to the issue of why my valve cover cracked...wonder if it was metal fatigue (?)..with the age & miles (or more accurately engine hours) maybe the darn thing just wore out & failed.

I noticed when I first removed the thing that there was hardly any torque on the nuts-so little I could have removed them with little more than "finger pressure" on the driver..Don't know if that's relavent or not.

Anyway...I have a replacement on the way...guess I'm just gonna be careful, but now I'm actually nervous about what should be an easy job!

-Mike

I would use 17 ft-lbs. Check the torque after a week of driving.

There is no reason to think that your new valve cover is any stronger than the old one. Their torque they sent you must be a misprint. If you have any doubt, call a dealer and ask a tech.

WHAT??

17 ft lbs??!!??

That might explain the cracked cover....wonder where the hell Haynes came up with 33???

Brian, if you don't mind me asking, where did you get that info?
Not that I doubt ya (cause it certainly make sense), but maybe I need to look elsewhere besides Haynes.


I found a used valve cover for $86.00; supposedly less than 50k miles & it has a 60 day warranty. I don't know what the dealer would charge but I'm sure I'd get screwed.

thanks guys,
-Mike
$11.14 is what you pay for a valve cover at our local pull-a-part junkyard in Ga. Do you have anything down there like that?

I also have a 1997 Camry with 5S-FE (4-Cy). and too thinking about replace the valve cover gasket. So, after checking the Toyota Factory service manual specific for 1997 Camry, it says the valve torque is 33 ft/lb.

But, my 1990 Celica service manual published by Chilton says 17 ft/lb. By the way, 1990 4-Cy Celica also use the 5S-FE.

Hmm.... Who should I believe... :sly:

Be conservative and use 17. The author of this thread has found out what happens when you use 33.

Be conservative and use 17. The author of this thread has found out what happens when you use 33.


Here's what happens....POP!
"Motherf***er!"

or whatever your favorite workin on the car word is...

I'm stickin' with 17 ft lbs baby....

And retorque it a week later.

Yes indeed!


I never would have thought putting a valve cover on would have turned into such an ordeal...goes to show what a simple typo can start.

thanks for the advice, though!
This forum rocks

You're welcome

Torque is 17 ft-lbs

I have two 95 Camrys 129K, 156K and they started leaking only when the engine was running. The 129K Camry US valve cover seal was brittle and the 156K Camry ( Japan) was made of rubber and stayed together. Also changed out the oil sensor on the 156K and seems that I got both Camrys leak free for the moment. Did not have a torque wrench, so I had to use two adjustable wrenches. Just snugged them down in a pattern and will check them in a few days..... Jen

To me, 17 ft-lbs is moderate wrist torque with my hand at the socket end of the wrench

Strange but true - you try your best to do a quality job by following the good manual but now you wished you had not.
You actually begin to wish you had just relied on your good-ol-hand-feel-bolt-torquing instinct like we do on many other repairs.
Not only did the manual not help you do a better job in this particular case it actually hurt you.
my my - who can we trust?

I know on the 94 it's 27 foot lbs per the Toyota technical service manual. I did mine a few years ago to that spec to stop a minor leak in to the spark plug well and it took that torque just fine. It hasn't leaked since.

I would try a recycling yard for a replacement cam cover. It would be a lot cheaper than the dealer.

Mike

Mike, the value you quoted (probably actually 29 ft-lbs) is the torque used to tighten the spark plug tubes into the head, not the head cover torque. As you said, it is the torque needed to seal the tubes against oil leakage into the tubes.

Placed into the FAQ thread:
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=5650006&postcount=74

My local Toyota dealer confirmed that 17 ft-lbs is correct for all 5S-FE engine tube nuts.

Mike, the value you quoted (probably actually 29 ft-lbs) is the torque used to tighten the spark plug tubes into the head, not the head cover torque. As you said, it is the torque needed to seal the tubes against oil leakage into the tubes.

Placed into the FAQ thread:
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=5650006&postcount=74


Brian,

Thanks. You are correct. I realized this some years ago. This thread and my original answer to this thread was from 2005. I have since been recommending 17 ft lbs.

Mike

Yes, I've seen you in another website....:)