When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
ok fellas so ive been doing a bit of research in regards to the 2 19mm head bolt that bolt the T bracket to the transmission on b series motors. im hoping someone has some insight to this, on integras the 2 bolts call for 87ft lbs of torque, but ON 99-00 SI and crv they call for 61ft lbs of torque. on all 3 applications the bolts are m14x1.5 thread and 67mm long but integra has a diffent part number than civic si and crv, and i have no idea why that would be since in all aspects they are the same bolt. the part number for the integra bolts is 90165-ST7-000 and the part number for civic si and crv is 90188-SR3-010. so my question is what exactly is diffent and why differant part numbers and torque specs, the only conclusion i can come to is the rating of the bolts hardness.
and for those of you who are wondering why ive put so much thought into this it is because time and time again i see that those bolt holes are cross threaded or stripped. ive put pics of the helms manual for each apllication as well.
I suggest you follow the FSM for your application.
i always follow the FSM, BUT there isnt a manual that outlines which bolt and what torque to use for a 92 civic with a b series swap, sooo you see why this is a pretty legitimate and relevant question. i might just end up buying 2 of each bolt to find out first hand there is actually a difference between them. there is obviously a reason behind the fact that they both call for different torque specs and are a different part number BUT are both the same length and thread pitch and used for the exact same application. like i said in my first post the only reason i can think of is the bolt hardness, but then that raises a new question which one should i use considering i will be making quite a bit more power then any of these motors did factory.
Last edited by bigjon1378; 03-05-2019 at 11:32 PM.
Reason: spelling errors
also there are other things that i am curious about for example everyone always says 92-95 civic and 94-01 integra use the same upper control arms, this statement is true BUT is also false.
after a bit of research i have discovered that 92-95 civics and 94-01 integra RS both share the same part number for the front upper control arms BUT all other 94-01 integra models have a completely different part number, once again this cant be for no reason at all so now the question is, WHAT is the difference? part numbers for 92-95 civic and 94-01 integra RS front upper control arms are 51450-ST3-305 right side and 51460-SR3-023 left side. the part number for all other models of 94-01 integras are 51450-ST7-020 right side and 51460-ST7-020 left side.
so the only thing that i could possibly think of and this is a bit of a stretch, perhaps the st7 part numbers are very slightly longer and the reason i think this is to make up for camber, and since the RS is the lightest model that is why it shares the same part as civics. but like i said this is a bit of a stretch but im just thinking outside of the box. and i know the first thing some of you might think is "well what about the type r, it sits lower than the rest so if they are for camber wouldn't it have its very own part number?" or some question like that but if any of you have ever looked into what the specs are for factory alignments the type r actually has more of an allowable degree of negative camber factory vs the other models. hope that all makes sense to you guys.
i know all these silly little questions are irrelevant to most people in the grand scheme of things but they do matter to some of us that are 110% dedicated to making everything as perfect and "factory" as possible.
for example i have a 1999 crv that i lifted and instead of just throwing the lift spacers on and calling it a day i searched the deep dark corners of the web to find a solution to keeping the front sway bars as close to the factory orientation as i could so that it operates as it should, does that really matter? i dont know but honda put orientation marks on them for a reason so i assume it does, what i ended up doing was using a set or 2010 mazda miata rear sway bar end links on the crvs front sway bar they are nearly identical to the crv ones except that the are slightly longer so now that solves my sway bar orientation concerns.
and one more example, when lowering my civic and installing a factory ITR rear sway bar instead of going with an ASR sub frame brace or other similar to it i decided to go with an old school suspension techniques brace and other than the fact that i wanted to use a cool old school part i chose it for a functional reason vs other brands because all other braces that i have seen actually mount the sway bar lower on the sub frame then it is on a factory ITR sub frame BUT the suspension techniques brace mounts the sway bar damn near exactly in the same higher up location as factory if not slightly higher then factory and to further help insure that my factory ITR rear sway bar has as close to factory orientation i also decided to use skunk2 lower control arms because the sway bar mounting points on them are lower on the arm then they are on stock arms. also factory ITR lower control arms have a slightly lower sway bar mounting point then regular integra lower control arms, so that means if i had gone with factory integra lower control arms which have a slightly higher mounting point for the sway bar right off the bat the sway bar would not be oriented properly and then if i had also used an ASR or similar brace which places the sway bar lower than the factory ITR location AND i lower my car then the rear sway bar would in all aspects be oriented completely differently then it is in a stock ITR. once again i hope all of that makes sense and sorry for the long drawn out explanation.
i will share a few pictures to help illustrate what i am talking about miata end link on the left crv end link on the right
use the lower control are bolt as a reference point for sway bar placement in each picture
factory ITR subframe and sway bar factory ITR sway bar, suspension technique brace and skunk2 lower control arms ASR subraframe brace and factory ITR sway bar
I’ve never had 99-00 si t-bracket/bolts in my hands, so this is speculation based on the fsm pics, but it looks like the 99-00 are shorter than the integra counterpart, this seems like reason enough to lower the torque values, again speculation.
Also, y’all need to chill with the ..xx...matter stuff, it’s quite offensive.
I’ve never had 99-00 si t-bracket/bolts in my hands, so this is speculation based on the fsm pics, but it looks like the 99-00 are shorter than the integra counterpart, this seems like reason enough to lower the torque values, again speculation.
Also, y’all need to chill with the ..xx...matter stuff, it’s quite offensive.
Chill with what stuff?
And 94-01 integra 99-00 SI and 97-01 CR-V bolts are all the exact same thread and length.
well damn... Now you got me really wondering. I do enjoy pondering the innerworkings of the honda engineer brains.
And I was referring to the two hashtag lines.
I did the hashtag thing in response to the other guys hashtag lol
And I also enjoy pondering but it also drives me nuts because how the hell will I ever find a definitive answer to all these questions, I mean maybe if they related to this year's model civic couldcall and inquire but a car that's over 20 years old lol I doubt anyone still has that info laying around.
Just go by the FSM spec to the car, and use locktite. You can investigate on your own time and either share what you found or don't. Its good to rattle your own brain every once in a while.
i always follow the FSM, BUT there isnt a manual that outlines which bolt and what torque to use for a 92 civic with a b series swap, sooo you see why this is a pretty legitimate and relevant question. i might just end up buying 2 of each bolt to find out first hand there is actually a difference between them. there is obviously a reason behind the fact that they both call for different torque specs and are a different part number BUT are both the same length and thread pitch and used for the exact same application. like i said in my first post the only reason i can think of is the bolt hardness, but then that raises a new question which one should i use considering i will be making quite a bit more power then any of these motors did factory.
I appreciate the pedantry, personally.
Since 5G Civics existed with B-series motors, why not consult the EDM FSM that has the torque specs? FYI this manual makes no distinction for the spec here between D and B series, so there is no difference to note! 61lb-ft / 8.5kg-m. The two bottom bolts are listed as p/n 90188-SR3-010.
I also cross-referenced with the JDM FSM and it is also not different: 8.5kg-m.
Interestingly, there is an error either with the FSM or the parts database: The top bolt is listed in the parts database as 90186-SL4-000 and described as 12x67 mm, so 12mm wide not 14mm. Easy enough to check who's right though by checking the T-bracket.
Since 5G Civics existed with B-series motors, why not consult the EDM FSM that has the torque specs? FYI this manual makes no distinction for the spec here between D and B series, so there is no difference to note! 61lb-ft / 8.5kg-m. The two bottom bolts are listed as p/n 90188-SR3-010.
I also cross-referenced with the JDM FSM and it is also not different: 8.5kg-m.
Interestingly, there is an error either with the FSM or the parts database: The top bolt is listed in the parts database as 90186-SL4-000 and described as 12x67 mm, so 12mm wide not 14mm. Easy enough to check who's right though by checking the T-bracket.
Ya the FSM is wrong the top bolt is 12mm but I'm interested where your picture is from exactly because the US FSM for vehicles with b series motors calls for 14x1.5 thread bolts and the ones in your picture says 14x1.25 hmmmm interesting
Ok now I suspect that the FSM may have some incorrect information. One thing that it did get wrong is the bolt size of the upper bolt on the 99-00 SI the manual says it is 14x1.5 when it is infact 12x1.25. but I also suspect the reason for the difference in torque between Integra and Crv/Civic is because crv and Civic actually use 14x1.25 bolts. I decided to order both part numbers I talked about earlier to find out for sure so I guess we will find out in a few days. If this is the case I will definitely be upset because I spent $134 on a time-sert kit because the ez-lok inserts I normally use only offer a 14x1.25 and not a 14x1.5 so if I find out that I could have just ordered the Civic/CR-V bolts I will definitely be bummed out that I spend all that loneyon a time-sert kit when the ez-lok inserts are only $20 or so lol
I love reading posts that go into this meticulous level of detail on original Honda engineering and the FSM. But yea, the FSM has typos or is wrong A LOT MORE than people realize. I've racked my brain scouring through the different 3g Integra FSMs and have found lots of little bits of incorrect info or typos. 99.9% of the time, it's correct. As it is official Honda documentation after all. But when you're talking about a couple thousand page long manual, that .1% of incorrect info can turn into a lot. Interestingly enough, when cross referencing the FSM against official online parts diagrams like on oemacuraparts.com and using the info I have off of my own car, the online parts diagrams are basically 100% correct everytime. I have not found an exception to that. Even down to the # of parts needed for any given parts category such as how many clips you need for a specific application. So I would stick to that for what bolts you want, not the FSM. Though it'll be interesting to see what the difference is between these two bolts. It also helps to look through the European parts diagrams too on the Honda UK sights.
I love reading posts that go into this meticulous level of detail on original Honda engineering and the FSM. But yea, the FSM has typos or is wrong A LOT MORE than people realize. I've racked my brain scouring through the different 3g Integra FSMs and have found lots of little bits of incorrect info or typos. 99.9% of the time, it's correct. As it is official Honda documentation after all. But when you're talking about a couple thousand page long manual, that .1% of incorrect info can turn into a lot. Interestingly enough, when cross referencing the FSM against official online parts diagrams like on oemacuraparts.com and using the info I have off of my own car, the online parts diagrams are basically 100% correct everytime. I have not found an exception to that. Even down to the # of parts needed for any given parts category such as how many clips you need for a specific application. So I would stick to that for what bolts you want, not the FSM. Though it'll be interesting to see what the difference is between these two bolts. It also helps to look through the European parts diagrams too on the Honda UK sights.
oemacuraparts.com is where I look up all my parts and order a fair amount of them there as well since it just so happens to be the nearest acura dealer local to me haha. But the oart that's got me a little upset now is I did ALOT of research on what my options were before pulling the trigger on that expensive *** time-sert kit so if I find out that I actually could have just bought some ez-lok inserts like I always do I'll be more upset lol oh well. AtlAt le now I can fix drain bolts haha
I have a D16Y8 96 civic lx I was wondering based off of this diagram what the sizes were for the rear trans mount bolts the three that bolt into the frame of the car.
03-05-2019, 01:29 AM
T bracket bolt question
Re: T bracket bolt question
