Originally Posted by komp55

Okay, let me make sure I've got this straight -

1. The bolt was NOT replaced as specified by MB workshop procedures;

2. Somehow you later end up with the wrong part (bolt) installed in your car;

3. Whatever bolt was installed wasn't torqued down correctly in two steps; and

3. Now you're wondering why the crank bolt backed out and probably ruined your crankshaft.

We all feel your pain, but back when you first posted about your Ferrari mechanic not being able to find the tensioner release for the accessory drive belt, many on this Board advised you to take your car to a mechanic that was competent and familiar with MBs. That didn't happen and it's only gotten worse from there. I hope whoever messed up your latest install accepts their responsibility and pays for the damage they've caused. GL getting it repaired and back on the road.

Originally Posted by RenntechE55

Yep I accept full responsibility for me installing it wrong I guess. the 2nd time i torqued it 200ft/lbs so im not sure why it wanst tight enough.....

Originally Posted by hooleyboy

Renntech reuses the stock bolt, AMS reuses the stock bolt, Mercedes reuses the stock bolt, and I'm sure other tuners reuse the stock bolt...

Originally Posted by RenntechE55

Thanks, Ya the first time I thought that I did 90-degrees but i guess not I'am hearing that it take 4ft long breaker bars and tuns of torque

Originally Posted by JustPete

^^^

Looks pretty clear to me.

Whenever I've done work on motors, with any high torque bolts that meet a lot of stress. The rule has always been to replace with new.

Originally Posted by komp55

As the facts come out now, this just goes from bad to worse. You CANNOT reuse the crank bolt because it's a stretch to torque bolt. The MB WIS is very clear on this. Did no one learn anything went Jangy went through this with James a while back?

If the crank bolt is reused, it's simply a BAD INSTALL.

Originally Posted by hooleyboy

Renntech reuses the stock bolt, AMS reuses the stock bolt, Mercedes reuses the stock bolt, and I'm sure other tuners reuse the stock bolt.

I don't think MB uses it, but either way...best not to argue. Simply put, IF MB really didn't use it on yours when the procedure says to, then you should speak with my brother the lawyer who happens to be working on numerous Chrysler fraud claims.

why didn't the reused bolt fail during the 3+ years of service with the renntech pulley? Why havent a number of members cars have bolt failures after reusing the stock bolt?

I would like to think that the numerous client cars are running fine because they were modded properly (however you want to define it). Why OP's car ran fine could be that the 63 bolt was rammed in and held. That doesn't mean he can re-ram, nor does it mean Dyno Comp is at fault.

EDIT: there is debate on the reuse of the stock bolt. Im not a mechanic and dont do install work. I just race and come up with crazy ideas. From what my eyes have seen and what the dealer has done to my car. I've never personally seen the bolt fail on the number of pulley i've seen installed. strangely enough I've seen some pulleys come in to the shop that have failed, None on a MBZ though. Well except for a CLK430 that had the rubber damper missing from the stock pulley.

Originally Posted by BlownV8

The 55 kompressor engine is still being built by Mercedes. I wouldn't think it would be that far of a stretch to have an engine builder pull the wrong bolt or have the wrong bolt given to him.

Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM

+1

While you may not "have to" replace it, I will say that not replacing the crank bolt with a new OEM one is, at the very least, poor judgement. It's a $10 part, allegedly is supposed to be a one-time-use stretch bolt, and ultimately is critical to the health of the engine. Why any reputable MB tuning organization would skip this cheap insurance for their clients is beyond me...

Originally Posted by jangy

And why RennTech endorses it......

Originally Posted by Hammer Down

OMG its Jangy! how ya been/ where ya been?