Briggs rod w/o bolt locking plate?

[creia]

1968 Briggs 3 HP horizontal-shaft "Easy Start" model 80202
I recently purchased an OEM NOS rod (part # 294367) for this engine. Every other Briggs rod for the 3 Hp and 5 HP I've purchased over the years has always come with the little locking tab (part # 220756) that you bend up the ears against the side of the bolt heads to prevent them form loosening. This one, however, did not have the locking tab- instead it had 2 very thin flat washers. The original Briggs instructions that came with this rod specifically stated to use these under the bolt heads in place of the locking tab. Anybody else ever heard or seen this before? I don't want those rod bolts loosening up...
Michael

[bobodu]

Locktite...

[Walt 2002]

Yeah, they quit using the locking plate years ago. I have flattened and reused the old one BUT if you torque the rod bolts to proper setting, you will be OK.

Walt Conner

[creia]

Thank you for the replies so far- very much appreciated! I have attached the eBay link to the Briggs rod I purchased. The Briggs packaging colors and style suggest that this is a "newer" Briggs part and not a NOS part. You can read the instructions that clearly state to use the 2 thin washers if they came in the package (they did) and there was no locking plate included (there was not). That being said, I fail to understand how these 2 thin washers can prevent the rods bolts from loosening, like the ("old style") locking plate did. Can anybody explain it to me?
Michael
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Briggs-294201- ... SwkSlbBxZi

[bgsengine]

It's all about torque retention.. long ago they thought they needed those locking plates to keep bolts from getting loose (which can happen as the lock plate wraps over the rod cap, and movement of one will affect the other) - separate thin washers reduce friction between bolt head and rod cap, allowing more consistent application of torque, and offer a "slippery" surface for rod cap and bolts to move independently under thermal expansion.. if a bolt got loose enough anyway that the lock plate was needed to keep it from turning, it'd be loose enough to "pound out" the threads and just come straight out, too.

[creia]

It's all about torque retention.. long ago they thought they needed those locking plates to keep bolts from getting loose (which can happen as the lock plate wraps over the rod cap, and movement of one will affect the other) - separate thin washers reduce friction between bolt head and rod cap, allowing more consistent application of torque, and offer a "slippery" surface for rod cap and bolts to move independently under thermal expansion.. if a bolt got loose enough anyway that the lock plate was needed to keep it from turning, it'd be loose enough to "pound out" the threads and just come straight out, too.

OK- thank you for the detailed explanation Brian. A Briggs rod w/o a lock plate was all new to me (first one I have ever seen in over 30 years of working on these)- I LEARNED something new today...
Regards,
Michael

[KE4AVB]

Creia, Don't feel too bad. I have working mowers for over ten years now and didn't even see a Tecumseh Peerless LTH2000 then this Spring I already had two of them to show up with the same problem. Try to avoid pulling one out as I now I will need to try to make the assembly jig since it is not available.

[Walt 2002]

It's all about torque retention.. long ago they thought they needed those locking plates to keep bolts from getting loose (which can happen as the lock plate wraps over the rod cap, and movement of one will affect the other) - separate thin washers reduce friction between bolt head and rod cap, allowing more consistent application of torque, and offer a "slippery" surface for rod cap and bolts to move independently under thermal expansion.. if a bolt got loose enough anyway that the lock plate was needed to keep it from turning, it'd be loose enough to "pound out" the threads and just come straight out, too.

OK- thank you for the detailed explanation Brian. A Briggs rod w/o a lock plate was all new to me (first one I have ever seen in over 30 years of working on these)- I LEARNED something new today...
Regards,
Michael

Boy, you have been working on some old machines. They probable quit using locking plates 30 year ago.

Walt Conner

[creia]

It's all about torque retention.. long ago they thought they needed those locking plates to keep bolts from getting loose (which can happen as the lock plate wraps over the rod cap, and movement of one will affect the other) - separate thin washers reduce friction between bolt head and rod cap, allowing more consistent application of torque, and offer a "slippery" surface for rod cap and bolts to move independently under thermal expansion.. if a bolt got loose enough anyway that the lock plate was needed to keep it from turning, it'd be loose enough to "pound out" the threads and just come straight out, too.

OK- thank you for the detailed explanation Brian. A Briggs rod w/o a lock plate was all new to me (first one I have ever seen in over 30 years of working on these)- I LEARNED something new today...
Regards,
Michael

Boy, you have been working on some old machines. They probable quit using locking plates 30 year ago.

Walt Conner

Walt- You are correct. All of the engines I work on (Both Briggs and Tecumseh) are at least 40-50 years old. This 1968 Briggs is a perfect example. I guess that all of my previous rod purchase have been NOS parts that were OLD and all came with the locking plates in the box.I remember that the COLOR of the Briggs packaging was the old blue and orange- you old timers will remember those!
Michael
Michael

[bobodu]

Walt's forgotten more than I will ever know....Pretty sure I was still building my old shop the first time he helped me out. And now I eat at Golden Corral at 4 PM and hit bed right after Matlock....