Torque Conversion Chart: Nm to Ft-Lb Table (Free PDF)

The unit in the left hand column is what it is converted from; read across to the column with the unit you wish to convert to. Multiply your value by the figure in that cell.

So for instance, if you wanted to convert from foot-pounds to newton metres, read across the ft-lb row until you reach the column marked Nm (so you multiply by 1.355818). If you want to convert the other way round, then look at the Nm row instead, and read across to the column labelled ft-lb (in which case multiply by 0.7375621).

There are just five torque units you'll encounter in manuals and on tools but they is covered by the columns. In most moddern manuals, including nearly all from Europe and Asia, it's the SI unit: Nm (newton metre).

For US structural work and some automotive, it's ft-lb (pound-force foot, otherwise known as lbf.ft or lb-ft). For very low-torque fastener it's the US unit of in-lb (pound-force inch). The gravitational metric units kgf.cm and kgf.m is still quite common on small motor datasheets and in Japanese service data. These are sometimes found in old Japanese manuals as kg-m or m-kg.

Some of those values are exact by definition, not rounded measurements.

According to NIST SP 811, 1 lbf is equal to force on a 0.45359237 kg object due to standard gravity (also known as 9.80665 m/s2). This means that 1 ft-lb is exactly equal to 1.3558179483 Nm and 1 kgf.m is exactly equal to 9.80665 Nm.

So likewise the ratios within each system are exact: 1 ft-lb = 12 in-lb; 1 in-lb = 16 ozf.in; 1 kgf.m = 100 kgf.cm. All the numbers in this table (and all the rows in any table further down this page) is calculated from those definitions, which is why they can never drift away from the standard.

These are all the classic traps. You might of heard someone argue that pound-feet and foot-pounds aren't the same torque unit. Physicists reserve foot-pound for energy, but it doesn't matter since all manuals and torque wrenches treats them as the same thing.

Confusing in-lb with ft-lb is far worse, however, as it's off by a factor of 12, so setting your wrench at 96 ft-lb instead of the spec value of 96 in-lb (8 ft-lb) will snap the fastener. Likewise, confusing kgf.cm with kgf.m is off by a factor of 100. If you mistake Nm for kgf.m, you will use nearly 10 times less torque.

Since a Class A torque wrench is only required to be within plus or minus 4 percent by ISO 6789 standard, there's not really any hand tool that would warrants such precision (I include the seven important digits in the table in case you need it for your calibration paperwork).

You can use Nm x 0.74 = ft-lb, ft-lb x 1.36 = Nm, or kgf.m x 10 = Nm. These are accurate to within 2 percent, which is good for quick calculations.

This is just a conversion chart. I am not providing you with information about how much to tighten bolts with this one. That info varies with property class, thread size, the joint being tightened, and whether or not it was lubricated.

Use a bolt torque specification chart for those numbers and return here only if the spec is given in a unit your wrench doesn't show.

You'll find the figure for a newton metre in the first column then its matching values in the other three columns. It's in step increments: 1 Nm up to 50; 2 to 100; 5 to 200; 10 to 500. That means it covers everything from tightening bike stem bolt to tightening truck wheel nut.

The numbers for all three converted columns is based off actual factors. For ft-lb, you multiply the value by 0.7375621. For in-lb, you multiply by 8.850746. For kgf.m, you multiply by 0.1019716.

Why does the in-lb matter? Many torque wrenches sold in the US below approximately 20 ft-lb is marked only in inch-pounds. And why is kgf.m used? That’s what they print on old Japanese service manuals.

To find values between rows, interpolate linearly. Because it’s a simple multiplication, 47.5 Nm lands midway between the 47 and 48 Nm rows on the chart, which converts to 35.03 ft-lb. Alternatively, use a calculator to multiply your precise Nm number by 0.7375621. This is why we put together table; so that nobody should of do the math themselves.

Mind your rounding direction when a spec matter. The values above are all rounded to the nearest 0.01 ft-lb value. That’s much more precise than any wrench will ever give you. If you need to round the wrench dial to a whole number, round toward the middle of the acceptable range around the fastener instead of always rounding upward.

Never set a foot-pound wrench at the raw Nm number. For example, dialling 100 ft-lb for a 100 Nm spec over-torque the joint by 36 percent.

Car wheel nut torque values is usually 110 to 140 Nm (81 to 103 ft-lb). Spark plug torque is about 20 to 30 Nm (15 to 22 ft-lb). Drain plug torque is typically 25 to 40 Nm (18 to 30 ft-lb).

These figures are typical, but not a recommendation. Remember that the value used for conversion come from the manual for your vehicle or piece of equipment; it does not change on this page.

In the first column is the foot-pound value from your spec sheet for the US market, then alongside that you can read off its metric equivalent. The increments goes as follows: 1 ft-lb to 50; 2 to 100; 5 to 250; and 10 to 400. That covers everything from a small machine screw right up to hub nuts on heavy equipment.

•    Nm column: Dial this number into the wrench and it’s ft-lb x 1.3558179. The Kgf.m column matches older (Korean or Japanese) manuals that quote kg-m, which is ft-lb x 0.1382550. in-lb column: This is just ft-lb x 12. It is exact, so no rounding is necessary. This is useful if your only accurate wrench read inch-pounds but your spec is small.

This way is no different: The largest danger is the 12x thing. Misreading a spec of 18 ft-lb (on a valve cover, for instance) as 18 in-lb means leaving those bolt finger-tight at only 1.5 ft-lb. Apply that spec as 216 ft-lb and you’ve stripped the thread out.

Before picking up the wrench, see if it’s some crazy-high/low number for the bolt size because the doc happens to use the other pound unit.

So if you have direct numbers (for instance 45 lb-ft) you just go down and across. Or multiply straight through. In this case 33.5 ft-lb = 45.42 Nm.

To do your head math in a hurry, take ft-lb and add one third or multiply by 1.36; that’ll get you within a percent of the actualy Nm number. It is well within the tolerance of any click wrench.

These are conversion factors only, like all the tables on this page. Having a number here doesn’t imply that you should of tighten any bolt to that value. That comes from the equipment manufacturer, or from the fastener standard.

It’s for low-torque jobs like laptop/phone screws, scope rings, optics, electronics and even little screw on machines. It also works for fuel system and carburetor fasteners. Bicycle parts.

The first column have the inch-pound value. From there you move across to get the newton metre, kilogram-force centimetre, ounce-force inch and foot-pound versions of the same torque.

Incremental steps are 1 in-lb up to 30. Then it go in 2, 5 and 10 in-lb steps to 200 in-lb. There is also a 0.5 in-lb row for the smallest drivers.

Nm = Metric torque screwdriver. It is in-lb times 0.1129848. kgf.cm appears on a lot of Asian-market camera gear, servo motors, and torque drivers. It is In-lb times 1.152125. ozf.in = Instrument-grade drivers for realy tiny fasteners. It is exactly in-lb times 16. ft-lb is included to show that all of these torques is very small when expressed on full-size wrench scale. It is In-lb divided by 12.

The 12x trap gives this range its own table. Inch-pound specs is usually published for less than 15 ft-lb (they’re so close that they look like the same thing). 25 in-lb is just over 2 ft-lb.

Reading an in-lb figure as ft-lb multiplies the torque twelve-fold. That’ll shear M3 and M4 screws in an instant. Crack plastic bosses in electronics too. When a small screw spec look high, it’s probably in-lbs until proven otherwise.

Metric habits cross over as well. 1 Nm = 8.85 in-lb. From 0.4 to 1.2 Nm, which is common in electronics, translates to about 3.5 to 10.6 in-lb.

These commonly used torque screwdrivers tend to be accurate within plus or minus 6 percent. The third decimal place in the Nm column is for calibration certificates and reference only. A tool cannot provides that level of resolution.

Below the 0.5 in-lb row, the trade changes completely to only ozf.in. Alternatively, if the value is above 16.7 ft-lb (200 in-lb), use the foot-pound table. Full-size wrenches are a bit more naturaly number-wise.

If you’ve got torque quoted in kilogram-force (kgf) centimetres or metre on a manual or datasheet then use this table: simply find the kgf.m value in the first column (or divide a kgf.cm figure by 100 and find that) then go across to the Nm, in-lb and ft-lb columns. It covers everything from small-engine fastenings up to big machinery, running from 0.1 to 50 kgf.m in gradualy increasing increments.

The units are exact: 1 kgf.m is 9.80665 Nm (torque of a 1 kg mass at the end of a 1 m arm under standard gravity), thus the conversion are exact.

The "kgf.cm" columns is exactly 100 times the "kgf.m" column.

The columns labelled "ft-lb" and "in-lb" uses the same definitions as above. They are calculated by multiplying kgf.m by 7.233014 and 86.79617, respectively.

These is mainly from service manuals published in Japan and Korea up to about the mid 1990s. They usually describes the unit as kgm, kg-m or m-kg.

They can be found on datasheets for servos and motors that quote holding torque in kgf.cm and on torque tools sold in Asia. Occasionaly you see a table in a JIS-era manual that tabulates both Nm and kg-m. When only kg-m is given, this table restore the missing columns.

The two traps are: One is the 100x slip between kgf.m and kgf.cm. A stepper motor rated to hold 42 kgf.cm has 0.42 kgf.m, aka 4.12 Nm, not 412 Nm.

The other trap is that kgf.m and Nm are nearly 10x similar, causing silent errors. 5 kgf.m is 49 Nm. If you treat them as the same, your joint's at barely a tenth its spec. If you do the opposite, you over-torque by a factor of ten.

Rule of thumb (for sanity checks): kgf.m x 10 = Nm is good, since it errs only under 2 percent; dial the wrench from the table, though, not from the rule.

Moddern standards like nist sp 811 and ISO 80000 deprecate the use of kgf.m, and it’s not an SI unit; the proper thing to quote in new documentation would of be Nm.

The point of this table is that you might find it on Asian-market tools or other legacy paperwork, for reading, not for writing new specs. It converts unit only, like all of this page. Values for bolt tightening is part of a torque specification chart.