American told to check newer 737s

Strange that they'd all be in the same range of under torque.

Is this assembly machine assembled or hand assembled? Hard to believe you'd have that many wrenches all being off to the same degree of inaccuracy, but it wouldn't surprise me to see robotics do it wrong that consistently...
 
Strange that they'd all be in the same range of under torque.

Is this assembly machine assembled or hand assembled? Hard to believe you'd have that many wrenches all being off to the same degree of inaccuracy, but it wouldn't surprise me to see robotics do it wrong that consistently...

If the assembler used a "user adjustable"micrometer type torque wrench it is very possible that these bolts were under torqued. I don't know how many times I've seen mechanics give these type of wrenches only one or two clicks while torquing a bolt. You have to watch the bolt head for rotation. In other words, you have to keep clicking the torque wrench until all rotation stops. Only then is the bolt or nut truely torqued to specification. I remember Rolls-Royce had a warning in all of their manuals stating "User adjustable" torque wrenches ARE NOT to be used" during engine assembly. Only beam or dial type wrenches were to be used. Of course AA and TAESL in their infinite wisdom had a "pink" page put into the manual to allow the "clicking" type wrenches to be used against Rolls recommendations.
 
Just being the devils advocate here, but has anyone thought about checking the slat cans for damage. If the slat track is askewed then it will rub into the can such as has happened on our 80s.
That is part of the AD if any hardware is missing. At that point the job most likely goes from a overnight at the gate task to a hangar visit. To effectively check the slat can I would bet you have to pull the slat track. I also doubt any damage you find would be in limits. I know in light of the AD I would be very particular of any damage I found.