Thanks good to hear yours worked out. Do you remember if the springs were fully compressed when you had finished torquing it all down?

Sorry, I don't recall if they were. It's been a few months since I did it.
In my opinion I don't think that the springs would be compressed completely. Doesn't the clutch spring plate tighten down to the posts that the springs go over?
I remember that when I was putting it back together that I had to slowly tighten every other bolt to keep the plate levelish before I applied the "proper" torque. I may have even applied a mult-sequence torque...about 30 in/lbs first...then the full specified amount.
Were you replacing just the springs? Or did you have all the plates apart too? Curious if everything was assembled back together properly, or if you may have the wrong length springs.

No all is together properly, springs are not compressed all the way but close. I just think that the spec is wrong in the manual, I cannot see why they would change the spec if nothing else is different.

Comparing the two different years parts lists for the clutch assembly...I noticed there are a few different parts and price differences between the 2. Namely the clutch spring bolts are a different number entirely. Plus they cost more per bolt. Is it possible they upgraded them...hence the new torque measurement? Doesn't explain what happened to yours though. Maybe they had some of the "old" bolts laying around and thought they'd use them up? Sorry, hope ya get it figured out. That lock tight trick sounds like it would do the trick...and maybe only use 50 in/lbs?

Thanks, mine was built in late 08 but when I look at ron ayers and bike bandit for each of the years they are the same number. where did you see different numbers?

Found it on Bike bandit too. The spring bolt has 2 different numbers. '06 shows 92151 and the '09 has 92154. Maybe being that you have the '08 Canadian model...you still have the '06 clutch basket. They might have combined the two years until full production of the '09s.
Here's the links were I was on BB
2006 Kawasaki KLX250S KLX250H Parts, 2006 Kawasaki KLX250S KLX250H OEM Parts - BikeBandit.com
2009 Kawasaki KLX250S KLX250T Parts, 2009 Kawasaki KLX250S KLX250T OEM Parts - BikeBandit.com

OK, thanks. the 07 08 shows the same numbers and different torque specs for them. I will use the old spec and loctite.

I picked up some new 5 by 35 mm bolts and put the clutch back together. I measured the friction plate thickness just to see if they actually did need replacing, and they were still at the top end of the spec (.118) That is after about 25000 km with 4000 with the 351 kit. Plenty of life left there. I noticed that the EBC springs which I didn't use were actually softer than the stock springs and the barnett were mildly stronger than the stock springs. That is just by feel though.

An inch/lb torque wrench should be used and the bolts be at least a grade 8.8, but even then that 69 in/lb sounds like a bit much for a 5mm bolt. Machinetool Help showed 4.13 ft/lb or about 49 in/lb as the spec for the M5-.8 grade 8.8 bolts and it is confirmed by other sources. That could be your reason for snapping them. I think you've got a typo, especially considering what you've found from the other manuals. Go to the torque spec per the actual Machinery Handbook type values and you won't snap them anymore.

The tensioners I make use an M6-1.00 and the information I found on them was 84 in/lb so I hedge it about 10% lower at only 72 in/lb, knowing the head style I use will have more surface area to grip.

If you are really concerned you could drill and safety wire them. My Bultacos used safety wired nuts because the actual spring pressure was controlled by the tightness of the nuts. Once dialed in, they were safety wired to prevent turning.

Safety wire? Didn't the counterbalancer in that Bultaco engine take care of the excessive vibration in that washing machine motor?;)