haha, I should just do a quick FEA of it next time I'm bored at work.
|
I'll be putting the head back on my car this weekend hopefully. I'm planning on torquing them to 65 ft lbs as well.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Found this today with some old papers in the garage. Installed mine before this thread started and probably followed the instructions. Guess I will just need to wait and see what happens.
|
Received an email from ARP after the floods destroyed all our build diarys,
Sorry to hear you lost some things in the flood! Here are the torque numbers you need. They are the same for both the ARP Ultra Torque and ARP Moly Lube. Rod Bolts 118-6401 = 38 ft/lbs Head Studs 218-4701 = 80 ft/lbs Main Studs 218-5401 = 60 ft/lbs Regards, Alan Nichols Sales & Technical Automotive Racing Products 1863 Eastman Ave. Ventura, CA 93003 Toll Free: 800-826-3045 Ph: 805-339-2200 Fax: 805-650-0742 Email: alann@arpfasteners.com www.arp-bolts.com So I think I follow Savs recommendations Terry |
Originally Posted by tbro
(Post 685726)
Received an email from ARP after the floods destroyed all our build diarys,
Sorry to hear you lost some things in the flood! Here are the torque numbers you need. They are the same for both the ARP Ultra Torque and ARP Moly Lube. Rod Bolts 118-6401 = 38 ft/lbs Head Studs 218-4701 = 80 ft/lbs Main Studs 218-5401 = 60 ft/lbs Regards, Alan Nichols Sales & Technical Automotive Racing Products 1863 Eastman Ave. Ventura, CA 93003 Toll Free: 800-826-3045 Ph: 805-339-2200 Fax: 805-650-0742 Email: alann@arpfasteners.com www.arp-bolts.com So I think I follow Savs recommendations Terry Bob |
So if the head bolt spec is off then what should the rod and main bolts be torque to? I am about to rebuild my engine.
Have a great day, Jared |
Originally Posted by bbundy
(Post 681237)
ARP studs also have smaller OD washers than stock which isnt helping things.
Bob |
I haven't seen the size difference but any time you can increase the area that will reduce the pressure/stress exerted on the face. Even small changes in area should produce a decently reduced stress. P=F/A
|
Originally Posted by Larimer
(Post 689647)
I haven't seen the size difference but any time you can increase the area that will reduce the pressure/stress exerted on the face. Even small changes in area should produce a decently reduced stress. P=F/A
Bob |
I torqued mine to 80ft/lbs a couple years ago, which seemed ridiculous when torquing them down at the time. I have, however, ran the engine without a belt on the water pump for 40 minutes in traffic (Had no water temperature gauge) before the upper radiator hose literally blew off the radiator. In normal cases with factory head studs, this would call for the head to be machined for sure. I just put the hose back on, threw a belt on, filled up, and I haven't lost coolant ever since.
|
Originally Posted by tbro
(Post 685726)
Rod Bolts 118-6401 = 38 ft/lbs
|
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 692465)
Surprising that ARP would tell you this. The ARP2000 bolts that M-Tuned ships with their rods specify a stretch spec, not a torque spec. I've found that in order to get the ~.005-.006" stretch spec (IIRC), they wanted around 55-60ft.lbs of torque, not 38.
|
Sorry to bring this back up. I just pulled the head, and plan on installing the new gasket this weekend. I originally torqued the nuts to 80 ft lbs per the instructions using the arp moly lube. After reading this thread it sounds like 65 lbs is a better option. Do I need to get more arp moly, is there a substitue, and do I need to measure the length of the threads for stretching with a micrometer? Keep in mind the threads had moly only when initially torqued, and now they will probably have a little oil on them. What is the recommendation for this scenario.
EDIT: It appears that ARP is now using the "ultratorque" lube which really minimizes the variance between torque stages. I think I screwed the pooch by tightening once, then immediately checking the torque again then buttoning everything up and never looking back. It appears that a person should probably use 8 separate torque cycles at the desired torque. How many cycles leading up to the desired torque before starting the 8 cycle retorque session? How long between cycles should a person wait before starting the next torque cycle??? Example: Pre torque 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% then 7 more cycles at 100% torque |
Originally Posted by djp0623
(Post 783131)
Sorry to bring this back up. I just pulled the head, and plan on installing the nw gasket this weekend. I originally torqued the nuts top 80 lbs per the instructions using the arp moly lube. After reading this thread it souns like 65 lbs is a better option. Do I need to get more arp moly, is there a substitue, and do I need to measure the length of the threads for stretching with a micrometer? Keep in mind the threads had moly only when initially torqued, and now they will probably have a little oil on them. What is the recommendation for this scenario.
In for answer. |
Just an FYI. This is why I said eight cycles to tighten. Then if you use assembly lube or motor oil you can be sure that you are getting the torque that you want. It also appears that a torque cycle is defined by tightening to spec, then loosening. I was unaware of this. I thought it meant tighten to spec, wait for any stretching then hit it with the torque wrench again to check. Using ARP assembly would clearly save a bit of time.
https://www.miataturbo.net/picture.p...pictureid=1840 |
That is very good info. Thanks for sharing.
I will say that the BP is not known for blowing head gaskets, and unless you are building a mega high horsepower motor, 8 torque cycles, tightening and loosening, and choice of lubircant is not overly important. Clamping a miata head to block is pretty forgiving of discrepencies in technique, with the exception of over torquing which has already been discussed. |
There is no time component to fastener stretch. It stretches as soon as you preload it.
8 torque cycles is absolutely ridiculous. Use their recommended lubricant, torque it in 3 steps, and don't untorque it. All you are doing is uncompressing and recompressing the gasket, which is a bad idea. |
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 783750)
There is no time component to fastener stretch. It stretches as soon as you preload it.
8 torque cycles is absolutely ridiculous. Use their recommended lubricant, torque it in 3 steps, and don't untorque it. All you are doing is uncompressing and recompressing the gasket, which is a bad idea. |
Back from the dead.
I just called FM and they say the 48lb ARP head stud number is not used by them anymore. They said 60-65lb for both the ARP head and main studs when using the ARP moly lube. Why would we want to exceed the OE torque spec and thus clamping force if we know that the ARP studs are already stronger than OE bolts? Isn't the benefit in using the stronger studs? Or is there something to be gained by increasing the clamping force? I'm reluctant to use ARP main studs at a higher torque if it forces a line bore since it adds $$$ to the build. |
The increased yield of the material is of little use in stock preload applications. The modulus of elasticity which would determine the "clampyness factor" is pretty well absolutely constant for most steels. Unless you need a higher torque load on the bolt/stud the additional material strength isn't going to do you any good. In short... the studs should not apply any additional clamping force under stock pre-load. Higher then stock pre-load can cause problems as mentioned...
That being said, the tensioner bolt on my power steering pump broke today. I could just be bitter. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands