• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

Getting ready to start my project !!!

I contacted ARP yesterday regarding how you can determine whether or not it is safe to reuse the head studs. I had a phone conversation with on of the tech support guys who told me that unlike the rod bolts (which you can measure to see if the amount of stretch is within allowable limits) the recommended criteria for the head studs is a subjective one. If the stud feels tight when you reach the recommended torque specification then it is o.k. If it feels soft or spongy at this torque value then it should be replaced. They subsequently sent me an email as well reiterating the same thing:

"As long as you have not exceeded the recommended torque for that
fastener, and it takes the torque and does not feel spongy, the stud
should be fine."

hmmmm.....
 
bk95td said:
No need for the dual stats. Single stat works just fine and flows as much.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you posted that, I was looking into upgrading my cooling system soon. That will save me $150, I also though the dual stat was essential, good to know now.
 
VW_Lupo_TD said:
I contacted ARP yesterday regarding how you can determine whether or not it is safe to reuse the head studs. I had a phone conversation with on of the tech support guys who told me that unlike the rod bolts (which you can measure to see if the amount of stretch is within allowable limits) the recommended criteria for the head studs is a subjective one. If the stud feels tight when you reach the recommended torque specification then it is o.k. If it feels soft or spongy at this torque value then it should be replaced. They subsequently sent me an email as well reiterating the same thing:

"As long as you have not exceeded the recommended torque for that
fastener, and it takes the torque and does not feel spongy, the stud
should be fine."

hmmmm.....
Click to expand...


Well... I torqued mine to 120 lbs and they all felt good.. I know my arms were a lil tired after torquing them in 5 steps. 25 lbs - 50 lbs - 75 lbs - 100 lbs and then 120 lbs and there definitely was NO spongy feel anywhere. I'm sure ARP says that to cover their own ass, these things are harder then the hubs of hell. I think you would pull threads from the block before pulling threads on these studs.

Hell.. even the gay ass TTY bolts torque specs are I think.. 30 - 50 and then an additional 90*.. I can assure you they are not clamping as hard as the ARP studs are at 120 lbs. I actually was slightly nervous to pull them all the way to 120, but that's where they are at.

Mike
 
Last edited:
Wow and i thought i was being adventurous torquing mine to 105... Those heads definately shouldnt lift at all now... cant wait to see the end of this build, if it all works out you may have me convinced into converting mine... or buying a 93 with a stick shift :reddevil:
 
There is a torque spec sheet posted here.. ;)

http://www.thetruckstop.us/forum/showthread.php?18989-ARP-headstud-torque-specs

I used some lubriplate engine assembly lube and just went for a 120 lbs and figured it should be just fine. I'm not building a dragster or land speed record breaker.. Just a good ole daily driver, hell maybe once done and running good, maybe even sell it !!

I'm sure it would make somebody an awesome 6.5er dually haulin' truck

Mike



What the heck are these extra fuel fitting adapter things for on the # 1 fuel nipple ??
There was one on both of my 4911 and DB4 pumps.

100_4499.jpg
[/IMG]
 
Last edited:
Is it not necessary ???

The lines I have on there now are from Ted's also, and the #1 line isn't bent for the use of that lil timing "doo-hickey". So basically I would have to get my old #1 fuel line from my truck, put that on there with that adapter, or not fool with that stuff and just time it by ear / feel.

What do ya guys think ??

Mike
 
The adapter was for the kent moore timing tool which is extinct. I do not believe AFAIK that the Kent moore Tach N Time or the Snap On MT480 use that adapter and earlier 6.2 motors did not have it so you can easily lose it if it's to your benefit to do so.
 
Yea, you can just remove that timing adapter from the pump and your "normal" injection line will screw right onto the pump. Getting rid of that timing adapter thing won't hurt or change anything, it is only used for/with that special timing tool aces spoke of. Other than being used with that tool, the timing adapter has no purpose.
 
Mike K3500 said:
................................Hell.. even the gay ass TTY bolts torque specs are I think.. 30 - 50 and then an additional 90*.. I can assure you they are not clamping as hard as the ARP studs are at 120 lbs. .........Mike
Click to expand...
i think where people run into trouble w/ the TTY bolts is, after the 3rd sequence, they need to be turned another 1/4 turn. put a mark on the bolt for reference. i like the thought of studs but can't see paying for them.
this is a great build and look forward to the end when it's run.
did you ever drop the pan?
 
TTY=60$. ARP's 170 but ARP can be reused as many times as you like even if the motor handgrenades and they are harvested for another motor. The strength difference is night and day and 110$ is piddly considering the amount of work to change them again.
 
deejaaa said:
i think where people run into trouble w/ the TTY bolts is, after the 3rd sequence, they need to be turned another 1/4 turn. put a mark on the bolt for reference. i like the thought of studs but can't see paying for them.
this is a great build and look forward to the end when it's run.
did you ever drop the pan?
Click to expand...

I haven't just yet, it is all unbolted and hanging on there with the "super mighty liquid gasket" that was used to glue the sheet metal on with,... some tough shit there. I want to wait until I come up with a "truck" pan to clean paint and get buttoned on. I would rather not pull the pan off my truck engine and have oily shit dripping everywhere.

Acesneights1 said:
TTY=60$. ARP's 170 but ARP can be reused as many times as you like even if the motor handgrenades and they are harvested for another motor. The strength difference is night and day and 110$ is piddly considering the amount of work to change them again.
Click to expand...

WORD !!!

Like I already said earlier, I think that ARP just says that maybe to make more sales possibly, but most likely to cover their own ass.

I really think that if you feel anything spongy torquing these studs that you should look at the block.. I know about this OR I should say that my buddy that I got these parts from knows first hand !!...LOL I know that he has been through many 6.5's, trying to Hot Rod them.
This last one that I got all my parts from, he had a VGT turbo on it and was pushing 35 - 40 psi to it and of course he broke a bunch of shit.. He did tell me one time on one of his motors (all GM castings) that he torqued the head studs to maybe 130 lbs or 150 lbs and pulled the threads on his block.

I really, really hate the TTY bolt idea, I think it's the stupidest damned idea ever (maybe as dumb as plastic intake gaskets), BUT I do have my own theory as to why they are used... I think the assembly plants found it faster and easier for the assemblers to just crank those things in to "just adequate" clamping force upon assembly and not have to worry about reading / adjusting torque wrench's.

So basically in short form, I think they were designed by retards for retards that shouldn't be assembling engines.

Every GM vehicle that I have wrenched on that has had head gasket problems ALL had TTY head bolts, not to say the bolts are the cause, but have seen it less with traditional torque style bolts / studs.

Sorry for the rant,
Mike
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top