jdub said:
Racer - You are obviously one of those guys that's smarter than the engineers that design head bolts/studs.
No, I am just smarter than you. I just don't have my head up my fourth point of contact.
jdub said:
I mentioned the use of a stretch gauge because it is the most accurate method...you didn't even attempt to see the point and you either didn't read or ignored the rest of the info on the ARP site I posted.
No, I read it all, and will you STOP reffering to torque proceedures for ROD bolts... for the last time, we are talking about HEAD hardware here.
jdub said:
The most accurate method for head studs/bolts is to make multiple passes at near final torque using a tightening, then loosen technique. This overcomes the coefficient of friction...use of moly reduces the values required due to it's superior lube characteristics. After each tightening/loosening cycle, friction levels reach a constant and enable an accurate final torque...ARP recommends 5 of these cycles on their hardware..
Actually, ARP recommends it for the ROD bolts, and never mentions other bolts, or other fasteners with that technique. It's here
http://www.arp-bolts.com/Tech/TechInstall.html and it's under the "2. Importance of Proper Rod Bolt Stretch." Can you identify the key word?
jdub said:
Your statements on stretch shows a basic misunderstanding of how fasteners work...that's what I was addressing...
You are still addressing that you do not have a basic understanding of anything you read. And you still can't prove me wrong.
jdub said:
It's irrelevant if its a head bold, rod bolt, or any other area where a high strength fastener is required....
Actually it IS relevant.
jdub said:
In the case of head bolts/studs, you are also ignoring the differences in thermal expansion between aluminum and steel. Not only does this cause a horizontal "scrubbing" effect between the steel block deck and the aluminum head deck, it also causes vertical expansion exerting additional tension on the fastener. The elasticity of the fastener alloy used is very important in this case to allow for the additional stretch while providing the required clamping force. New bolts have greater elasticity until the metal grain "settles" after being subject to the heat environment in which they are being used. This is where the re-torque comes in...you want to ensure the correct torque value after the fastener has been through at least 5 heat cycles.....
Stop comparing everything to how to properly set all fasterners like a ROD bolt. They are different, and it's not HEAT cycles, it's loosening and tightening cycles for again, ROD bolts. Even still if you do it right the first time like I said to in my post that you got all upset about, leave it ALONE after that, and the load will not change.
jdub said:
The thermal expansion mentioned above occurs with both composite and MHG's. As you mentioned, a composite HG will "squish" slightly and actually cause less additional stretch on the fastener...a MHG does not have this ability...the full brunt of the thermal expansion is carried by the fastener. .....
And if you think the full brunt effects it, why does it stop effecting it even if you make it tigher? Or retorque it? The bolt will STILL carry the full brunt of the thermal expansion carried by the fastener, this will NOT change with a MHG, no matter what torque setting you used, within spec of course
jdub said:
That makes it even more important to re-torque on a MHG..
Cometic said no, and you still say yes? Come on man! You're almost in China by now! Stop digging! You're wrong, let's move on!
jdub said:
For the same reason, if an ARP fastener was used on a composite HG and then re-used on a MHG, I'm going to re-torque it...
For the same reason.... Dude, your reason is going all over the place. The MLS types don't "squish" they are made of steel that's stronger than the head is.... same reason? Uh, not at all.
Oh, and yeah, you probably should re-torque and check your work, I would recommend that you get a friend to make sure you do it right, if there is there a right way to do it. Once you set it to the final torque, that's it man. Believe and do what you want, I'm going with what the manufacturer's are saying, not your backyard garage beliefs that after you run a motor you have to take it apart again and retorque it. Is that in the brand NEW car guide? Nope. Think more about that.
jdub said:
I have no idea how much the fastener stretched with the composite HG absorbing some of the thermal expansion...I do know the MHG does not compress...if the fastener does experience additional stretch, I want to do a re-torque to get the clamping force for a good seal. Re-torquing to the ARP spec values will never over stress the bolt/stud....
You have no idea, don't use it as a point. Now you say the MHG does not compress. Interesting.
You're using the magical word "if" now, good job at finally discovering what you should have used in the first place.
Re-torquing to get clamping force for a good seal is done how? I suppose you think breaking the final torque clamping force, and retorque it again somehow... I would never recommend this, especially if you have done it right the first time. And it does matter how many times you've stretched the bolt/stud, they don't last forever. Take some old ones you have laying around, and measure them. You will see what you really know about stretching, and never over stressing the bolt/stud. Even after ONE torque down to a value that exceeds the yield strength may cause permanent stretching.
jdub said:
Besides, a re-torque is just not that hard to do...look at it like this: I have a ton of $$$ invested in my motor...why would I want to risk it just because I'm too lazy to check the torque on my head bolts/studs? I'm very methodical about this kind of thing, but what if I made a mistake? What if there was a piece of debris that fell into the head bolt hole? A few more "IF's" to add to the list..."IF's" are one of the best reasons (in this case) to do a re-torque...it's cheap insurance in my book. It only needs to be done once.....
The first word fortold the entire paragraph above is your opinion, not fact.
You have a ton of $$$ invested in your motor which you care about enough to argue with me about. You still cut corners, and there is still doubt with either your abilities, or the products you are using. Your methodical practice is perfectly fine. Disassembly after it's all finished creates a lot of room for error, and I don't blame you for rechecking your work. You seem a bit paranoid about it.
I can imagine you retorquing your oil drain plug after 5 heat cycles too. And the lug nuts on your wheels, and removing the transmission to check the flywheel bolts................
The final torque needs to be set once. ARP doesn't say anything else you can agrue with me about it. Do it right the first time, like I said in my other posts, and you will have nothing to worry about, unless of course you do it wrong.
jdub said:
I'm basing my recommendations on how a fastener is engineered and the physics behind it...it's not conjecture. I know how fasteners work...it would be a good thing for you to figure that out if your going to make recommendations, hence my original "educate yourself" comment..
You are basing your opinions on your interpretation of what you have read. That is all. It is arguable when you post information which goes against your original point, and your supporting links did nothing but make you look the part of a guy who has nothing else to do with his time, but share the paranoia with other people. I do not want it! You need to read what you are posting, and think about it. I read this seven hours ago, and didn't bother to reply until now, hoping you would have time to think about it.
No one can discuss things with you, as you seem to be so full of yourself with a ARP hardon by saying things such as "educate yourself." You serioulsy need to stop getting what YOU WANT out of what you read, and take it for what it is, because just from what you have already said and provided, I have valid points to argue that you aren't sure of what you are talking about.
jdub said:
At least base it on facts and not the usual hearsay/opinions so may people on this site are fond of doing...
You don't read. I said there is no factual evidence to support that a retorque is necessary on either "cycled" (heat or tighten/loosen, whatever YOU decide is good enough for the rest of us), or NEW head hardware. All you have presented is your opinions, which your supporting links do not support enough to say is fact. You're very fond of doing it, and repeating what you read off another forum, and NOT from the manufacturer like YOU say you do.
jdub said:
It's easy to take a statement from any tech article out of context.
You've done it this entire time. You apply Rod bolt techniques to every other fastener. They are different yet you say they are the same.
Then why don't you take the oil pan off and recheck the values of the rod bolts as specified by ARP? If the MLS headgakset is made, well, of STEEL, then the softest metal is in the head, which isn't going to deform after it's been seasoned through some heat cycles, and that's HEAT, not torque and retorque for that component if you want a reliable high HP motor.
You are applying something you read about ONE thing, and going ape shit with it.
jdub said:
I take tech articles as a whole to learn what the author is trying to say and learn the underlying reason why something works.
Techical articles as a whole may cover a wide variety of topics. ARP's reference you posted is one of them. The underlying reasons were specified. Read it again.
jdub said:
To base your reasoning on "Cometic is covering their ass" or the author is covering their ass is, well lets say, your choosing not to understand the many variables that go into the design of head gaskets and the fasteners used..
Understand the many things you call variables still leads me to believe Cometic is covering their ass. Business is business, and Cometic cannot explain what head hardware to use. THAT is the variable. Their gaskets do not deform, and ARP's once set to final torque, that's it, and I stand by it.
COMETIC said if you use "heat" cycled head hardware you don't need to re-torque. That's HEAT, not what ARP says to do the rod bolts, by tightening and loosening. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, stop picking and choosing, your argument holds no torque, and this is my FINAL torque down on you, you ARP lovin' fool!
jdub said:
Judging from some of the posts I've read on SM during the past few days, it's pretty obvious who is the douchebag is here.
Don't get upset. p5150 is actually a very intelligent guy.
jdub said:
I learned a long time ago never to argue with an idiot...they just bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. I think you need to go back to your village...I do believe they are looking for you. And welcome to my ignore list...I will no longer be able to see any of your posts. Have a nice life.
So where does talking down to me come in? Trying to use that silly tactic to pursuade your opinion?
Everyone else will see the posts, and see your name. Turning a blind eye is not going to teach anybody anything, but what an example!
Since no one has evidence other than speculation to arp/MHG needing retorque after X heatcycles, who can say anyone is right or wrong?
Have a nice day!
