swinky
New member
Yess I do. Quit talking to me like I'm a retard.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
ARP vs Extreme Studs
- Thread starter mcdaniel1991
- Start date
Yess I do. Quit talking to me like I'm a retard.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
I am sorry if you felt like I was talking to you like a retard... but if you knew how a fire ring worked then you would know that your statement is not always true when it comes to fire rings.
I only asked if you knew the difference because many people get it confused and mix the two up.
swinky
New member
Seen fire rings fail many many times. Maybe I just don't believe in them.
Do you have any info on how much these are stretching? Mine with arps puked not long ago but replaced the cap and been good since. Hoping for the best lol
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
Do you have any info on how much these are stretching? Mine with arps puked not long ago but replaced the cap and been good since. Hoping for the best lol
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
swinky
New member
Cool. Thanks man. Sorry if I'm a dick sometimes. Paid 5k to have arps installed I'm going to defend them as much as I can :banghead::banghead:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
mcdaniel1991
Active member
I'm sorry but this is a bone head comment. I understand that ARP studs are proven however, if there is potentially a better product for the price why do people have a problem excepting that? Is not money out of if your pocket? Yes we still need real world testing and that is happening currently. But don't țry steer people away because you "think" they may not be better. Let people make an educated decision based on facts and not theories.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk
swinky
New member
Yeah but if I admitted to why I'm being like that there's no need for your input. Thanks for the helpful statement :banghead:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
mcdaniel1991
Active member
:thumbup::doh:
swinky
New member
mcdaniel1991
Active member
I understand being sour, I just don't want to muck up the thread with inaccurate info and theories. I would like to keep it as factual as possible. No hard feelings..
swinky
New member
swinky
New member
Why are all these people that are blowing gaskets with arps being kept anonymous?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
sootie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2012
- Messages
- 11,853
- Reaction score
- 37
this wont happen for a while. its hard to have accurate info and not speculate when the product being discussed hasnt even been ran...
I'm sure the same concerns were spoken about arp when they started their business. Give the company a chance, if their product sucks, it will show. But, I do agree fully that crappy prep work will make a job go south.
Since you guys love to what if everything to death, why not just braze the head to the block and be done? I'm joking, before someone passes out.
Since you guys love to what if everything to death, why not just braze the head to the block and be done? I'm joking, before someone passes out.
SEABEE08FX4
New member
A LOT of failures can be attributed more to who did the work than the part its self. Some shops don't have the heads machined ore prep the block, other do. Some torque them with uncalibrated wrenches, some don't. Some use the right lube some don't. Some over toque, some under toque and some hit the sweet spot. I would say 90% of better of the failure have more to do with workmanship than the stud.
Just my .02
Just my .02
^^^^ I have thought a lot about what you said and I am gonna hop on my soap box for a second... NO OFFENSE INTENDED
I hate that excuse :fustrate: It just seems crazy to me. There area easily 10 excuses that make it so that no one can offer a 100% solution or guarantee to fix the 6.0 head gasket problem. It is so easy just to blame things on the unknowns... Torque wrench, over torque, under torque, block flat, head flat, block prep work, head prep work, OEM gasket, type of stud, type of lube, type of tune, type of turbo, back pressure... blah :blah: blah... Basically its seems that no one has any freaking idea why heads keep blowing even after everything is done right. There are many other platforms that have similar downfalls (similar gasket type, same 4 bolts per cylinder, diesel, high boost, etc) They don't have as many issues as we do. It seems the most common reason/excuse for the 6.0 head gasket failures is that the cosmos have to be aligned just perfectly for a head job to actually work on the 6.0 powerstroke.
riest:
To say that 90% of failures are caused by workmanship... while other platforms don't have the same 90% failure rate with crappy workmanship says something. We are missing something... It is so easy to blame things on the unknowns instead of trying to figure out exactly what is going on. We have definitely learned a lot and have provided better options than when the 6.0 powerstroke first came... but I would venture to say that it can still get better.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could actually find a solution that would keep us all from having to ever worry about blowing gaskets again (well at least for 90% of the 6.0 population to not have to worry instead of only 10%). Let people know that even if the cosmos are not aligned perfect that day that they still won't have to worry about the gaskets blowing because we have engineered a solution that is good enough to have a little wiggle room.
I have been working with a lot of different people trying to come up with a better solution while still keeping it cost effective. Some of us are engineers, shops, average joes, and other like minded people and we have come up with a lot of theories. We feel it has more to do with how thin our cylinder heads are, how much our heads flex in between the studs/bolt, type and thickness of the stud, and using a silicon/elastomeric sealant as a first line of defense for the fire ring area.
With all that said... I love the idea of another stud being offered as a better option. I hope to hear great things from the extreme studs. :toast: I commend anyone trying to release a better more cost effective option to help out the 6.0 community!
Rant Over :thumbup:
I hate that excuse :fustrate: It just seems crazy to me. There area easily 10 excuses that make it so that no one can offer a 100% solution or guarantee to fix the 6.0 head gasket problem. It is so easy just to blame things on the unknowns... Torque wrench, over torque, under torque, block flat, head flat, block prep work, head prep work, OEM gasket, type of stud, type of lube, type of tune, type of turbo, back pressure... blah :blah: blah... Basically its seems that no one has any freaking idea why heads keep blowing even after everything is done right. There are many other platforms that have similar downfalls (similar gasket type, same 4 bolts per cylinder, diesel, high boost, etc) They don't have as many issues as we do. It seems the most common reason/excuse for the 6.0 head gasket failures is that the cosmos have to be aligned just perfectly for a head job to actually work on the 6.0 powerstroke.
riest:To say that 90% of failures are caused by workmanship... while other platforms don't have the same 90% failure rate with crappy workmanship says something. We are missing something... It is so easy to blame things on the unknowns instead of trying to figure out exactly what is going on. We have definitely learned a lot and have provided better options than when the 6.0 powerstroke first came... but I would venture to say that it can still get better.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could actually find a solution that would keep us all from having to ever worry about blowing gaskets again (well at least for 90% of the 6.0 population to not have to worry instead of only 10%). Let people know that even if the cosmos are not aligned perfect that day that they still won't have to worry about the gaskets blowing because we have engineered a solution that is good enough to have a little wiggle room.
I have been working with a lot of different people trying to come up with a better solution while still keeping it cost effective. Some of us are engineers, shops, average joes, and other like minded people and we have come up with a lot of theories. We feel it has more to do with how thin our cylinder heads are, how much our heads flex in between the studs/bolt, type and thickness of the stud, and using a silicon/elastomeric sealant as a first line of defense for the fire ring area.
With all that said... I love the idea of another stud being offered as a better option. I hope to hear great things from the extreme studs. :toast: I commend anyone trying to release a better more cost effective option to help out the 6.0 community!
Rant Over :thumbup:
Powerstroke Cowboy
Well-known member
Not sure what the big deal is. Head Studs and main studs are one of the smallest but most crucial investment you can make in a build. Why go a couple hundred and even a hundred cheaper? When you are already throwing thousands at the engine to make power. And do not want to have to dig back in anytime soon. Its worth it to me.
On Edit: ARP 6.0 Head studs have a MSRP of 883.99 But yet you can find them on the web for under 420.00 Shipped.. hhmmmmm.... How does that work? That is less then half the price of the MSRP. I know this is not relevant. just thought I wold post it.
On Edit: ARP 6.0 Head studs have a MSRP of 883.99 But yet you can find them on the web for under 420.00 Shipped.. hhmmmmm.... How does that work? That is less then half the price of the MSRP. I know this is not relevant. just thought I wold post it.
Last edited:
There are two different ARP studs available. The $883 studs are probably the 625 series... different stud all together.
Powerstroke Cowboy
Well-known member
There are two different ones for the 6.0L from ARP. The ones I posted the price on were part number 250-4202.
The Custom age 625+ head studs for the 6.0 have a MSRP of 2262.59 And can be had on the web for under 1300.00 a set. The part number for these are 250-4205..
Those CA625+ head studs are not cheap. They make the H13 price look cheap.
SEABEE08FX4
New member
^^^^ I have thought a lot about what you said and I am gonna hop on my soap box for a second... NO OFFENSE INTENDED
I hate that excuse :fustrate: It just seems crazy to me. There area easily 10 excuses that make it so that no one can offer a 100% solution or guarantee to fix the 6.0 head gasket problem. It is so easy just to blame things on the unknowns... Torque wrench, over torque, under torque, block flat, head flat, block prep work, head prep work, OEM gasket, type of stud, type of lube, type of tune, type of turbo, back pressure... blah :blah: blah... Basically its seems that no one has any freaking idea why heads keep blowing even after everything is done right. There are many other platforms that have similar downfalls (similar gasket type, same 4 bolts per cylinder, diesel, high boost, etc) They don't have as many issues as we do. It seems the most common reason/excuse for the 6.0 head gasket failures is that the cosmos have to be aligned just perfectly for a head job to actually work on the 6.0 powerstroke.
To say that 90% of failures are caused by workmanship... while other platforms don't have the same 90% failure rate with crappy workmanship says something. We are missing something... It is so easy to blame things on the unknowns instead of trying to figure out exactly what is going on. We have definitely learned a lot and have provided better options than when the 6.0 powerstroke first came... but I would venture to say that it can still get better.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could actually find a solution that would keep us all from having to ever worry about blowing gaskets again (well at least for 90% of the 6.0 population to not have to worry instead of only 10%). Let people know that even if the cosmos are not aligned perfect that day that they still won't have to worry about the gaskets blowing because we have engineered a solution that is good enough to have a little wiggle room.
I have been working with a lot of different people trying to come up with a better solution while still keeping it cost effective. Some of us are engineers, shops, average joes, and other like minded people and we have come up with a lot of theories. We feel it has more to do with how thin our cylinder heads are, how much our heads flex in between the studs/bolt, type and thickness of the stud, and using a silicon/elastomeric sealant as a first line of defense for the fire ring area.
With all that said... I love the idea of another stud being offered as a better option. I hope to hear great things from the extreme studs. :toast: I commend anyone trying to release a better more cost effective option to help out the 6.0 community!
Rant Over :thumbup:
Rant all you want, but there is a right way and a wrong way to everything and not every shop out there does things the right way. To add to that there may be more than one right or acceptable way, but there are plenty of people out there doing stud jobs that do really shoddy work. And in turn you have issues that stem from that.
When you're talking about a mass produced product that works perfectly fine for most, the common denominator between the ones that fail is most always human error. Don't really care much one way or the other if you don't like that answer, it is what it is take it or leave it.
Members online
No members online now.