H-11s vs ARP's

[forcefed6.4ford]

Id like to throw in a 195ft/lb

 

[oneturboforme]

tell lube owner to pull his out of that american thunder or whater that trucks called and ask him how much they stretched hell he went to like 310 on it i think he said.. that would see if they can handle that much without deforming

 

[bigrpowr]

i think craig is gonna try something like that with elite studs, at least go to 300 or more and see how they like it.

 

[Ipkyss]

My vote is on what the specs say. But. If you can go to 205-210 (as said) with better clamping force. I can't see any reason not to? I am barley pushing the 600hp mark. I think. But the last thing I want to do is head gaskets all over again.

 

[Tree Trimmer]

Why not increase to the torque value to 210ft/lbs as "the head sales rep" from A1 suggested/e.g. signed off on to eliminate any doubt? But knowing the specifics of your situation, and based on my own puke debacle and what the root cause turned out to be, (heads not straight plus stretched stock head bolts) my gut tells me that machining your heads this go around will solve your problem finally...
I guess I'm also guilty of "overpaying" for H-11 studs... NOT! But seriously after reading this entire thread and weighing EVERYTHING thats been stated do I feel dooped, not at all. I will stick with the facts of my case. Before, for whatever reason my cooling system was being pressurized, after installing Elite studs it does not. knowing I don't need to look back at the problem was worth the $237 more dollar gamble IMHO is all. But everyone is different and I can respect that, personally I'd pay more to watch monkeys *&@! but that's just me. Carry on. Great thread!

it was posted earlier in the thread, that to acheive X000 amount of clamping force, or bolt stretch/preload, you needed X amount of torque. this is a given. the problem you guys are not seeing, is the X000 is a constant. its a given. its the goal.

BUT, the torque is the variable. which is going to change based on the lube used in the process. for instance, compare WD-40 to elite's lube. to achieve the same bolt stretch/clamping force, you would have to torque the WD-40 a hellava lot more that if you used elites lube, because it will be a hellava lot harder to turn the nut to achieve the stretch.

the only thing left as a "unknown", is if elite didnt thoroughly research the studs they bought/created/had made, or how ever you want to classify the end result of this thread so far, did they research the lube they are using with the bolts they are using, to make sure that the end result is the correct clamping force.

assuming that the lube info they have is correct, than the directions are correct. do what they say. if the lube info they have is for some reason not correct, then it does not matter what you torque them to, as you will not know where your goin to end up anyways, in which case, you should still follow the instructions, as they at least give you some direction to travel, so your not flying blind.

Torque to the specs that the kit recommends with the supplied lube, simple as that.

this is why you always follow the instructions as seebee said. do what the kit says.

 

[oneturboforme]

Tree trimmer don't forget the 5-10% error that clicking torque wrenches have the digital ones I think are no more then .1-.9% if its correct. Lol oh im just messing with that may be why elite has a lower value to make aure people don't exceed that

 

[bigrpowr]

Tree trimmer don't forget the 5-10% error that clicking torque wrenches have the digital ones I think are no more then .1-.9% if its correct. Lol oh im just messing with that may be why elite has a lower value to make aure people don't exceed that

i still wanna see all these blown hg's with elite studs. lets see, the one's i know of, mike twice... once with a nuetral drop sledpulling on nitrous at dpc (that was classic and nobody could possibly think of blaming studs for that), then once recently at 90 psi, but never had a prob when he ran 11.3x ... , aaron when he had a huge nitrous backfire at suncoast dyno day, and then when he used old studs on his old motor and pegged his 100 psi gauge quick like. just how many passes did he make on the dyno and the track at well over 1200 hp and never have a failure? im sure there's more out there, and there can be other related issues such as block/head surface preparation and torquing. i keep hearing you mention failures, please expand.

 

[Danbonzo]

it was posted earlier in the thread, that to acheive X000 amount of clamping force, or bolt stretch/preload, you needed X amount of torque. this is a given. the problem you guys are not seeing, is the X000 is a constant. its a given. its the goal.

BUT, the torque is the variable. which is going to change based on the lube used in the process. for instance, compare WD-40 to elite's lube. to achieve the same bolt stretch/clamping force, you would have to torque the WD-40 a hellava lot more that if you used elites lube, because it will be a hellava lot harder to turn the nut to achieve the stretch.

the only thing left as a "unknown", is if elite didnt thoroughly research the studs they bought/created/had made, or how ever you want to classify the end result of this thread so far, did they research the lube they are using with the bolts they are using, to make sure that the end result is the correct clamping force.

assuming that the lube info they have is correct, than the directions are correct. do what they say. if the lube info they have is for some reason not correct, then it does not matter what you torque them to, as you will not know where your goin to end up anyways, in which case, you should still follow the instructions, as they at least give you some direction to travel, so your not flying blind.



this is why you always follow the instructions as seebee said. do what the kit says.

Trust me I see it, all things being equal, material, lube, preloading, and final torque there should be one absolute goal when finished. This is the only confusion I find about the recommended finished torque value using the aforementioned equal factors. Its been stated that Elite and A1 worked together to come up with the proper torque procedure, that being said, who is writing the instructions? Elite says "follow the instructions" ergo 180 ft. lbs. but A1 says "Finally, to help you with the performance of the A1 head studs, if you use our recommended lube, International Compound #2, you can torque the A1 Ford 6.4 ltr. head studs made from 17-22A to 205 - 210 ft. lbs. This will give you a substantial increase in clamp-load on the stud, compared to the 180 ft. lb. torque you mentioned and should eliminate any further gasket problems.

If you have any questions or we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us any time.

Don Trapp

Director of Sales"

In light of all the facts that have emerged on this particular subject, are we now, still, simply supposed to ASSUME the instructions that come with these studs are the gospel in lieu of the actual manufacture (A1) stating in print otherwise? I think the only way to really put this to bed is a meeting of the two minds, both Tad's and Don's. Do what you want but I'm not assuming anything.

 

[oneturboforme]

Bigpower i have said multible times there thae same product that post you quoted was about torque wrench error and I was trying to say the reason why elites value is lower then what the a1 guy said is elite may be taking that into account... Also I said in the other post I took that artical from that I didnt realize how much force was wasted when torquing and elites could actually have the same or more then arp or vise versia...also i said i was worried since my arps(earlier models) had such a high torque that i was worried if they were stretched to much for re use... Sorry for the confusion I'm just still kinda wondering how much torque they can.handle do to my concerns about the earlier arps

 

[Tree Trimmer]

if tad and don started their "meeting of the minds" using X lube, to achieve their end goal clamping force, and remember, this is a couple years ago, and since then, tad has decided to use a DIFFERENT lube, than he originally went with, then the numbers that don has are null and void.

as tads new lube has different properties, thus will require a different tq number to achieve the same thing.

or through all his mad scientist outtings, creating new and inventive stuff that works, he has decided that a different tq number with the same lube will net better more consistent results, then he's goin to recommend this as well.

now, im not a engineer, or "fast guy parts" designer. im a simple tree trimmer. what i do know, is that it is not always the highest tensile strength, or highest this, or best that, that makes the best product. there are other qualities that go into a product.

if tad is weighing A B C X Y Z, and decides, through another mad scientist moment, that lowering Z will achieve better A, thus a better over all product, then he's goin to do that. if lowering the tq value of the stud, by_____ amount nets a better product, then by all means, he better do it.

the problem we have, as the consumer, is we dont know what all goes into the A B C X Y Z of studs. we know tensile strength, and tq. we dont have all the proprietary data, to judge tads decisions. the technical ones anyways.

we, apparantly though, are goin to judge the hell out the "non-H-11, H-11" decision, it would seem.

 

[WoodBoy]

i still wanna see all these blown hg's with elite studs. lets see, the one's i know of, mike twice... once with a nuetral drop sledpulling on nitrous at dpc (that was classic and nobody could possibly think of blaming studs for that), then once recently at 90 psi, but never had a prob when he ran 11.3x ... , aaron when he had a huge nitrous backfire at suncoast dyno day, and then when he used old studs on his old motor and pegged his 100 psi gauge quick like. just how many passes did he make on the dyno and the track at well over 1200 hp and never have a failure? im sure there's more out there, and there can be other related issues such as block/head surface preparation and torquing. i keep hearing you mention failures, please expand.

Well this is how i kind of see it Mike. I feel like people that were spending $800ish on studs, were in the right state of mind to do things right the first time, getting heads checked, flattened, block smooth, etc. vs those who blew their gaskets, and wanted their truck back running tomorrow on the cheapest budget and threw in a new set of ARPs (because of cost), and some new gaskets and the only thing that was checked was the torque on the studs.

 

[Scottbigred]

FWIW the instructions from the studs I bought from Elite on black friday list a final torque of 195ftlbs not 180.

 

[MINK]

Well this is how i kind of see it Mike. I feel like people that were spending $800ish on studs, were in the right state of mind to do things right the first time, getting heads checked, flattened, block smooth, etc. vs those who blew their gaskets, and wanted their truck back running tomorrow on the cheapest budget and threw in a new set of ARPs (because of cost), and some new gaskets and the only thing that was checked was the torque on the studs.

ARPs because of cost? Nah ARPs because I still havent seen any issues from anyone running them(that warranted a stud issue). I'm one of those that also wanted to do this once so I did drop some coin on my heads - still happy I went with the ARPs.

 

[Mike@MPD]

#1 my truck didnt have studs at the dpc. So thats not it. #2 they blew a long time ago when i had about 3k on them. #3 i have been beating the sh1t out of my truck the past few days and it didnt puke once. I am def happy with the arps

Sent from my Droid Charge

 

[Mike@MPD]

And the truck puked everytime i sprayed it fyi

Sent from my Droid Charge

 

[Mike@MPD]

Esp that 11.3 run

Sent from my Droid Charge

 

[Danbonzo]

if tad and don started their "meeting of the minds" using X lube, to achieve their end goal clamping force, and remember, this is a couple years ago, and since then, tad has decided to use a DIFFERENT lube, than he originally went with, then the numbers that don has are null and void.

as tads new lube has different properties, thus will require a different tq number to achieve the same thing.

or through all his mad scientist outtings, creating new and inventive stuff that works, he has decided that a different tq number with the same lube will net better more consistent results, then he's goin to recommend this as well.

now, im not a engineer, or "fast guy parts" designer. im a simple tree trimmer. what i do know, is that it is not always the highest tensile strength, or highest this, or best that, that makes the best product. there are other qualities that go into a product.

if tad is weighing A B C X Y Z, and decides, through another mad scientist moment, that lowering Z will achieve better A, thus a better over all product, then he's goin to do that. if lowering the tq value of the stud, by_____ amount nets a better product, then by all means, he better do it.

the problem we have, as the consumer, is we dont know what all goes into the A B C X Y Z of studs. we know tensile strength, and tq. we dont have all the proprietary data, to judge tads decisions. the technical ones anyways.

we, apparantly though, are goin to judge the hell out the "non-H-11, H-11" decision, it would seem.

I concur that ultimately the R&D data should be accepted. In my case it was and all is well. So I have no reasoning not to trust or "judge" that decision despite a galactic misnomer literally flying under the radar and apparently noses for years. I am one of the fortunate ones, thankfully, but I can also see how others who are still dealing with trying to keep their heads down (no pun intended) would not be so accepting and more skeptical. Remember one thing that the email reply from Don Trapp that I was quoting (see post #332) was a day or so ago, not years when the research and devolopment started for this product. My final question on this is Don [A1] states their reccomended lube is International Compound #2, what is the supplied lube that comes with the Elite studs and instructions?

 

[Tree Trimmer]

yes dons email is a day old.

but how old is the info he is referring to?

if the product has been out for X years, the r&d had to take place before that.

 

[Powerstroke Racer]

When did A1 get away from using/recommending CMD#3 as lube of choice?

 

[Craig@MFI]

If you were referring to the comment you were about to make, and I quoted below you were correct about yourself being incorrectointlaugh:



^^^this logic is incorrect

When the H-11's are streched to 195 ft-lbs (using the supplied lube only- detroit diesel international compound #2 1#5198563) they are not deformed, they are streched. With the compound we provide, the studs are torqued to 75% of yield. A different lube/compound can alter the accuracy of load, so Elite DOES NOT RECOMMEND using any lube but what we supply (see description above) What lube did MPD use? I'd be willing to bet that it's not Elite spec'd., (probably ARP) and they wonder why the gaskets failed...:morons:

If an H-11, or any other stud for that matter is longer than before it was used the first time, it is deformed, and torqued beyond yield, therefore not going in any engine I would stand behind. Seeing as how ARP's are of a metal with less tensile strength, and torqued to higher specs then of course they'll be deformed. To me, using streched studs is no better than re-using stock head bolts. What do you do with factory TTY bolts after they've been removed? Well, I know what I do with them; throw them in the garbage, and get new ones.

Here's the science behind the 75% of yield, which Elite/ A-1 Technologies bases the torque specs.:
http://www.zerofast.com/torque.htm

I concur that ultimately the R&D data should be accepted. In my case it was and all is well. So I have no reasoning not to trust or "judge" that decision despite a galactic misnomer literally flying under the radar and apparently noses for years. I am one of the fortunate ones, thankfully, but I can also see how others who are still dealing with trying to keep their heads down (no pun intended) would not be so accepting and more skeptical. Remember one thing that the email reply from Don Trapp that I was quoting (see post #332) was a day or so ago, not years when the research and devolopment started for this product. My final question on this is Don [A1] states their reccomended lube is International Compound #2, what is the supplied lube that comes with the Elite studs and instructions?

from waynes post