H-11s vs ARP's

[oneturboforme]

Just had to bring that post again didn't you Craig..... Lol I belive by the way he put it that he has used othelube on a1 studs before.. like he was questioning why they use this now atleast thats how i took it. If this is the question then people change there lube quite a lot... Like a posted before up to 80% of torque can be wasted so maybe they found a lube that doesnt lose such a big percentage

 

[Craig@MFI]

I was just posting it becuase someone ask what kind of lube was supposed to be used

 

[bigrpowr]

Esp that 11.3 run

Sent from my Droid Charge

Musta been installer error. Aaron makes a hell of a lot more power than you and his lasted way longer, obviously.

 

[Craig@MFI]

Guess idk how to do headgaskets than?

 

[oneturboforme]

Maybe its the east coast air that is causinghead gasket problems LOL

 

[bigrpowr]

Guess idk how to do headgaskets than?

I guess not. LOL

Maybe its the east coast air that is causinghead gasket problems LOL

I think it's the east coast hair causing those issues.

 

[oneturboforme]

Good thing im on the west side.. I was worried for a second that high horse power rigs with high boost and back pressure blow head gaslets easier, now the i know its just a east coast deal Maybe ill throw the srock bolts back in...

 

[bigrpowr]

 

[Danbonzo]

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.

Now you can understand why I suggested a meeting of the minds

I disagree whole-heartedly with that last statement. R&D is a process based on trial and error. I believe the goal should be improvement not merely good enough. Maybe the product was introduced years ago, but every set of Elite or ARP studs for that matter sold today weren't produced years ago.

 

[Tree Trimmer]

as noted by elites change in torque specs.

dons r&d should have ended, upon the final creation and decisions needed to get said head studs to the market. don knows that he needs to make this stud, to this criteria, to meet this spec. he had to have some quality time with tad to get the details ironed out, on just what tad wanted. and all don had to do is turn them out.

tad's r&d should be a never ending process. as new lubes come out, or real world experience doesnt reflect what paper said would work, or this, or that.

this is why i say, r&d had to take place earlier, and this would be what don is referencing.

next......

 

[Black_Lightning91]

Maybe im retarded but Tad Stated Detroit Diesel "International" Compound #2 and A1 suggested International Compound #2. Should tad have stated it Detroit Diesel, International Compound #2. I have never seen this point made clear and i have read this whole thing 3 times but so many posts and bs with no info my head is hurting so I may have missed it. Since none of us know if Elite is actually suggesting a different compound then A-1 maybe we need more research. So if they are the same who's torque specs are correct? If A-1 states 210 or so to reach 75% yield with their studs then it is 210 to reach that % yield (saying both lubes are the same) any less would be a lower clamping force. So I would like someone to find if the Detroit and International lubes named about are actually different. Instead of assuming they are different (which is why this thread exists) so we know based on facts and not an opinion.

 

[Black_Lightning91]

This is what I have been using for a long time on rod bolts. It is very slippery and will change torque readings so a stretch gauge should be used. Must be sourced from a Detroit Diesel dealer.

International Compound #2, GM part, 1#5198563

At least ARP won't be changing it.

Terry

Copied from this thread http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=24843&start=15

Just to kinda back why we need more research on this. Maybe International compound #2 is actually a Detroit Diesel name for their product.

 

[BFT]

It's the same thing, Detroit makes it. It's what is called "peanut butter"

 

[Black_Lightning91]

How much difference in clamping force are we talking between A-1 torque specs and Elites? which one is 75% of yield? It was stated that Elite and A-1 came to the torque number to provide 75% of yield but they have suggested two completely different numbers. There is no way they both can be 75%. Just trying to understand why Elite is stating one trq number while the manufacture of the stud's claims another with the same lube and Elites being the one leading to less of a clamping force. Since craig can't install studs for crap but yet his arp's made out of the same material (maybe slightly different composition or processing) is apparently holding in now both trucks. This thread was started due to "H-11" studs failing and going to ARP because of their luck with them in another truck. The only reason provided for the Elites studs failing so far has been:1 they are not H-11 tool steel but made of the same material as ARP 2 Craig performed the install incorrectly. Yet his ARP's don't fail, maybe ARP studs are more idiot proof and everyone should buy those because improper installation won't cause them to puke while Elites studs are screwed. So Like oneturboforme had said way way back at the top, Is Elites final torque values too low to provide a good lasting seal? In my eyes if it was too low it would: 1 make it easier for the heads to life due to higher cyl pressures 2 give even more stretch room and allow head to lift further from the block/gasket 3. allow moderate stretching at lower pressures causing accelerated metal fatigue of the studs. I am no expert just stating my concerns hopign answers are provided by those more knowledgable in this matter. Thanks

 

[Danbonzo]

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?

Corrected to post #130

 

[Danbonzo]

Maybe im retarded but Tad Stated Detroit Diesel "International" Compound #2 and A1 suggested International Compound #2. Should tad have stated it Detroit Diesel, International Compound #2. I have never seen this point made clear and i have read this whole thing 3 times but so many posts and bs with no info my head is hurting so I may have missed it. Since none of us know if Elite is actually suggesting a different compound then A-1 maybe we need more research. So if they are the same who's torque specs are correct? If A-1 states 210 or so to reach 75% yield with their studs then it is 210 to reach that % yield (saying both lubes are the same) any less would be a lower clamping force. So I would like someone to find if the Detroit and International lubes named about are actually different. Instead of assuming they are different (which is why this thread exists) so we know based on facts and not an opinion.

It is claimed that with all things being equal, i.e. lube, stud material that 180ft/lbs. achieves 75% of yield. Therefore the 210ft/lbs. would increase that force to 87.5% of total yield. The suggestion of Don's quote (post #130) is to HELP with the performance of the stud. Is the only reason 180 ft. lbs. is spec'd by Elite is to make them more reusable when we can discern from the actual math that the holding power and the stretch is obviously greater at 210 ft. lbs.?

 

[Craig@MFI]

I guess not. LOL



I think it's the east coast hair causing those issues.

Guess you'll have to come out and teach me

 

[oneturboforme]

Black lighting... I think the pressure isnt stretching the studs I belive(only my thoughts) that what may cause failers is the clamping pressure at 180 but who really know without it being tested... But the clamping force at 180 with studs has to be atleast double stock. Due to thread pitch alone

 

[Scottbigred]

Maybe its changed in the past two months since I bought my studs but like i said earlier the instructions that came with my studs list 195ft.lbs. as the final torque specs. Not 180

 

[Dustball8504]

Hate to drag this back up but I now see Elite has H11 studs listed along with the 625s, 1722s and ARPs. Talk about options lol