Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

I bought some ARP main studs for my RB30/26 about 5 years ago from Spool and recently started building the engine.

The block was sent away for machining with the studs and I requested that the mains girdle be torqued to 65-70 ft lbs with ARP Moly lube for the main tunnel honing as per the torque specs in this thread http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/388491-help-what-tension-arp-main-studs/?hl=arp+main+torque#entry6196886

Got the block back and torqued the girdle down to 70ft lbs to measure the bearing clearances with plastigauge. Clearances were fine so final assembled and then found that I needed to cut one of the 3 long studs down to clear the shaft that passes through the RB26 sump. Released the girdle, cut the appropriate stud down and re-assembled back in its hole. Torqued the main bearing ladder back down and one of the shorter studs sheared before it reached 70 ftlbs !

post-4871-0-29073300-1371502721_thumb.jpg

post-4871-0-90047400-1371502830_thumb.jpg

Managed to drill the bugger out but now I'm left wondering why exactly it sheared. The threads in the block were clean. The stud was hand tightened first. ARP moly lube was used in assembly and the main studs were tightened in the appropriate order with a good quality Snap-on torque wrench.

Is it just a case of 70ftlbs is too much or could it be a faulty stud ?

Should I replace the whole set as a precaution or is it safe to just replace the single stud do you think ? If thats the case does anyone know the ARP part number for one of the short studs ? It would appear to be M10 x1.5 where it screws into the block, 105mm long and the nut end would appear to be a different pitch thread - possibly M10 x 1.25

During my searching I've found torque figures of 55, 60, 65, 70 and 73-75 ft lbs for RB ARP main studs so some clarity and real world experiences would be nice.

Edited by mambastu

I'm told by ARP that there isn't an official main stud kit for the RB30 and the stud kit arrived in a bag so Spool must make up a kit and unfortunately there wasn't a spec sheet with them.

Incidentally the 73-75 ft lb torque figure came from your excellent thread at http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/378823-engine-internals-comp-ratios-general-info/?hl=%2Barp+%2Bmain+%2Bstud+%2Btorque if you're able to edit that at all (you may not be able to due to its age) it could help people with future searches. :)

  On 21/06/2013 at 4:38 AM, superben said:

Considering one has snapped due to over tightening, I would definitely be replacing the rest.

this.

I thought they were meant to be torqued to factory specs unless stated?

  On 21/06/2013 at 4:38 AM, superben said:

Considering one has snapped due to over tightening, I would definitely be replacing the rest.

Yes, not worth risking the other studs. I've ordered a new set.

Thanks for your help fellas.

  • 1 month later...

There has been a batch of arp studs floating around snapping. I usually torque them to factory nm +10nm and NEVER have a issue however a couple of years ago we had several engines primarily rb getting snapped studs on factory or below torque settings. We werent the only people to of suffered this. Try getting arp2000 or l-19 studs. Secondly DO NOT CUT that stud down. Have it machined off at a machine shop. TBH ive NEVER had any clearance issues with this stud so many have

When was your torque wrench last calibrated? Just because its a snap on wrench it doesn't mean its even close to being with spec. They are a pain in the ass to calibrate and get parts for too.

Seriously consider having it calibrated again before you do up another set of studs, lest you start breaking rod bolts next.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Structured text and other high level PLC programing languages are not allowable in Functional Safety. They are very difficult to audit. My PLC stuff is almost exclusively oriented towards Burner Management Systems which are a particularly pernicious form of Safety Instrumented System, when implemented in an SPLC. Even the part of the code written to work in the non-safety logic part of the PLC, like with a Siemens S7-1500 series, still needs to be treated as if it was safety code, with access restrictions, code fingreprints and the like. And Allen Bradley can go EABODs. They ae full of shit. They have this whole lie going on where they say if you use a ControlLogix controller and its IO, and then just duplicate the IOs (ie, run in series or parallel depending on type, to try to make it "fail safe") and "use these programming styles and place these restrictions on what you do" that you can achieve SIL2. What a load of crap. They just get away with it because no-one in the US seems to understand the first thing about Functional Safety and carries on as if all they have to do is buy only SIL2 rated equipment and hey presto, it's a SIL2 system. Idiots. /rant
    • If you're really considering leaving it, a great question to ask is, is the magnet going to stick to the sump? The answer to the above is the same answer towards if I'd have any level of comfort leaving it... Personally, based on the cost of a motor if the magnet were to cause damage, I'd be fishing it out either way. Use the methods in here. It fit in through the plug hole, it'll come out.   PS, get a small actuatable claw for a bore scope. OR if you know a vet, they have really cool controllable scopes with hooks on the end. Supposedly they're like playing a video game. Ask if they can acquire you one of their scopes... Engine oil after all is just a different type of lube right? Will only make it easier on the next dog or cat...
    • All other (Boolean) logic functions though, are just built on those blocks above. Which does give you a lot of functionality in logic. It is basing that on using thresholds with analogue signals like GTS alluded to.   Not having things like timers will make it less useful for some of the ramp up logic you'd want, and again, on Haltecs capacity specifically, I'm not across anymore what you can / can't do with different tables.   I'm assuming, with your logic you want to implement, not only do you want your timing safeties, you're wanting to be able to derive the duty cycle for your solenoid, to maintain I'm assuming 175PSi? Or are you using a standalone WMI controller to maintain the DC correct, and you just want the Haltech working out which fuelling maps you should be on?
    • It doesn't seem to follow revs. Oddly it seems to follow TPS a little bit from what I can see, but with some delay a bit. IE end of the graph, when he lets off throttle fully, pressure drops a lot, then slowly builds back up, but rpm is on a nice cruisey drop off. I do agree though, it seems very electrically.
    • I just try to entirely stay away from ladder now unless it's something basic maintained by electricians. Even then and to your point, it mostly ends up being blocks I wrote in structured text.  PLC's are slowly going towards C, C++ and C#. I just wish Allen-Bradley would jump on the bandwagon. 
×
×
  • Create New...