Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Monday December 11, 2017
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Built Motor Discussion

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2014, 02:38 PM   #1326
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 GTFO Lesbic WGN View Post
Thanks Captain Obvious, I explained it was stupid in the original thread, my point is there is less meat in two stud holes due to these relieves, I understand the studs exert compression but still I would feel more comfortable with more aluminum, it is amazing I have not seeing any failures in higher boost applications running 1/2 in studs, would be interesting to run an FEA analysis to see the amount of stress in those areas considering there is only 2mm of material.

We are all in the same quest, a long lasting block, so I am addressing a potential failure point down the road.

I am currently saving for a stronger block and want to make sure all my concerns are addressed.
You obviously did not read my post! The studs job is not to exert compressive forces on the block at the bottom of the stud pocket. The studs when installed are under tension not compression. Because you actually put oil into the stud pocket and then torqued the oem stud down you created a problem that should not even exist and you cracked your block! I guess this was not obvious enough for you.

Questions are always good if they are well thought out questions. Some are not!
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 01-30-2014, 02:42 PM   #1327
Maxwell Power
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 190729
Join Date: Oct 2008
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Marysville, WA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
You obviously did not read my post! The studs job is not to exert compressive forces on the block at the bottom of the stud pocket. The studs when installed are under tension not compression. Because you actually put oil into the stud pocket and then torqued the oem stud down you created a problem that should not even exist and you cracked your block! I guess this was not obvious enough for you.

Questions are always good if they are well thought out questions. Some are not!
cut it out. He understood. He said he hydro'd the stud. If he didn't know that's what he did, he wouldn't have said it.

He was explaining that when he ****ed it up, during the repair he noticed how little material there was. He didn't say that his failure was due to low material.
Maxwell Power is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 02:54 PM   #1328
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

^^^The point is that's why he had the failure and cracked his block. It has nothing to do with stud diameter or this closed deck thread, durability of the block or any power level that we are discussing here. You also have to look at the block from all angles, sure some areas are thin but that does not mean the area that this stud fits into is weak. That is what I was pointing out but he seemingly failed to comprehend!
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 03:00 PM   #1329
Maxwell Power
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 190729
Join Date: Oct 2008
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Marysville, WA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
^^^The point is that's why he had the failure and cracked his block. It has nothing to do with stud diameter or this closed deck thread, durability of the block or any power level that we are discussing here. You also have to look at the block from all angles, sure some areas are thin but that does not mean the area that this stud fits into is weak. That is what I was pointing out but he seemingly failed to comprehend!

Allen,
he said that. You are clearly the one not comprehending here.

His failure had nothing to do with the thickness. He said that.

He personally FEELS that there isn't enough material in that area. And honestly, it's probably a valid point. You are discrediting his point by drawing attention to his failure. His failure was only the method by which he discovered that there was very little material. He did not have a neat cutaway of a block. He broke his, went to fix it and said "HOLY CRAP THERE ISN'T MUCH HERE". Then he mentioned it to us.


He is saying this (FORGET EVERYTHING ELSE) and I'm paraphrasing:

Quote:
Why make the studs bigger when there is very little material in there in the first place?
Why hasn't the lack of material been discussed?
So let's be courteous and address that question instead of saying
Quote:
you're dumb. you screwed up, your point is therefor invalid
His question is valid in this thread because Outfront brought in pictures of larger studs, cutaways and all that. They used this thread as a means of furthering their product, so now we get the chance to quiz them on it.
Maxwell Power is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 03:04 PM   #1330
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxwell Power View Post
cut it out. He understood. He said he hydro'd the stud. If he didn't know that's what he did, he wouldn't have said it.

He was explaining that when he ****ed it up, during the repair he noticed how little material there was. He didn't say that his failure was due to low material.
I've also helped him plenty on his 20G build issues in another forum, he knows this but most here are unaware of that. Yes, I was giving him a bit of a hard time, so shame on me for that!
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 03:14 PM   #1331
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

I think it's pretty clear that the bigger studs offer more strength and holding power because of the bite they give into the block. This is proven, nothing new and Outfront was not the pioneer here. They are bring attention to it again in this thread and those great photos show the added bite their 1/2" studs are giving but also reveal the material thickness in that cross sectional view of the block. I was just trying to point out that the material thickness around the head stud threads is not uniform and there is more material when you look at it from a different cross sectional view.

Last edited by manitou; 01-30-2014 at 04:28 PM.
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 04:24 PM   #1332
Cinic
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 349945
Join Date: Mar 2013
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Tempe, AZ
Vehicle:
2015 WRX
GBP

Default

Has there ever been a failure from a head stud pulling out a chunk of the block with head studs of any size? I know I've seen instances of the threads failing...but not the block itself.
Cinic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 04:50 PM   #1333
outfrontmotorsports
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 220204
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Buena Park, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinic View Post
Has there ever been a failure from a head stud pulling out a chunk of the block with head studs of any size? I know I've seen instances of the threads failing...but not the block itself.
The results are in, we just performed the ultimate head stud torture test on uncut video (soon to be uploaded).

we tested a stock fastner with a snap-on digital torque wrench with torque recall.

the stock fastner gave way at 125ftlbs. at this point the stud felt like it was deforming/growing (it did not pull out)

ARP2000, this fastner torqued to 166ftlbs (from memory) when the fastner had no more to give. it also appeared to be stretching

625+ this fastner torqued to 185 ftlbs when it wouldn't go any more, it also started to stretch

this shows that these two studs above are really at their max torque (75% of yield)

The New Outfront 1/2" head stud torqued to 201ftlbs and then our socket broke. getting a new socket we torqued it to 233ftlbs, the fastner still felt strong and no feeling of stretch.

torque facts from ARP
11mm ARP2000= 15,700 pounds clamping at 90ftlbs cost $220 220ksi
11mm ARP625+= 18,000 pounds of clamping at 100ftlbs cost $520 260ksi
Outfront 1/2= 20,500 pounds of clamping at 140ftlbs cost $480 $220ksi

Our studs do require block and head machining that we can do for $270

there is zero reason for spending the money on timeserting the block for 11mm studs. it is clear that there is no "pullout" of any stud before the yield was met or at 233ftlbs!

we will start a new "stud torture test" thread
Outfront

Last edited by outfrontmotorsports; 01-30-2014 at 06:25 PM.
outfrontmotorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 05:01 PM   #1334
25rsti
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 166324
Join Date: Dec 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: BLOD in BLOD out
Default

In for those results. I wish I could have had the machining done to use those 1/2 studs. I guess I'll be using the 625+ for now.
25rsti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 05:03 PM   #1335
m.bryant
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 310077
Join Date: Feb 2012
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Pleasant Hill, IA
Vehicle:
2007 Legacy GT SpecB
DGM

Default

I'm loving it....I feel even better about my planned boost levels!!

So the failure point of the 1/2" is still unknown? I know we are beyond the point of reason already but inquiring minds want to know
m.bryant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 05:10 PM   #1336
jnorth85
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 76785
Join Date: Dec 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: DSM iowa
Vehicle:
2000 580Whp The RSTI
SRP

Default

Awesome! Glad I stepped up to the 1/2" studs on my build!
jnorth85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 05:11 PM   #1337
Crystal_Imprezav
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 84105
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: I'm a Newbie
Vehicle:
2005 Super Slow STi
CGM

Default

In for the video. I would like to see what kind of distortion that kind of force puts on the main bearings. Up to 100 ft/lbs. I have not noticed any measurable difference, however I have heard, when you get past 120ft/lbs it starts moving stuff around.
Crystal_Imprezav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 05:21 PM   #1338
outfrontmotorsports
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 220204
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Buena Park, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by m.bryant View Post
I'm loving it....I feel even better about my planned boost levels!!

So the failure point of the 1/2" is still unknown? I know we are beyond the point of reason already but inquiring minds want to know
More info: we went to take the fastners out of the block. the 1/2 unit unscrewed by the allen at the tip of the stud.

but guess what?...........................both of the 11mm units could not come out of the block using the allen (or should I say my allen started to strip out

beings that these studs used in this test are junk, we just put a stud removing tool on them to get them out. they did not come out easy and felt like the threads in the block were not OK any more.

So Chris (KillerBee) there is your answer: threads pulling out of the block with stock 11 mm threads appears to start happening at 140-170 ftlbs. pull out of the 1/2"ers are unknown at this point. it also proved that there is no weakness in the block (at least at 233ftlbs) I might add we did find a weakness with our kit. The 1/2" 12point nut did not move on our stud. this test damaged the nut!

Outfront
outfrontmotorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 05:59 PM   #1339
outfrontmotorsports
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 220204
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Buena Park, CA
Default

The video will take over two hours to up load. we will be posting future posts regarding the studs in this thread: http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2595764

Outfront
outfrontmotorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 07:18 PM   #1340
user1029
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 57064
Join Date: Mar 2004
Vehicle:
2008 STi IAG built
HTA86 E85 Kel272s Cos IM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outfrontmotorsports View Post
The results are in, we just performed the ultimate head stud torture test on uncut video (soon to be uploaded).

we tested a stock fastner with a snap-on digital torque wrench with torque recall.

the stock fastner gave way at 125ftlbs. at this point the stud felt like it was deforming/growing (it did not pull out)

ARP2000, this fastner torqued to 166ftlbs (from memory) when the fastner had no more to give. it also appeared to be stretching

625+ this fastner torqued to 185 ftlbs when it wouldn't go any more, it also started to stretch

this shows that these two studs above are really at their max torque (75% of yield)

The New Outfront 1/2" head stud torqued to 201ftlbs and then our socket broke. getting a new socket we torqued it to 233ftlbs, the fastner still felt strong and no feeling of stretch.

torque facts from ARP
11mm ARP2000= 15,700 pounds clamping at 90ftlbs cost $220 220ksi
11mm ARP625+= 18,000 pounds of clamping at 100ftlbs cost $520 260ksi
Outfront 1/2= 20,500 pounds of clamping at 140ftlbs cost $480 $220ksi

Our studs do require block and head machining that we can do for $270

there is zero reason for spending the money on timeserting the block for 11mm studs. it is clear that there is no "pullout" of any stud before the yield was met or at 233ftlbs!

we will start a new "stud torture test" thread
Outfront
what about MAP H11 studs?
user1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 07:24 PM   #1341
Crystal_Imprezav
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 84105
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: I'm a Newbie
Vehicle:
2005 Super Slow STi
CGM

Default

Probably the same at 625's and L19's.
Crystal_Imprezav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 08:30 PM   #1342
juanmedina
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 133146
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SC
Vehicle:
07 FPgreen [email protected]
WRX VF39+E85 12.0, 121mph

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crystal_Imprezav View Post
Probably the same at 625's and L19's.
I think they are the same as L19's, so a little less than 625's.

It doesn't matter the Outfront Motorsports are the clear winner
juanmedina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 08:53 PM   #1343
user1029
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 57064
Join Date: Mar 2004
Vehicle:
2008 STi IAG built
HTA86 E85 Kel272s Cos IM

Default

Seems like Outfront closed deck + their headstuds in the future for me

what headgaskets are you guys using?
user1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:01 PM   #1344
jnorth85
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 76785
Join Date: Dec 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: DSM iowa
Vehicle:
2000 580Whp The RSTI
SRP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by user1029 View Post
Seems like Outfront closed deck + their headstuds in the future for me

what headgaskets are you guys using?
Outfront typically run the JE pro seal head gaskets
jnorth85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:02 PM   #1345
user1029
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 57064
Join Date: Mar 2004
Vehicle:
2008 STi IAG built
HTA86 E85 Kel272s Cos IM

Default

nice I'll keep that in mind
user1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:08 PM   #1346
25rsti
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 166324
Join Date: Dec 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: BLOD in BLOD out
Default

That recipe sounds like WINNING to me.
25rsti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:19 PM   #1347
outfrontmotorsports
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 220204
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Buena Park, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
This is what's important, resistance to stretching, not clamping force. If clamping force greatly exceeds what the head is designed for it will actually warp the head upon tightening... Or what is actually over tightening.

If the diameter can be increased without and negatives (like a loss in pull out strength, or thread strength), this is preferred. With hardened fasteners its always a balaning act between toughness and brittleness. Strongest = brittle, less strong = tougher.
A fastners' clamping force is only determined by the tensile strength (material)
and the cross section of the fastner, therefore the resistance to stretch is directly proportional to clamping force, are you saying they are different?

I think the balancing act you referred to is when the diameter stays the same and you are trying to maximize the fastner within your limits, however going to the larger stud (as long as there are no side effects to block cracking under load and proven negative today) allows for
1 more thread engagement
2 larger thread diameter (more surface contact)
3 if only torqued to 120ftlbs then the fastner is being used at 60% of yield
unlike those running at 80% yield,

So you tell me if my fastner and the 625+ were both torqued to 100ftlbs,
the one at 80% yield and the other at 60% which would be more likely to stretch? in theory they should hold the same. however where ours shine is when you need to go over 100ftlbs. It is not proven yet how high you could torque a head without distortion, it's possible that that torque could be 140ftlbs and we never knew because the only fastners available could only be torqued to 100. the argument of not torqueing the heads any tighter than stock because it might warp the head was more likey because the fastners couldn't handle anything more--not that the head couldn't.

It will be interesting to see more testing, we will gear up to see the effects on the mains when a head is torqued to 140. of course this would be a candidate for ARP case studs before the test is done.

Outfront
outfrontmotorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:28 PM   #1348
user1029
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 57064
Join Date: Mar 2004
Vehicle:
2008 STi IAG built
HTA86 E85 Kel272s Cos IM

Default

With the outfront head studs being so strong, is there any need to O-ring their closed deck block if I want to run 37psi?
user1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:35 PM   #1349
jnorth85
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 76785
Join Date: Dec 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: DSM iowa
Vehicle:
2000 580Whp The RSTI
SRP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by user1029 View Post
With the outfront head studs being so strong, is there any need to O-ring their closed deck block if I want to run 37psi?
No not really, outfront typically does not o ring.
jnorth85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:43 PM   #1350
user1029
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 57064
Join Date: Mar 2004
Vehicle:
2008 STi IAG built
HTA86 E85 Kel272s Cos IM

Default

^^^very nice, I'll definitely go this direction by the end of this year/next year (when I run my current built block to 60k or if it fails whichever first lol). I'm just waiting for more guinea pigs to report back on their Outfront closed deck, all positive reviews so far
user1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2017 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2017, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.