When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Tech / General EngineIs your car making a strange sound or won't start? Thinking of adding power with a new combination? Need other technical information or engine specific advice? Don't see another board for your problem? Post it here!
Reminds me of a story. I was helping a friend and his brother was also over. My advice was to do it one way and his bro another. Then his bro throws out do it my way because I'm an engineer! My reply, no your Not But I Am! Dude forgot we went to the same college at the same time!
Point isn't who is an engineer really, vorteciroc or me. The point is sometimes people are just confident because of their position because my friends bro wasn't an engineer But still was a successful enough programmer and I was just doing w/e at the time so he forgot. He was so confident that he could just say how to do it and it would be accepted by his bro because of his success. Great example of this is the corvette forums, lots of those confident types but no matter how good you argue or w/e your position, proof is Proof!
And not the kind of results were you make what you need/want to be the answer.
I've always kept an open mind and never like to be absolutely 100% So for me the Proof is in those who have done it! Not the few that failed for some unknown reason.
I love how people quote someone from GM and assumptions on the internet means "PERIOD END OF STORY" when it directly contradicts the engineers from the AERA that come up with procedures and the company that manufactures the bolts.
Classic.
And posting links to $10 bolt kits? lol Gee, I wonder why those stretch... and those listings could be making the assumption that they're TTY when they're really just TTA like FelPro says.
Who do you believe? Someone selling something or the company that makes them?
If i believed everything that the schmuck at O'Reilly's said, I'd be in sad shape.
Last edited by Bills87IROC; 12-19-2022 at 09:36 PM.
My 02' Gen3 LM7 got TTY oem head bolts and MLS OEM gasket. I re-used TTY bolts on one head out of curiosity. Felt great. So, one head brand new TTY, one head re-used TTY. 50,000 miles no issues with either head 600rwhp daily driver. But, I know how to keep cylinder pressure down at high output. I know how to keep the engine cool. I know how a bolt should feel while being torqued.
I love how people quote someone from GM and assumptions on the internet means "PERIOD END OF STORY" when it directly contradicts the engineers from the AERA that come up with procedures and the company that manufactures the bolts.
Classic.
And posting links to $10 bolt kits? lol Gee, I wonder why those stretch... and those listings could be making the assumption that they're TTY when they're really just TTA like FelPro says.
Who do you believe? Someone selling something or the company that makes them?
If i believed everything that the schmuck at O'Reilly's said, I'd be in sad shape.
AERA bulletin is for 96-99, NOTHING newer! Newer being 2000-2006 GM truck applications, marine, industrial, crate engine, etc. Remember as I said the engine these bolts came out of is much newer, has a 2018 serial code.
I was over at the shop a while ago. Since this thing is a junk block anyway. I put the used head gasket on the block. Set the cylinder head on. Then put those used bolts into the block. Using the GM/Mercruiser/Kohler alternative method of 22/44/66 ft/lbs they claim you can do in-frame rather than the TTA procedure. Out of those 17 used bolts, 5 of them would not reach 60 ft/lbs on the digital reading, they kept stretching, very obvious feel of the bolts yielding, 2 of those 5 snapped in half!!! Thats right 5 of them would not go to the specified torque value of this procedure and 2 of them snapped in half. When one broke I moved to the next one, as I said, junk block anyway. I checked the calibration of the torque wrenches before testing. Yes, I have a torque wrench calibration tool. Finally, I put on my 1/2" digital torque wrench adapter in addition to the wrench itself. The torque value was as precise as I could make it. I have seen some guys post that these bolts should go to 100 ft/lbs without yielding and even possibly pull the block threads without yielding. That would be true if they were not TTY! Tomorrow will be the main cap bolt attempt, since they too are claimed to be TTY. I already have the rotating assembly out of the block, so it will be throw the caps on it and go. If the bolts break, so what. One of the two that broke was the short bolt I posted the picture of too. Further enforcing the idea that it was stretched as GM built it.
Cylinder Head Bolt - Optional Method All Bolts In Sequence First Pass: 26lbs Second Pass: 44lbs Final Pass: 66lbs
So, like I've been saying all along, the factory Vortec bolts are NOT TTY...
Thanks for the clarification.
It's also interesting that these bolts are snapping right and left when people have been reusing LS TTY head bolts over and over and over and they're not snapping.
It's almost as if it's an isolated incident.
Makes one wonder.
Last edited by Bills87IROC; 12-19-2022 at 11:29 PM.
My 2cents. I hate the new TTY bolts.
I try to measure stretch on every lower end bolt I can when going together.
I hate them for the sheer fact that they feel like they are going to fail before you even get to the angle specified. It is not a natural feeling you want to feel tightening a fastener to feel it stretching as you tighten it. Granted I get the idea of tightening a fastener is to stretch it. It is that feeling of going from the elastic to plastic phase that I do not like. I have tightened enough of both to be able to feel the difference.
So, like I've been saying all along, the factory Vortec bolts are NOT TTY...
Thanks for the clarification.
I do not know where you are getting the idea that 99 is the end of a factory Vortec. They came in the Tahoe until 2000, the fullsize vans until 2002, the Isuzu NPR until 2003 and I believe another year or two in some Workhorse chassis. Then GM kept turning them out by probably the millions and are still building them. The engine that was in my 1997 van from 2006 until a couple of years ago was cast in 2005. Those are all factory GM Vortecs.
I do not know where you are getting the idea that 99 is the end of a factory Vortec.
I don't recall ever saying it was. 99% of the vortec engines people pull are from 96/99 trucks. Rarely are they pulled from vans because they're such a PITA.
If you're going to make a blanket statement that "Factory Vortec Head Bolts ARE TTY", you need to revise it.
First, you kept saying that ALL of them were. Now, you're finally conceding that it doesn't apply to 96/99.
The links you posted were for cheap aftermarket bolts, not factory installed stuff.
Now you're saying all these bolts won't hold torque after being reused once and are snapping.
That's not the experience of thousands of people that have reused TTY bolts, not that i would recommend that.
I'm calling bullshit until I see a video of you or someone else trying to reuse one of these bolts and it snapping off under 65 ft/lbs.
So, like I've been saying all along, the factory Vortec bolts are NOT TTY...
It's also interesting that these bolts are snapping right and left when people have been reusing LS TTY head bolts over and over and over and they're not snapping.
It's almost as if it's an isolated incident.
Makes one wonder.
It is not an isolated incident. Reading though tons of posts, reading through reviews, I found dozens of people with the same issue of snapping these bolts at less than 65 ft/lbs. Basically anything newer than 96 that has these bolts have reports of issues from them. New or Re-Used as well.
Two people had them break in the Summit Review section alone. The Felpro ES72856 listing on Amazon also had 2 or 3 people review that they had one break as well. I do not feel it is some fluke. Then again make thousands of units of a product and there are bound to be some that do not meet the grade.
I don't recall ever saying it was. 99% of the vortec engines people pull are from 96/99 trucks. Rarely are they pulled from vans because they're such a PITA.
If you're going to make a blanket statement that "Factory Vortec Head Bolts ARE TTY", you need to revise it.
First, you kept saying that ALL of them were. Now, you're finally conceding that it doesn't apply to 96/99.
The links you posted were for cheap aftermarket bolts, not factory installed stuff.
Now you're saying all these bolts won't hold torque after being reused once and are snapping.
That's not the experience of thousands of people that have reused TTY bolts, not that i would recommend that.
I'm calling bullshit until I see a video of you or someone else trying to reuse one of these bolts and it snapping off under 65 ft/lbs.
Give me a sawzall, a junk van and in 10 minutes a Van engine is no harder to pull than a truck. I have actually bought a couple of dirt cheap 6.0L vans 10+ years ago at co-parts because people would not buy them. They bid some completely destroyed 2500/3500 6.0L trucks up 2-3 times what the vans I picked up sold for. I miss $800.00 running lower mileage 6.0/4L80E van combinations.
I never said it did not apply to 96-99. I said the AERA bulletin was written for 96-99. Does not mean their information is correct or that the head bolts do not stretch. You do realize that those bolts I listed as well as the GM bolts are probably all being made in the same factory in Taiwan, Korea or perhaps even China now. These companies buy them by the container load, package them as a set and sell them to you. I can buy the Long, Mid, Short bolts by increments of 250-500 if I want to. In those increments they are dirt cheap, just the way GM buys them too. That being said I am sure GM, Victor Reinz, Mahle, Felpro and the like buy these bolts in 100,000+ unit increments and probably pay $0.50 a bolt.
There were LT1 guys doing head swaps breaking these bolts in the late 90s and early 2000s left and right on the 96+ LT1s. I have put 20 sets of ARP head bolts in LT1s nearly 20 years ago. I had enough hate for those 4th gens after working on many of them and I had my 95, I vowed never to own another.
In 20+ years of rebuilding probably 1000+ Vortec 305's and 350's, I've yet to experience what you're saying, but then again, I'm talking factory stuff from 96/99 trucks but there have been a few newer Tahoes and Suburbans in the mix. I don't think I've ever even had a customer with a van wanting an engine. Usually my customers with the work vans would just scrap them. The 4x4 trucks on the other hand, those were worth fixing and putting back into service.
It just boggles my mind that you or anyone else would snap these bolts in two when others have been reusing them, specifically TTY bolts, and not having the same issue. The only time I've ever seen someone snap one is when they're trying to take it out and it's corroded to the block.
But you are right about some things not meeting specs. Out of millions and millions of items, there will no doubt be some that fail.
I never said it did not apply to 96-99. I said the AERA bulletin was written for 96-99. Does not mean their information is correct or that the head bolts do not stretch.
You know what, you're probably right. You know more than the engineers that do all the testing and come up with the procedures followed by the automotive industry.
You know what, you're probably right. You know more than the engineers that do all the testing and come up with the procedures followed by the automotive industry.
You know something. As an independent that does this stuff, I want it to stay together. My labor is worth $125 hour. That is what I bill when I do heavy line work for ANYONE. It is a false economy for me to reuse a $55 set of bolts that can create issues in chassis on vehicle. A wrecker is $100 to hookup and something like $5 a loaded mile. Then add in a new set of head gaskets, new head bolts anyway, sealers, coolant, oil, filter, shop supplies, then 4-6 hours having to R&R a head, clean everything all while eating the labor bill from lost productivity as well as the parts, worry about coolant contamination in the bearings and rings. Then factor in my reputation if someone had a failure from something preventable. I bill the customer for a set of head bolts and move on. In fact I do not even like doing mechanical repairs at this point for people. I make far more money buying a decent vehicle non-running, repairing the mechanical problem, and flipping it for a good profit.
Tuning is $100/hr for street tuning plus the software license. If I have to diagnose a mechanical issue it is $100/hr until it is resolved, or they can bring it to me again. I know my way around this stuff very well. I am not going to do something for free or hack my way through it to save $55.
You know something. As an independent that does this stuff, I want it to stay together. My labor is worth $125 hour. That is what I bill when I do heavy line work for ANYONE. It is a false economy for me to reuse a $55 set of bolts that can create issues in chassis on vehicle. A wrecker is $100 to hookup and something like $5 a mile. Then add in a new set of head gaskets, new head bolts anyway, sealers, coolant, oil, filter, shop supplies, then 4-6 hours having to R&R a head, clean everything, worry about coolant contamination in the bearings and rings. Then factor in my reputation if someone had a failure from something preventable. I bill the customer for a set of head bolts and move on.
And you'd think that being in business since 1985, and rebuilding these Vortec motors since the early 2000's when they started getting miles on them, we would have had numerous head gasket issues but haven't... I mean if what you're saying is FACT and Felpro and the AERA are WRONG, out of the thousands of these engines we've rebuilt, you'd think at least ONE would have failed but hasn't.
In 20+ years of rebuilding probably 1000+ Vortec 305's and 350's, I've yet to experience what you're saying, but then again, I'm talking factory stuff from 96/99 trucks but there have been a few newer Tahoes and Suburbans in the mix. I don't think I've ever even had a customer with a van wanting an engine. Usually my customers with the work vans would just scrap them. The 4x4 trucks on the other hand, those were worth fixing and putting back into service.
I have a feeling that in the next few years you may very well see some customers wanting to put an engine in their vans. GM is dropping the Express/Savanna in a year or two and the only ones they are building now have the 4.3 Ecotec V6 in them. I have bought 2-3 nice conversion vans over the years, put an engine or transmission into them and sold them for a decent profit. I bought a 2002 Astro for $500 non-running. Ended up having to put a fuel pump in it and drove it for 6 months before selling it for $3,500.
Reusing bolts that are NOT torque to yield isn't being a "hack".
From what you've said previously, even the main bolts are 1 time use and that is ridiculous.
Re-using bolts that I have seen fail multiple times is being a hack. I have said the same thing since 2005. I even went against my own advice helping my own brother when the Vortec head small block in his C10 blew a head gasket. Halfway through the torque pattern at 65 ft/lbs one of the long bolts snapped in half. I had to pull the head back off, wasting time and buying a head gasket in the process.
It is in the newer documentation and not ridiculous when it is true. At some point GM changed the main cap bolt design on the newer engines. I do not know when, but it has been changed.
And you'd think that being in business since 1985, and rebuilding these Vortec motors since the early 2000's when they started getting miles on them, we would have had numerous head gasket issues but haven't... I mean if what you're saying is FACT and Felpro and the AERA are WRONG, out of the thousands of these engines we've rebuilt, you'd think at least ONE would have failed but hasn't.
Weird!
Maybe I need to buy a lottery ticket!
What shocks me more is that out of these 1,000s of engines you claim to have built that are Vortecs with 34 bolts in each, you have not broken one bolt torquing them. I mean 1,000 engines would be 34,000 bolts, 2,000 engines would be 68,000, 3,000 engines would be 102,000 re-used bolts out of engines that had who knows what done to them to bring them to the point of failure. I have seen multiple examples of these engines overheated to the point of lifting the heads from bolt stretch or the bolts stretching enough to allow the head gasket to blow between 3&5 and 4&6. Did you re-use those bolts as well? I am calling BS myself on your statement here. I think you better buy that lottery ticket because you have better odds of being struck by lightning than not having one of these bolts fail on you.
I did failure analysis for an extended warranty company for a while. I went to various shops and dealerships and looked at broke down stuff for a living. Basically, I went in and looked at what the technicians were claiming caused an engine or a transmission failure and gathered information to determine if it was a warranty issue or not. Small stuff the company would fix no questions, but major components had to be inspected. I looked at dozens of these engines torn down to the point of failure in the field as well as many others. I am sure you see a lot of this as well if you are rebuilding the things. As I said what do you do when you have one that has overheated to the point of cracking the head or blown the gasket between the cylinders. Do you just re-use those bolts too because the AERA bulletin states that you can. SMDH!
What shocks me more is that out of these 1,000s of engines you claim to have built that are Vortecs with 34 bolts in each, you have not broken one bolt torquing them. I mean 1,000 engines would be 34,000 bolts, 2,000 engines would be 68,000, 3,000 engines would be 102,000 re-used bolts out of engines that had who knows what done to them to bring them to the point of failure. I have seen multiple examples of these engines overheated to the point of lifting the heads from bolt stretch or the bolts stretching enough to allow the head gasket to blow between 3&5 and 4&6. Did you re-use those bolts as well? I am calling BS myself on your statement here. I think you better buy that lottery ticket because you have better odds of being struck by lightning than not having one of these bolts fail on you.
Never, ever broken a head bolt reusing a factory vortec head bolt.
Have I reused head bolts from severely overheated engines? No. Those aren't even good cores for rebuilding since the heads are cracked, the decks severely distorted, etc.
The ONLY head bolt I've ever broken was trying to remove a rusted head bolt on a 3400 years ago.
From what you've said, even the new bolts won't hold torque and are breaking which doesn't pass the smell test.
If you're breaking so many bolts, you're not doing something right or flat out lying.
As I said what do you do when you have one that has overheated to the point of cracking the head or blown the gasket between the cylinders. Do you just re-use those bolts too because the AERA bulletin states that you can. SMDH!
The AERA says the following:
"The cylinder head mounting bolts may be reused if they are not damaged in the threads or show neck-down or stretch condition. The bolts should be thoroughly cleaned of sealer before inspection and installation."
Maybe you should go back and actually read what is stated instead of just going off half cocked and blabbering whatever comes to mind.
Never, ever broken a head bolt reusing a factory vortec head bolt.
Have I reused head bolts from severely overheated engines? No. Those aren't even good cores for rebuilding since the heads are cracked, the decks severely distorted, etc.
The ONLY head bolt I've ever broken was trying to remove a rusted head bolt on a 3400 years ago.
From what you've said, even the new bolts won't hold torque and are breaking which doesn't pass the smell test.
If you're breaking so many bolts, you're not doing something right or flat out lying.
I said I have seen a new bolt break when it was torqued initially. I recently had 2 bolts break after the engine had run for over a year. Those had washers under them that I was not completely familiar with and did not know to watch for the washers spinning under the bolt head.
I am not lying at all and definitely not doing anything wrong in the process. I have built enough small blocks with decent hardware that actually worked. As I stated several times that stretched bolt I took a picture of was not one that I installed. That was a GM installed bolt. I put that same used bolt back in the same block and snapped it off with ease well under 60 ft/lbs.
The GM dealership had it listed in their computer in the parts lookup catalog back in 2005 that these bolts were TTY and one time use. It was in the application notes. Said something like Short, 7/16-14, TTY blah, blah. I said back then in 2005. Also had the same statement from Autozone from Felpro back then as well. Manufacturer recomeends head bolt replacement. Its nothing new and not like something I have just made up.
It takes a lot to break a bolt on the spot, I mean waaaaaay out of bounds to snap one off.
Not these TTY bolts. They snap pretty darn easily. I mean easily enough that re-using them has always worried me. I know what 65 ft/lbs feels like with my educated elbow. These get mushy around 50-60 ft/lbs and just twist right off.
I said I have seen a new bolt break when it was torqued initially. I recently had 2 bolts break after the engine had run for over a year. Those had washers under them that I was not completely familiar with and did not know to watch for the washers spinning under the bolt head.
If those washers are lubed, they act like bearings and you are severely stressing the bolt...
That's why Felpro and the AERA have gone to Torque To Angle on certain bolts.
If you are relying on the friction between the head of the bolt and a lubed washer, it's going to over-torque the bolt and it WILL SNAP.
That's called IMPROPER assembly...
So like I said before, if you're breaking so many bolts, you just revealed why.
If you use the Torque To Angle method, even if that washer is lubed, it doesn't matter because you're only twisting the bolt a certain amount, not keep on twisting and twisting HOPING to get the right reading from a torque wrench OR the bolt entirely fails.
"The cylinder head mounting bolts may be reused if they are not damaged in the threads or show neck-down or stretch condition. The bolts should be thoroughly cleaned of sealer before inspection and installation."
Maybe you should go back and actually read what is stated instead of just going off half cocked and blabbering whatever comes to mind.
Since you want to see where these bolts fail, have tons of blocks sitting around and think I am doing something wrong. Take a few of these used bolts. Shove them in one of those trashed cores. Then on camera torque a bolt to ultimate failure. If these bolts are as strong as some think, I want to see 80 ft/lbs or 100 ft/lbs or some threads pulled. I bet not a single one makes it about 75-80 ft/lbs and would go so far to say that they will fail even sooner than that.
Since you want to see where these bolts fail, have tons of blocks sitting around and think I am doing something wrong. Take a few of these used bolts. Shove them in one of those trashed cores. Then on camera torque a bolt to ultimate failure. If these bolts are as strong as some think, I want to see 80 ft/lbs or 100 ft/lbs or some threads pulled. I bet not a single one makes it about 75-80 ft/lbs and would go so far to say that they will fail even sooner than that.
I don't need to see anything. You've already revealed why you're snapping bolts.. INCORRECT assembly procedure.
No wonder you're breaking them.
Even ARP was seeing failures because people were lubing up the under heads of the bolts and both sides of the washer.
That 65 ft/lbs takes into account the friction between the head of the bolt and the cylinder head.
If you lube that up, it's not going to give you an accurate torque reading.
ARP finally had to come out and tell people to NOT lube both sides of the washer and even went as far as making one side serrated so it wouldn't spin and throw off the readings.
Last edited by Bills87IROC; 12-20-2022 at 01:21 AM.
If those washers are lubed, they act like bearings and you are severely stressing the bolt...
That's why Felpro and the AERA have gone to Torque To Angle on certain bolts.
If you are relying on the friction between the head of the bolt and a lubed washer, it's going to over-torque the bolt and it WILL SNAP.
That's called IMPROPER assembly...
So like I said before, if you're breaking so many bolts, you just revealed why.
If you use the Torque To Angle method, even if that washer is lubed, it doesn't matter because you're only twisting the bolt a certain amount, not keep on twisting and twisting HOPING to get the right reading from a torque wrench OR the bolt entirely fails.
That was a onetime problem with an unfamiliar product. I now know to rough the back of the washer up. The back side of the washer was installed dry on a new cylinder head that had never seen oil and the upper face of the washer and underside of the bolt was lubricated per the instructions. The bolts also had the specified sealer on them.
These Vortec bolts do not use any lubricant under the heads, just sealer. As I said earlier, I re-used these bolts that were stated to be TTY per the manual on the engine they came out of merely to show that the stretched bolt in the picture was compromised and guess what it easily snapped off.
I don't need to see anything. You've already revealed why you're snapping bolts.. INCORRECT assembly procedure.
No wonder you're breaking them.
Good lord you are absolutely dense or trying to put words in my mouth I never said or jump to conclusions. The bolts in question here were GM assembled. They came out of the engine stretched noticeably longer than a new replacement bolt. I put them back in and followed PROPER torque procedure but they failed before achieving the torque value stated. No INCORRECT assembly procedure. Merely a re-used TTY bolt failing with ease.
The one I snapped that I was unfamiliar with was a completely different engine with aftermarket bolts that have a separate washer. Not a Vortec bolt.
Good lord you are absolutely dense or trying to put words in my mouth I never said or jump to conclusions. The bolts in question here were GM assembled. They came out of the engine stretched noticeably longer than a new replacement bolt. I put them back in and PROPERLY torqued them but they failed before achieving the torque value stated. No INCORRECT assembly procedure.
The one I snapped that I was unfamiliar with was a completely different engine with aftermarket bolts that have a separate washer. Not a Vortec bolt.
Two completely different issues at hand here.
Sure Jan...
I'll take things that never happened for $400, Alex.
You've already revealed the issue... You don't know what you're doing, lol.
If they were actually stretched, the threads or shank would have been visibly distorted and if you used damaged bolts, that explains that one.
Again, IMPROPER ASSEMBLY.
The extra length has to come from somewhere...
Remember physics? Energy, therefore matter, can neither be created nor destroyed.
Last edited by Bills87IROC; 12-20-2022 at 01:26 AM.
I'll take things that never happened for $400, Alex.
You've already revealed the issue... You don't know what you're doing, lol.
I absolutely do know what I am doing. As I stated the aftermarket bolt with a spinning washer was a new one for me. When I last used that design the machine work quality was not what it is today and the washers never spun.
The stretched bolt in question was NOT MY DOING! As I said jumping to false conclusions and probably lying your butt off.
I absolutely do know what I am doing. As I stated the aftermarket bolt with a spinning washer was a new one for me. When I last used that design the machine work quality was not what it is today and the washers never spun.
The stretched bolt in question was NOT MY DOING! As I said jumping to false conclusions and probably lying your butt off.
Oh, it's obvious you're an expert.
You break **** right and left and don't know how to properly lube head bolts and keep on twisting them until they snap and then blame the parts!
Those are totally signs of an expert!
Last edited by Bills87IROC; 12-20-2022 at 01:50 AM.
You break **** right and left and don't know not to lube the heads and washers of head bolts and keep on twisting them until they snap and then blame the parts!
Those are totally signs of an expert!
Vortec head bolts do not get lubricated under the face nor do I. ARP as well as the Jegs head bolts that I had fail in a completely different engine have clear instructions to lubricate between the head bolt and the top of the washer. ARP even supplies the correct lubricant to use. Yet you are the expert!!!!
I DID NOT TORQUE THE BOLT IN THE PICTURE I MADE. THAT WAS A USED BOLT OUT OF A GM ASSEMBLED ENGINE COMPARED TO NEW BOLTS. THEY STRETCHED AS INSTALLED FROM THE FACTORY. I PUT THE SAME BOLTS BACK INTO THE ENGINE TO SEE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, REUSING THE SAME BOLTS THAT I ALREADY COULD PLAIN AS DAY SEE WERE STRETCHED. I WANTED TO KNOW IF THEY WOULD TORQUE TO SPECIFICATION OR FAIL AND THEY FAILED. WHAT IS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND.
Ordinarily I do not break things left and right. I have however now broken several of these used vortec bolts that some claim are not TTY. I broke these last ones on purpose because I wanted to make absolutely sure that they would not suddenly tighten to specification. Breaking one I attempted to re-use years ago was enough for me to throw a used set away and get new ones. I have never broken a new Vortec bolt but I have had a few that started to yield during the torque sequence. I stopped removed the bolt, grabbed another new bolt and kept on going.
Vortec head bolts do not get lubricated under the face nor do I. ARP and the Jegs head bolts that I had fail in a completely different engine have clear instructions to lubricate between the head bolt and the top of the washer. ARP even supplies the correct lubricant to use. Yet you are the expert!!!!
Again, we have a reading comprehension issue here...
You lube between the head of the bolt and the washer but not the washer to the head...
If the washer spins, it throws off the torque reading...
I DID NOT TORQUE THE BOLT IN THE PICTURE I MADE. THAT WAS A USED BOLT OUT OF A GM ASSEMBLED ENGINE COMPARED TO NEW BOLTS. THEY STRETCHED AS INSTALLED FROM THE FACTORY. I PUT THE SAME BOLTS BACK INTO THE ENGINE TO SEE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, REUSING THE SAME BOLTS THAT I ALREADY COULD PLAIN AS DAY SEE WERE STRETCHED. I WANTED TO KNOW IF THEY WOULD TORQUE TO SPECIFICATION OR FAIL AND THEY FAILED. WHAT IS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND.
Again, IF and I STRESS "IF" those bolts were stretched, the threads or shank would have been DISTORTED.
If you used DISTORTED bolts, that's IMPROPER ASSEMBLY.
And yes, ARP supplies a little pack of their assembly lube with their products.
Any discussion involving re-using a TTY bolt is a waste of time. There is no need to defend why you don't re-use because that's basic groundwork kind of knowledge. If somebody disagrees then just let them wallow in their own mire and move on past them.
Any discussion involving re-using a TTY bolt is a waste of time. There is no need to defend why you don't re-use because that's basic groundwork kind of knowledge. If somebody disagrees then just let them wallow in their own mire and move on past them.
Except that's not the issue here. I don't think anyone is advocating for reusing TTY bolts.
These are the instructions for the Jegs bolts I had fail. Yet, I do not know what I am doing because I followed the manufacturer's instructions and lubricated under the head and the top of the washer. I ran my finger over the top of the washer and underside of the bolt so that they were not dripping wet even. ARP goes a step further and even supplies the lubricant to use.
These are the instructions for the Jegs bolts I had fail. Yet, I do not know what I am doing because I followed the manufacturer's instructions and lubricated under the head and the top of the washer. I ran my finger over the top of the washer and underside of the bolt so that they were not dripping wet even. ARP goes a step further and even supplies the lubricant to use.
And I'd bet $1000 you lubed up the washer to head face too but won't admit it because now you know it'll throw off the readings, you'll over-torque the bolt and it'll snap, lol.
Again, we have a reading comprehension issue here...
You lube between the head of the bolt and the washer but not the washer to the head...
If the washer spins, it throws off the torque reading...
I do not have a reading comprehension issue. Perhaps you do. I never said that I lubricated between the washer and the cylinder head. I lubricated between the head of the bolt and the washer being careful to keep the cylinder head and underside of the washer dry. I went so far as to slide the underside of the washer on 60 grit sandpaper this time to rough it up.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that topic matter is intertwined in this discussion and is why you two are cross-talking each other.
Well, I've said what I needed to say. It's pretty clear what's been going on and why certain people have been snapping bolts that are strong enough to lift cars off the ground.
I do not have a reading comprehension issue. Perhaps you do. I never said that I lubricated between the washer and the cylinder head. I lubricated between the head of the bolt and the washer being careful to keep the cylinder head and underside of the washer dry. I went so far as to slide the underside of the washer on 60 grit sandpaper this time to rough it up.
And I'd bet $1000 you lubed up the washer to head face too but won't admit it because now you know it'll throw off the readings, you'll over-torque the bolt and it'll snap, lol.
I know better than that. Only place that got lube was between the head of the bolt and the top of the washer. But you seem to know what I did better than I did. You want to pick a fight you know nothing about, jump to false conclusions, accuse me of not knowing what i am doing and alot of other such BS. At this point I am done with you. Reuse these garbage bolts if you want to. I never will because I know better. Either you are lying about never having had one snap when being re-used or are the luckiest man alive. Either way I no longer care. $55 gets new bolts and they are cheaper in bulk. I am not making my money off pushing the cheapest stuff out the door like some mass rebuilders and machine shops.
I know better than that. Only place that got lube was between the head of the bolt and the top of the washer. But you seem to know what I did better than I did. You want to pick a fight you know nothing about, jump to false conclusions, accuse me of not knowing what i am doing and alot of other such BS. At this point I am done with you. Reuse these garbage bolts if you want to. I never will because I know better. Either you are lying about never having had one snap when being re-used or are the luckiest man alive. Either way I no longer care. $55 gets new bolts and they are cheaper in bulk. I am not making my money off pushing the cheapest stuff out the door like some mass rebuilders and machine shops.
All I hear is Blah Blah Blah, kinda like Charlie Brown's teacher.
If you knew WTF you were doing, you wouldn't be snapping off head bolts... lol
Well, I've said what I needed to say. It's pretty clear what's been going on and why certain people have been snapping bolts that are strong enough to lift cars off the ground.
Maybe when they are new.
In the next day or two I will video torquing a used vortec bolt to show exactly where it breaks. I have a stash of stretched ones similar to the one in the picture that came out of factory built engines. I would put money that says they are nowhere near as strong as you claim because they are TTY and the factory installation is putting them into the plastic zone.
All I hear is Blah Blah Blah, kinda like Charlie Brown's teacher.
If you knew WTF you were doing, you wouldn't be snapping off head bolts... lol
If they were not TTY garbage that had already been placed into the plastic zone, then fatigued for many heat cycles they would not be snapping off either. The forces placed on a head bolt of a running engine far exceed what the preload torque value produces in terms of clamping force.
The new bolts being supplied are TTY. Once tightened per the FSM they are deformed and stretched. Tighten them per the FSM again and some are sure to fail. If not during the initial torquing procedure they will at some point down the road. If the broken portion of the bolt stays sealed in the deck surface with 17 head bolts the failure may not even become known for months or years or at all until the engine is torn down for work at a later date. Fire Ring failure has never really been an issue on a SBC.
If they were not TTY garbage that had already been placed into the plastic zone, then fatigued for many heat cycles they would not be snapping off either. The forces placed on a head bolt of a running engine far exceed what the preload torque value produces in terms of clamping force.
So explain the new ones snapping...
Was the Ghost of Christmas Past secretly heat cycling and stretching them before they were packaged for sale???
12-19-2022, 08:24 PM
