Re: cylinder studs: torque or length?

[Bob Hadden <kbhadden@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Also, I'm wondering why no one has brought up the problem of pulled out 
studs.  This has been a problem for some.  I suppose from over torquing 
the head nuts.  But I'm concerned that John started out by saying that 
the studs seemed a bit loose in the threads.  Is this the fore warning 
that he could be coming up on a pulled stud or two when all goes back 
together.

I haven't had a head off either (Like Bob McF below) so I'm just 
wondering out loud here.

Bob Hadden - '05R12GS, '62R27

On Apr 4, 2006, at 6:42 PM, Emoto wrote:

> On 4/4/06, jmerlinw <jmerlinw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Original poster of "cylinder studs: torque or length"
>>
>> Thanks to all of you who commented. I was interested in torque 
>> figures for
>> the cylinder STUDS. Many of you commented on the procedure for 
>> torquing the
>> cylinder head NUTS. But we all learned some new approaches.
>>
>> Bottom line, I think I heard a (small) consensus say that the 
>> cyclinder
>> studs are just turned to the proper depth of exposed stud (152.5mm 
>> for three
>> studs, 132mm for one). Mine will be just finger tight at that depth 
>> (well,
>> maybe 5Nm). I'll probably dope them up HT thread lock.
>>
>> Any last comments before I button her up?
>
> I haven't had the heads off on a boxer yet, so perhaps my question is
> silly, but is heavy thread locker on the bottom end of the studs
> really necessary? Will the studs just spin if not anchored, or will
> their threads stretch and hold as the nut puts tension on?  Usually
> BMW is really good about specifying when/where to use thread locker,
> so if they have not, why are we concerned?
>
> Just my inquisitive nature, trying to understand.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob

------------------------------

End of oilheads-digest V3 #49
*****************************