Bob Norway wrote:
>
> Little clarification needed. I'm talking about removing the stud *before*
> I get the head off. Dave said to do this in order to give the head some
> lateral clearance for when he walloped the 2x4 with a hammer to break the
> head loose from the lower engine. At least that's what I *think* he
> meant..... There is not enough room to hardly get 2 nuts on, let alone 4
> without the head removed, and once the head is off, I don't think I'd
> *need* to get the studs out unless they were damaged.
>
> Cheers
> bob
>
> jonmac wrote:
>
> > Bob and listers about to remove stubborn heads,
> >
> > My recommendation for what its worth is this. Try to avoid using
> > vise-grips - especially if the stud shows signs of being stubborn and
> > not wanting to come out. Doublenutting is a better idea, but
> > multi-nutting with 4 or more nuts is even better. Particularly so if
> > the stud appears to be locked in place with gunge and corrosion. With
> > double nutting, you tend to put a massive strain on the stud threads
> > within the nut immediately above. Multi-nutting spreads that load
> > more evenly up the whole threaded part. Just a sound tip passed on to
> > me by an old man. Using this technique over the years, I've never
> > stripped a thread by multi nutting though I have with double. The
> > added advantage is you have another nut in place where you can put
> > another open ended spanner and apply double the amount of torque.
> >
> > John Mac
> >
> > >Dave,
> > >Thanks for the info.... but how did you go about removing the studs?
> > Use a
> > >vise-grip or doublenut the end?
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > GatesDavid@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > Bob,
> > >
> > > Been there, done that. When I removed my head, I found that it
> > really did not
> > > want to come off. I ended up removing all the head studs. Then,
> > using a 2x4
> > > a couple feet long and a large hammer placed the 2x4 against the
> > head and hit
> > > the other end with the hammer. A couple good hits and it loosened
> > up enough
> > > to remove it with my hands. With the head studs out I didn't have
> > to worry
> > > about damaging them and it allowed the head a bit of sideways
> > motion instead
> > > of just upward.
> > >
> > > Hope this helps,
> > > David Gates
> > John Macartney
> >
> > EDITOR
> > SIXappeal - House Magazine of The Triumph 2000 2500 2.5 Register
> > "The Triumph preferred by Royalty"
> >
> > Tel: 01608 664939 (24 hour Answerphone)
> > Email: jonmac@ndirect.co.uk
> > Internet: http://www.kvaleberg.com/t2000.html
>
> --
> Bob Norway
> Rockledge, Florida
> Home Page http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/5953/mypage.html
> ICQ# 3752712
> ***************************
> TLCB - Thailand, Laos, Cambodia Brotherhood
> http://www.seacoast.com/~jsweet/brotherh/index.html
> Udorn RTAFB Nov'70 - Nov'71
> 432 AMS/Autopilot
> ***************************
> SpitList
> 1976 Triumph Spitfire 1500
> FM43376UO - Daily Driver
> ***************************
> "Don't Take My Pint Mate,
> I'm In The Loo!"
Bob, I think it is a good practice to replace all the studs while doing
the head work, as the old ones are now pretty well strecthed-out and most
are already over torqued, it takes very little over torqueing on just one
stud to then not be able to properly reseat the head. In todays modern
cars, almost all manufacturers say replace all studs, most Ford products
come with them in the head gasket package, cost a little more today, but,
sures is cheaper down the road, and sometimes we all forget about down
the road, proper maintenance gives more driving time, improper allows for
more yelling at these cars. "FT"
|