ARP Head Studs / 911 3.0
 

ARP Head Studs / 911 3.0

I recently had my 1980 911 SC engine “rebuilt” in that I committed to unpardonable sin of lifting it incorrectly – violated the case o-rings and caused a massive oil leak. My shop in N VA had to disassemble the engine and install new O rings at some considerable cost

Prior to that I had the engine rebuilt by Motor-meister in 2001. I had them use ARP head studs. Engine has maybe 5k miles on the engine since 2001.

My question is – would the techs know that the engine was using ARP head studs vs OEM or other studs – as my understanding is that regular studs use a 24.5 ft/lb torque and the ARP use 38ft/lb torque. I’ve read that the ARP hardware is a different color – is distinguishable from OEM.

I’ve since put ~1300 miles on the “rebuild” and time to retorque the head studs. What do I do if my shop only tightened the head studs to 25 ft/lb?
Thanks for any input

Kim Langley
1980 911SC

Yes, any reputable shop would know the difference between studs and hardware.

38 lb ft of torque is usually reserved for high hp turbos where the combustion pressures exceed the force the lower torque settings can handle, causing the heads to lift under boost. The ARP's will work fine at stock torque. Contact ARP if you're unsure or don't trust us.

Arp
 

Use the stock torque.

I'm curious how you wreck o-rings lifting it wrong?
And a "motor meister" rebuild is suspect enough!

prschmn:

> I used the infamous telephone book under the center of the engine / circular oil sump case. I guess I was "off center" enough that the lift imparted a wee bit of extra strain of the case O rings - resulting in major oil leak at the case seam.

I had used that center lift method multiple times since I got the 911 in 87 with no problem... but it only takes one time to change my process.

Thanks all for the input. As the famed Faber College [Animal House] motto goes >> Knowledge is Good.

Motor Miester was notorious for using a steel head stud they had manufactured to their specs. They used a common steel, had no ground surfaces and the threads were cut not rolled. In short, cheap junk. They other issue is the coating is black oxide that makes them look like early ARP head studs.

They also made head studs that were powder coated red.....be on the look out.

I still fail to see how you created a massive oil leak.....

I'm curious too. I've never heard of creating an oil leak in that manner. I ship out and receive engines all the time. Never any issues propping it with blocks of wood.

thanks for the additional input..

I'll advise my shop that motor meister was the engine rebuilder - and they claimed to have used ARP head bolts - at least I paid $$$ for ARP.

Had I known then 2000 - what I know now I would not have used MM for the job. But not much I can do about it now..

The shop I'm using now in N VA is noted as a first class operatiopn... gets excellent reviews - maybe it's a case of MM biting me in the ass 22 years later...

MM was known for charging people for high end parts and then using the cheapest worn out parts that they could scrape together. Every part and dimension on the engine is suspect. They duped dozens of not hundreds of people over many years.

I'm also confused how this would damage a case o-ring. If truly o-ring damage, my is return tube got stressed with the off-center phone books.

I'm guessing he means the oil return tubes.

I don’t think it was oil return tubes if the shop had to disassemble the engine at considerable cost. Expanding oil tubes and labor shouldn’t have been more than a couple hundred.

I'd guess that the return tubes were bent, during the engine lift....and the shop didn't know that the extendable return tubes would fix the problem without taking the engine apart....likely a great shop, but perhaps not focused on Porsches.

regards,
al

It sounds like he was lifting the engine alone, but perhaps he lifted the car by jacking on the engine sump which resulted in the damage.

Jim2 :

Exactly. I had used the technique for years of using a thick telephone book with my floor jack and lift at the engine sump - and never experienced any issues. It allowed an easy center lift and then I could use jack stands at the torsion bar points to support the back end.

If you are lifting the car, there is no good reason I can think of (but I may be missing one) to lift the rear by the sump plate area. Lift at the rear of the engine, under where the motor cross mount attaches. Either on the base of the mount, or on the case immediately forward of it. That way no bending force on the power train. It doubtless can take it, but why.

Holding the engine up by the sump should be reserved for removing the engine while leaving the transmission in the car (to avoid having to remove CVs and sway bars, mainly).

On the other hand, what seals. Agree with others that this should not be the oil return seals unless the shop was not knowledgeable - though this seems the most likely given the few facts presented. No way this could harm the through bolt seals. Flywheel/other end of crank seals? Naw.

Three things:
1. I don't think lifting by the engine will cause a massive oil leak.
2. The Motor Meister rebuild war probably a huge waste of money.
3. No 2 is probably the cause of no 1.