Good to hear , thanks. Now that I re-read Hammill, he speaks of main cap studs by John Eales being a bit special, in that they are longer, and end in a cone that will bottom in the tapped block hole, for improved contact and grip. Must have confused that with head studs.
Did you use std head torque for heads on studs?
Re this above "once the heads/gaskets are on torque the nuts up to Std. Rover spec. " -ARP notes forthe 10bolt heads call up100 ft/lbs, where std is 70ft/lbs for the P6B, but the later 10 bolt engines calls for15ft/lb then 90deg,90 deg. My 3.9 is a 1994 10 bolt.
Anybody with experience here please?
Understand the 'stretch' bolts are single use Ron, and why. Was trying to elicit a response/comment on the difference between the original torque and ARP's figure. Somewhere in this forum I have seen somebody quote using 80ft/lb on studs, a little above the std 70ft/lb.
If you apply a tensile load to a stud by tightening a nut, the reaction in the alloy thread at the other end must be the same for the loads to balance.The difference that I see JP is with the original Rover class 8 (imperial) bolts (fasteners), the tension that is experienced by the bolt is transferred into the threaded aluminium block. The aluminium threads within the block experience a shear force as a result. In the case of the stud, the aluminium thread within the block experiences very little shear force by comparison. Indeed, the nut that is tightened onto the stud is now experiencing the applied force, not the aluminium threads. This allows the high tensile steel nut to be tightened with an increased torque compared to the torque that can be safely applied to the original bolt screwing into aluminium.
Ron.