arp L19's into the block: anti-seize or dry?
 

Ok, so on top of my many questions this is one i searched and couldn't find on the forums but i've heard so many things.

So, since i had head studs pull out of my other block i'm being cautious. I know that steel into aluminum dry is horrible and will cause the studs to seize but nowhere in ARP's instructions does it say to use an antiseize compound going into the block.

What is the general consensus on this? no antiseize and let those bad boys ruin another block or use it on the threads going into the block?

also, arp lists them as m11x1.25 head studs in the instructions and they are clearly NOT. They are 7/16-20 thread size/pitch. Kinda sad the people that make them don't even list the correct size.

last time i used arp studs im pretty sure they stressed that you HAVE to use assembly lube

not the question. The question is for the studs into the block. Not the nuts onto the studs.

I use thread sealer on head studs, never had a problem... I don't know how I would feel about an anti-sieze compound on my head studs. Taking them out however is always a fun task, but as long as everthing was torqued properly in assembly, I have never had an issue myself.

I usually install the studs with a small dab of the arp lube on the threads that go into the block.

When considering the size, and it being incorrect, keep in mind that the end of the stud that goes into the block will be M11X1.25 and the end that the nut goes on very well may be 7/16-20.

Also, for comparison sake, M11X1.25 would measure .4330" with 20.32 threads per inch. 7/16-20 is .4375" and... 20 threads per inch. So if you're using a 7/16-20 nut to judge the size, it very well may run right on the M11X1.25, and vice versa. I know from experience that even using a thread gauge it can be tough to tell the difference.

Thanks for the input guys.

Also, I know for a fact they are 7/16 20. The studs will not thread into the m11 1.25 helicoil repair I got for it. I had to use the 7/16

well you have your answer but I will reinforce, I also used the ARP lube also some of the studs didn't go in with only minor force, I had to really torque some of them to go down, and yes it has been fine, the engine has over 20k on it so far

Ya, the only problem with over torquing them into the heads is if u have to rebuild the engine. The studs will damage the block when they are removed if u need to deck the block which is what happened to me. Never take those studs out or ull be sorry! Lol

+1 on a little bit of the arp moly lube, although shouldt need to torque em, head studs are supposed to be hand tight into the block itself

LOL good to know, although if I have to rebuild this engine, I will probably be in the decision making mode of going back to stock or LS conversion.

Although I did have to remove them once as the machine shop screwed up the sleeves and after having coolant issues I had to disassemble the engine and have them fix it, which resulted in a second decking of the block, so I doubt I can do another deck job on it and have the timing chain case line up with the heads, it was already close.

Supposed to and actually are not the same, it was just 2 or 3 but they were not even close, and had to apply some extra force on the allen wrench to get them down

why would you use anti sieze on a head bolt or head stud?

That's kinda what I was thinking.

steel threads into aluminum block. Steel into aluminum will corrode and seize together.

we use it on all the semi's we have for the farm and they have well over a millino miles with no issues. I'm not sure why this is tabboo for these new engines. Steel and aluminum have always been steel and aluminum so it shouldn't be different which is why i'm curious the different practice.

It obviously causes problems because it caused my studs to seize into my block after 3 years thus destroying my block when removing the head studs.

the arp lube should be all the anti seize you need, while its not as good as true zinc it is moly which is a metal as well. really all your looking for is something for the steel to attack instead of the aluminum. (cant remember the exact process but thats how antisieze works the steel attacks and corrodes the zinc instead of the aluminum of the block)

ic, so people are using the ARP lube for the nuts actually on the threads that go into the block as well. Interesting. ARP needs to put that in their instructions if that's what they want then.

its not really what its meant for nor what arp had intended but it works and should have enough left over in the little packet they give you. dosnt take much just something for the steel to eat up instead of the aluminum.

Interesting question/thread. I am in the process of building an engine also. I will ask my builder this same question. ARP head studs have double threading don't they? One end theads into the block and the other is used to thread the nuts that fasten the heads down to the block, so I see this an issue if you anticipate having to work on the block itself in the future and need to remove the entire head stud.
I would ask a builder how much of this moly is enough in case the additional material (moly) will squew your torque readings when assembling.

it wont because the end threaded into the block is only hand tight anyway. the other end actually shows a higher torque reading for the same clamping force since theres higher friction when tightening the nut. thats why arp specifically states to use the lube and gives you a free packet in your head studs. dosnt take much just enough to lightly coat the threads where the nut will be. moly is pretty good for lube, for instance you can usually get about 50 feet per second extra out of moly coated bullets, the difference between headstuds is typically about 10 ft lbs(you would have to tighten the nuts to 105 ft lbs to get the same clamping force as 95 ft lbs with the lube.)

This is all very good information.